It's good to see the governments doing what their citizen given mandate is asking them to do. Not making sure that the money is good enough to support the economy. Not making sure that the States are not engaging in anti-competitive behaviour, such as requiring different professionals to license in every State (well, at least your driver license is good everywhere, yes?) Not making sure that the government is not treating different groups of citizens preferentially based either race, gender, age, political or religious affiliation or size of the bank account. Not making sure that the will of the people is actually exercised whenever a new war is started or another individual is arrested or even killed without a warrant and a court order and a day in court. Not making sure that the country is on an actual solid economic path in terms of total government spending, borrowing, printing, taxing, regulating. Not making sure that the trade is in fact free.
But the government is doing what all the citizens want it to do - fighting the absolute evil that the people of the world are facing - distribution of copyrighted materials.
FBI is doing a good job, it has absolutely paid for its own existence, as the Constitution mandates it to be. Now it's just a matter of ensuring that the criminals, these terrorists are properly and Constitutionally renditioned to the best and most aligned foreign ally that USA has - Saudi Arabia, and that the warrant says: Muslim apostates.
Well, obviously. All this stuff that is done not for any reason but just because there is money to throw at it (until there is no money), it's all BS.
Science didn't progress quickly within the last 300 years because of government, it progressed despite of government and because of free market capitalism and industrialisation. Those are the actual primary movers of engineering problems and of all of the science that goes around it. Scientific funding is a side effect of industry trying to make a buck, nothing else.
Obama is doing the right thing - the problem is Congress.
- so you say, so he says. He is a wannabe dictator, a king, he just found out that he can't rule like a king, but he still does everything to try (NDAA and all the wars he started, those are good examples).
The government is supposed to be near impossible to move, that's a feature, not a bug.
Tell me something - why should ANYBODY give a shit about the human race becoming extinct that way?
It's not like majority of the actual living people would personally benefit from a small group of individuals making it through a catastrophe. 99.9999...% of people would still not benefit from funding anything that allows "human race" to survive. It makes no difference to almost every single person on the planet whether the human race survives with a few hundred of a thousand individuals that would be say sent to space.
--
OTOH we have plenty of war tech. and we could kill each other much before any asteroid hit the planet.
Tell me it's wrong to be dependent when you're past your prime, when you're just a child, or where through, more than likely no fault of your own, you can't manage much of anything in life?
- sure it's wrong. It's not a 'collective' problem that forces individuals into becoming slaves to that system for no fault of their own.
Vote with our feet, that's what we must do to avoid being put into this position of perpetual slavery by the socialist propaganda.
Again, if individuals do not have to file any papers, do not have to keep track of any papers, it immediately is INFINITELY easier for them than having to do any of it.
Store is a business. They already have to keep track of their paperwork just to know what's going on in the business, keeping track of accounting, receivables, payables, everything, taxes are a small part of what stores do anyway for profit.
People do not do accounting like that for profit, they only do any of it because the government forces them, and it's easy to see how much time and resources is wasted on it every year. Every person who files this shit every year spends hours if not days putting it all together, paying for it either for software packages or maybe going to an accountant.
Spending time at an accountant, having to keep track of papers that do NOT make that individual any profit, that paperwork is ALL for the sake of government pleasure of stealing from individuals.
Stores and other businesses already have accounting because they must know how the business is doing, so some extra paperwork for them is less of an issue, they already do it all anyway, so from hundreds of millions of people spending hours or days (at least an hour for sure, but in most cases a couple of days at least) is thousands of millions of hours spent every year.
Then there are all the tax accountants and tax lawyers, and then there are IRS audits and courts and fines.
And you are still standing by your bizarre assertion that doing that is not inherently more complex than coming to a store because you need to come there anyway, and paying the tax in the store as part of the purchase and never having to deal with any of that again?
Ok then, I won't argue this stupid point any longer.
. Even a progressive income tax isn't really more complicated... I stand by my initial assertion.
- well, you are free to stand by your totally wrong assertion, it's your business.
Collecting papers over the year and having to FILE taxes at the end and then having to battle against IRS and having possible jail time and fines.. NONE OF IT is an issue with consumption tax.
You come to a store - it's in the price. The only people that can make a mistake are owners of the store and 90% of population are not owners of stores.
