Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the most responsible thing to do would be to repeal the 16th Amendment, fire all IRS workers, do away with 95% of the federal budget and fire all those workers too.
time for all those federal employees to go out and get real jobs and stop leeching off of the american taxpayers.
Yes I can see the future now:
Besides, isn't the final step of communism to get rid of all government? Is that your plan?
Besides, isn't the final step of communism to get rid of all government? Is that your plan?
strange, I did not say get rid of goverment, but you sure as heck allude to that. I said get rid of 95% of federal programs and employees. The USA did just fine without all that crap before the 16th Amendment was passed. The USA can do fine without them once again.
Get back to the Constitutional Republic that the USA is supposed to be.
strange, I did not say get rid of goverment, but you sure as heck allude to that. I said get rid of 95% of federal programs and employees. The USA did just fine without all that crap before the 16th Amendment was passed. The USA can do fine without them once again.
Get back to the Constitutional Republic that the USA is supposed to be.
Semantics between 95 and 100%....I was trying to make a point about your statement is all.
Arguing about the tax code is fine, but taxes exist for a reason and have for all countries throughout history. No one gets a free lunch. In fact having the "correct" percent of taxes is how you get the strongest possible growth. Having "no taxes" or even "low taxes" is not the fastest method of growth, I'm sorry to say.
Now if you say the government has a problem spending the money of late correctly, I agree.
Luckily the "framers," learning from the Articles of Confederation, though not in full agreement, did establish a strong Federal government ment to be the "supreme law of the land." Even if you got rid of the income tax, they have the right to tax everything else due to the commerce clause, so what's the point?
Worry about how the government spends the money, not how they tax you. Once we have gigantic coffers of money, then you can worry about how they tax you...
Semantics between 95 and 100%....I was trying to make a point about your statement is all.
Arguing about the tax code is fine, but taxes exist for a reason and have for all countries throughout history. No one gets a free lunch. In fact having the "correct" percent of taxes is how you get the strongest possible growth. Having "no taxes" or even "low taxes" is not the fastest method of growth, I'm sorry to say.
Now if you say the government has a problem spending the money of late correctly, I agree.
Luckily the "framers," learning from the Articles of Confederation, though not in full agreement, did establish a strong Federal government ment to be the "supreme law of the land." Even if you got rid of the income tax, they have the right to tax everything else due to the commerce clause, so what's the point?
Worry about how the government spends the money, not how they tax you. Once we have gigantic coffers of money, then you can worry about how they tax you...
regulate commerce, not tax commerce between the states.
the goverment should be able to do just fine like the framers did on duties, bonds and tariffs on imported goods
Well we disagree on interpretation of the Federal statute. Of course that happens with most people through our entire history (quite intentional to be vague by the way).
As to the other fund methods:
Bonds is borrowing money to be repaid back later, how do they repay it back without taxes?
Duties and Tariffs are anti-growth and do more harm then good by a huge amount. It was one of the main reasons the great depression esculated world wide when "trade wars" started.
Tariffs just export "economic responsibility" to another country. I don't know of many countries that want our economic responsibility, do you?
Well we disagree on interpretation of the Federal statute. Of course that happens with most people through our entire history (quite intentional to be vague by the way).
As to the other fund methods:
Bonds is borrowing money to be repaid back later, how do they repay it back without taxes?
Duties and Tariffs are anti-growth and do more harm then good by a huge amount. It was one of the main reasons the great depression esculated world wide when "trade wars" started.
Tariffs just export "economic responsibility" to another country. I don't know of many countries that want our economic responsibility, do you?
since the USA has one of the largest or the largest economy on the planet, if importers want to ship their goods to the USA, then i dont see a problem with putting tariffs on their goods at all.
if those companies want to put their plants inside the USA and hire US citizens to avoid the tariffs, then I do not see aproblem with that either.
either way, as long as the federal goverment does not tax the people would be fine with me.
I think you misunderstood my question. I was asking for an example of your system working anywhere in the world successfully that is not based on a one trick pony like oil.
By the way, I'm from Montana and grew up with the effects of mine tailings from strip mining. It is a step I doubt you would want to take if it was near you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