"no deductions"? So you run a business, hire a few people, pay their salaries and can't deduct their salaries from your revenue before showing the profit?
Can't deduct business expenses against revenue?
Ha! Under those conditions nobody would ever run a business.
How about a solar system - there are stars, planets, if you scale down, there is probably nuclear / thermonuclear activity, electromagnetism, thermal, volcanoes, tides, there is all sorts of chemistry going on on a small scale and all sorts of huge physical manifestations, like interaction among planetary orbits for example on large scale.
All patents and copyrights cause harm to the economy and to progress, it is absolutely wrong to have government protect anybody's business model, regardless of what it is, and this includes special subsidy of the enforcement, court and penal systems.
But the death penalty -- at least in its incarnation where you don't just shoot/hang/burn the first person you think is guilty -- seems awfully impractical
- that's a strange argument. It's much more practical to kill somebody and stop wasting resources trying to do some real justice, definitely cheaper that way. I have a different understanding of the word 'practical' from yours - in fact trying to achieve some form of justice is much less practical than just putting together a case against somebody and quickly executing them.
I mean think of all the resources that go into proving someone's innocence - why bother, if you are only concerned with the 'practical' side of things? Whoever you can frame the crime upon (without getting caught, that's important) practically speaking should be immediately executed and case should be closed.
Now, morally it's a completely different story. If you are concerned with the morality of the matter rather than practical side of it, then you can't use capital punishment at all, because you can never be either sure of total guilt nor can you create a 'just' society applying capital punishment. It's just not going to be a 'just society', because even one killing of an innocent means the society is unjust.
So if you care about morality, you can't have capital punishment.
If you care about practicality you shouldn't let anybody go, who you can simply frame for a crime, it's very practical.
For decades I've answered that question in exactly the same way - USA 1870-1913, Switzerland for the last 20 years, China today.
Good infrastructure means infrastructure that market requires. Good education means education that market requires.
USA had no strong central government before the Fed and IRS basically, all of these abominations: Fed, IRS, FDA, EPA, FAA, FCC, FDIC, FBI, F&F, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, labour laws, dept's of education, energy, commerce, agriculture, interior, etc., all of this was created already after the economy of USA became strong due to the free market that preceded it and those are the instruments of destruction of the economy and society. I have plenty on these subjects in my journal.
Central government is the end of the road, monopoly on government that is constantly putting more and more pressure on the freedoms of individuals will eventually be released in an explosion and it should.
Blah blah blah, I don't see you providing society with anything but hot air on/. Come on, slacker, do something. Make billions for yourself and others around you. You are not from Somalia, are you?
Nobody gets where they are alone. Everyone relies on the society they live in for support. That's why you don't see people like Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg coming out of Somalia. Unfortunately, it's now become commonplace to deny this obvious truth, because "Greed is Good", at least in the minds of the greedy.
- this 'Elizabeth Warren' talk is also complete nonsense, and I can easily show it with a few facts.
Out of 37 richest self-made people in USA, 27 were born prior to 1850. Only 3 were born in the 20th century - Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Sam Walton.
Over the 1870 to 1913 period of time people became much wealthier relatively to the time preceding that period than people over the entire 20th century relatively to the 1870 to 1913 period. This was done without most of what is called 'government' today, including most departments, agencies, income taxes, regulations, etc.
Beyond that - looks like you think that Zuckerberg owes you something, when in reality he is doing much more than his 'fair share' to increase his own wealth, and the wealth of everybody around him, providing products people use willingly, hiring thousands of people and providing opportunities in various niches around his business, creating jobs in the process (all of which is just a consequence of him making a buck).
On the other hand YOU are slacking off compared to Zuckerberg. You are in the same society, you aren't from Somalia I take it, yet I don't see you provide people with products that 10% of population wants to use and uses and I don't see you making millions for yourself, various investors, clients, creating thousands of jobs. You OWE MUCH MORE to the society by your own standard than Zuckerberg, he has given back already much more than he will EVER USE ON HIMSELF.
You are a slacker but also you want to steal money from others, who make it and you want government to do it for you.
Oh, and the people who are able to build their businesses and then are able to be paid more money than average are already giving back to society much more than society EVER gave them.
Facebook didn't exist and now 10% of population are on it. Definitely 1 person giving 10% of population something they are willing to use is much more important than any taxes that can ever be collected or anything that this person was ever given by anybody.
He shouldn't be paying ANY taxes, he already pays his dues to the society as is, by providing it with something the society wants. Before he pays a single cent in taxes, he already paid millions in salary, he bought millions in equipment and he created millions in value for his clients, investors, customers and employees.
Nonsense. Gov't destroyed education, not improved it, made it much more expensive and destroyed the quality.
Gov't doesn't create infrastructure, in fact gov't can do absolutely nothing without the free enterprise providing the means for it. The wealth is FIRST created by the people who work for living and then gov't comes in and steals it, reduces the overall amount of wealth in the system, scatters it around among its preferred people and then this is called 'public good'.
I am happy to live in times when this is going to come to a crashing end, this is something to look forward to - the end of the system. Either it will turn completely dictatorial and it will be even a bigger disaster or there will be a huge swing back to the true free market and freedoms for individuals and socialist ideologues will simply be laughed out of town.
Well, not all casualties had to be reported in 1983 in USSR, after all, when Chernobyl blew up they covered it up for days and days, people came out to the 1st of May parade (International labour day was always celebrated with big parades then), nobody stopped them coming out even in the surrounding cities and it was very dangerous for people in Kiev for example because of the wind pattern.
However Brin says they came too close to the rocket, and people don't have to be that close during launch, there is always a command bunker near the launch site.
... but on production side they would still be untouched and the government couldn't grow based on percentage of their production and work, only on percentage of what they are willing to spend on taxable goods.
If you implement a consumption tax similar to Canada's "Goods and Services Tax", everything is taxed at every stage through the process. It is impossible for the consumer to know what percentage of the price is tax.
- it is a compound tax, but to the consumer every step in the process does not matter, the simplicity of not bothering with collecting all of the papers over the year and then having to FILE a tax form and not really knowing what is going to happen - will you really owe a tax or be paid something back or will you really be audited and then you are on a 'black list' for at least 4 years, and they will go over the last 7-8 years of your tax returns and your spending, receipts, etc. This is a nightmare.
Compared to that, not knowing what the value added tax was at every step of production of a plastic bucket is trivial. You see the final price or the final price + a percentage that is tax, you are done. You don't need to keep the receipts, you don't need to worry that IRS will come after you because you claimed that bucket against your taxes or whatever you did, etc.
It's trivial and insignificant compared to the costs associated with filing income taxes, and especially if IRS comes after you and then you are properly fucked, because the law doesn't exist there to make everybody a law abiding citizen, it exists to ensure that nobody can ever be a 'law abiding citizen', because even the law enforcers themselves don't understand the law (as proven by the fact that only 85% of IRS related court cases have a 'guilty' verdict, so in at least 15% of cases IRS is wrong in its own understanding of the law, whatever it is.)
Lawyers and accountants and IRS agents and cops and courts and judges and unequal application of that broken law and who knows what else - that's what you get with income taxes.
Much simpler is a flat income tax (including flat corporate tax).
- what is INCOME tax? I explain that there is no such thing. It's a long post, with SCOTUS decision references, thus I don't copy and paste it here, just link to it.
Banks withold 10% of returns on investments. Employers withold 10% of paychecks/bonuses/cost of perks. Businesses pay a flat 10% on profit. It is *very* simple for everyone to understand. If you allow no deductions at all, it is incredibly simple.
- are there deductions under your plan?
Can a company deduct payroll from its revenue? Can a person deduct his losses against his investment?
Just that alone increases the total tax from 'flat' 10% to something else altogether and it's immediately open to discussion and banks definitely cannot WITHHOLD any amount based on investment revenue, who said it's the total PROFIT? Total profit is all revenues minus all expenses at least, never mind various special cases that you didn't address and that will immediately put a huge hole in talking about 'simplicity'.
There is no simplicity at all with taxing work.
The advantage over consumption taxes is that everyone pays the same percentage. With a consumption tax, poor people spend every cent they make (often more, since they are in debt). Rich people don't (they have money in investments). Pretty much the definition of poor and rich. Thus, poor people actually pay a greater percentage of their income on tax than the rich (anti-progressive?)
- huge problem with socialists is that they don't understand economics at all.
Any amount of money that is not spent is re-invested, and it is not government, that creates wealth and real jobs as a consequence of trying to make a buck, it's private enterprise.
Society needs as little government as humanly possible because any amount allocated to the government is the amount that is not used to grow the economy and growth of economy is not some esoteric useless concept, it's what allows us to a
Consumption taxes are not inherently simpler than income taxes
- I am just going to respond to this, the rest I won't touch with you.
Consumption taxes are not just 'inherently simpler' than income taxes, they are infinitely simpler for the consumers.
What does one have to do to file taxes? At the minimum buy a software package and install it on a computer (so must own and operate a computer) and then go over forms, but this means having to pull out various papers collected over the year (or more than one year), receipts, statements, payslips, etc.
Otherwise all of that information must be collected and brought to a tax accountant.
Tax accountants must be hired, workplace must be supplied to them.
When it comes to more complex stuff - tax lawyers must be hired. Sometimes IRS comes in and audits you.
Compare all of this to consumption taxes: you come to a store, the tax is either already in the price or it is applied to the total on the cash register. You don't have to keep the receipt even if you don't care about returning the item.
It's the store that has to take a percentage of its sales and send the check (or electronic payment) to the government.
Don't need IRS, why? Because it's not store's money, it's client's money, the law is simple and can be understood by a person as opposed to income tax/payroll tax/corporate tax/death tax/capital gains tax/other type of so called "income" tax law.
I show why income taxes are illegal and illegally collected here, and part of it the fact that nobody can understand the law and even based on that fact it's illegal, never mind the fact that there is no such concept as 'income', it's all profit tax, and it can only apply to corporations legally.
But saying that there is no difference between how complex income tax is compared to consumption tax is ridiculous.
All the unproductive jobs and resources spent that are used to file income tax, then fight the IRS, and what happens to people who lose this battle (85% of cases).... With consumption tax you pay it and forget about it, nobody is coming to get you, so if you don't get it, shut up.
A little typo: I don't mean to imply that identity theft is a 'correction' of the IRS fraud, only that what IRS does on daily basis is fraud and this guy is just a small part of that entire fraudster operation.
Slashdot Mirror
It's good to see the governments doing what their citizen given mandate is asking them to do. Not making sure that the money is good enough to support the economy. Not making sure that the States are not engaging in anti-competitive behaviour, such as requiring different professionals to license in every State (well, at least your driver license is good everywhere, yes?) Not making sure that the government is not treating different groups of citizens preferentially based either race, gender, age, political or religious affiliation or size of the bank account. Not making sure that the will of the people is actually exercised whenever a new war is started or another individual is arrested or even killed without a warrant and a court order and a day in court. Not making sure that the country is on an actual solid economic path in terms of total government spending, borrowing, printing, taxing, regulating. Not making sure that the trade is in fact free.
But the government is doing what all the citizens want it to do - fighting the absolute evil that the people of the world are facing - distribution of copyrighted materials.
FBI is doing a good job, it has absolutely paid for its own existence, as the Constitution mandates it to be. Now it's just a matter of ensuring that the criminals, these terrorists are properly and Constitutionally renditioned to the best and most aligned foreign ally that USA has - Saudi Arabia, and that the warrant says: Muslim apostates.
Well, obviously. All this stuff that is done not for any reason but just because there is money to throw at it (until there is no money), it's all BS.
Science didn't progress quickly within the last 300 years because of government, it progressed despite of government and because of free market capitalism and industrialisation. Those are the actual primary movers of engineering problems and of all of the science that goes around it. Scientific funding is a side effect of industry trying to make a buck, nothing else.
Obama is doing the right thing - the problem is Congress.
- so you say, so he says. He is a wannabe dictator, a king, he just found out that he can't rule like a king, but he still does everything to try (NDAA and all the wars he started, those are good examples).
The government is supposed to be near impossible to move, that's a feature, not a bug.
Tell me something - why should ANYBODY give a shit about the human race becoming extinct that way?
It's not like majority of the actual living people would personally benefit from a small group of individuals making it through a catastrophe. 99.9999...% of people would still not benefit from funding anything that allows "human race" to survive. It makes no difference to almost every single person on the planet whether the human race survives with a few hundred of a thousand individuals that would be say sent to space.
--
OTOH we have plenty of war tech. and we could kill each other much before any asteroid hit the planet.
Tell me it's wrong to be dependent when you're past your prime, when you're just a child, or where through, more than likely no fault of your own, you can't manage much of anything in life?
- sure it's wrong. It's not a 'collective' problem that forces individuals into becoming slaves to that system for no fault of their own.
Vote with our feet, that's what we must do to avoid being put into this position of perpetual slavery by the socialist propaganda.
I have a comment that explains that there is no such thing as an 'income tax', it's a ruse. There are only 'profit' taxes, and individuals have no profits to pay any of that.
Oh, I see, so just stealing from others, who do make it a goal then?
Again, if individuals do not have to file any papers, do not have to keep track of any papers, it immediately is INFINITELY easier for them than having to do any of it.
Store is a business. They already have to keep track of their paperwork just to know what's going on in the business, keeping track of accounting, receivables, payables, everything, taxes are a small part of what stores do anyway for profit.
People do not do accounting like that for profit, they only do any of it because the government forces them, and it's easy to see how much time and resources is wasted on it every year. Every person who files this shit every year spends hours if not days putting it all together, paying for it either for software packages or maybe going to an accountant.
Spending time at an accountant, having to keep track of papers that do NOT make that individual any profit, that paperwork is ALL for the sake of government pleasure of stealing from individuals.
Stores and other businesses already have accounting because they must know how the business is doing, so some extra paperwork for them is less of an issue, they already do it all anyway, so from hundreds of millions of people spending hours or days (at least an hour for sure, but in most cases a couple of days at least) is thousands of millions of hours spent every year.
Then there are all the tax accountants and tax lawyers, and then there are IRS audits and courts and fines.
And you are still standing by your bizarre assertion that doing that is not inherently more complex than coming to a store because you need to come there anyway, and paying the tax in the store as part of the purchase and never having to deal with any of that again?
Ok then, I won't argue this stupid point any longer.
. Even a progressive income tax isn't really more complicated. ..
I stand by my initial assertion.
- well, you are free to stand by your totally wrong assertion, it's your business.
Collecting papers over the year and having to FILE taxes at the end and then having to battle against IRS and having possible jail time and fines .. NONE OF IT is an issue with consumption tax.
You come to a store - it's in the price. The only people that can make a mistake are owners of the store and 90% of population are not owners of stores.
"no deductions"? So you run a business, hire a few people, pay their salaries and can't deduct their salaries from your revenue before showing the profit?
Can't deduct business expenses against revenue?
Ha! Under those conditions nobody would ever run a business.
Something created that software and computer.
- really?
How about a solar system - there are stars, planets, if you scale down, there is probably nuclear / thermonuclear activity, electromagnetism, thermal, volcanoes, tides, there is all sorts of chemistry going on on a small scale and all sorts of huge physical manifestations, like interaction among planetary orbits for example on large scale.
All patents and copyrights cause harm to the economy and to progress, it is absolutely wrong to have government protect anybody's business model, regardless of what it is, and this includes special subsidy of the enforcement, court and penal systems.
OK, so software running on a computer is alive then?
But the death penalty -- at least in its incarnation where you don't just shoot/hang/burn the first person you think is guilty -- seems awfully impractical
- that's a strange argument. It's much more practical to kill somebody and stop wasting resources trying to do some real justice, definitely cheaper that way. I have a different understanding of the word 'practical' from yours - in fact trying to achieve some form of justice is much less practical than just putting together a case against somebody and quickly executing them.
I mean think of all the resources that go into proving someone's innocence - why bother, if you are only concerned with the 'practical' side of things? Whoever you can frame the crime upon (without getting caught, that's important) practically speaking should be immediately executed and case should be closed.
Now, morally it's a completely different story. If you are concerned with the morality of the matter rather than practical side of it, then you can't use capital punishment at all, because you can never be either sure of total guilt nor can you create a 'just' society applying capital punishment. It's just not going to be a 'just society', because even one killing of an innocent means the society is unjust.
So if you care about morality, you can't have capital punishment.
If you care about practicality you shouldn't let anybody go, who you can simply frame for a crime, it's very practical.
For decades I've answered that question in exactly the same way - USA 1870-1913, Switzerland for the last 20 years, China today.
Good infrastructure means infrastructure that market requires.
Good education means education that market requires.
USA had no strong central government before the Fed and IRS basically, all of these abominations: Fed, IRS, FDA, EPA, FAA, FCC, FDIC, FBI, F&F, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, labour laws, dept's of education, energy, commerce, agriculture, interior, etc., all of this was created already after the economy of USA became strong due to the free market that preceded it and those are the instruments of destruction of the economy and society. I have plenty on these subjects in my journal.
I have tons of comments on this subject, here is something in infrastructure and taxes.
Central government is the end of the road, monopoly on government that is constantly putting more and more pressure on the freedoms of individuals will eventually be released in an explosion and it should.
Blah blah blah, I don't see you providing society with anything but hot air on /. Come on, slacker, do something. Make billions for yourself and others around you. You are not from Somalia, are you?
Nobody gets where they are alone. Everyone relies on the society they live in for support. That's why you don't see people like Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg coming out of Somalia. Unfortunately, it's now become commonplace to deny this obvious truth, because "Greed is Good", at least in the minds of the greedy.
- this 'Elizabeth Warren' talk is also complete nonsense, and I can easily show it with a few facts.
Out of 37 richest self-made people in USA, 27 were born prior to 1850. Only 3 were born in the 20th century - Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Sam Walton.
Over the 1870 to 1913 period of time people became much wealthier relatively to the time preceding that period than people over the entire 20th century relatively to the 1870 to 1913 period. This was done without most of what is called 'government' today, including most departments, agencies, income taxes, regulations, etc.
Beyond that - looks like you think that Zuckerberg owes you something, when in reality he is doing much more than his 'fair share' to increase his own wealth, and the wealth of everybody around him, providing products people use willingly, hiring thousands of people and providing opportunities in various niches around his business, creating jobs in the process (all of which is just a consequence of him making a buck).
On the other hand YOU are slacking off compared to Zuckerberg. You are in the same society, you aren't from Somalia I take it, yet I don't see you provide people with products that 10% of population wants to use and uses and I don't see you making millions for yourself, various investors, clients, creating thousands of jobs. You OWE MUCH MORE to the society by your own standard than Zuckerberg, he has given back already much more than he will EVER USE ON HIMSELF.
You are a slacker but also you want to steal money from others, who make it and you want government to do it for you.
Oh, and the people who are able to build their businesses and then are able to be paid more money than average are already giving back to society much more than society EVER gave them.
Facebook didn't exist and now 10% of population are on it. Definitely 1 person giving 10% of population something they are willing to use is much more important than any taxes that can ever be collected or anything that this person was ever given by anybody.
He shouldn't be paying ANY taxes, he already pays his dues to the society as is, by providing it with something the society wants. Before he pays a single cent in taxes, he already paid millions in salary, he bought millions in equipment and he created millions in value for his clients, investors, customers and employees.
Nonsense. Gov't destroyed education, not improved it, made it much more expensive and destroyed the quality.
Gov't doesn't create infrastructure, in fact gov't can do absolutely nothing without the free enterprise providing the means for it. The wealth is FIRST created by the people who work for living and then gov't comes in and steals it, reduces the overall amount of wealth in the system, scatters it around among its preferred people and then this is called 'public good'.
I am happy to live in times when this is going to come to a crashing end, this is something to look forward to - the end of the system. Either it will turn completely dictatorial and it will be even a bigger disaster or there will be a huge swing back to the true free market and freedoms for individuals and socialist ideologues will simply be laughed out of town.
Well, not all casualties had to be reported in 1983 in USSR, after all, when Chernobyl blew up they covered it up for days and days, people came out to the 1st of May parade (International labour day was always celebrated with big parades then), nobody stopped them coming out even in the surrounding cities and it was very dangerous for people in Kiev for example because of the wind pattern.
However Brin says they came too close to the rocket, and people don't have to be that close during launch, there is always a command bunker near the launch site.
Are they do?
Correction:
... but on production side they would still be untouched and the government couldn't grow based on percentage of their production and work, only on percentage of what they are willing to spend on taxable goods.
If you implement a consumption tax similar to Canada's "Goods and Services Tax", everything is taxed at every stage through the process. It is impossible for the consumer to know what percentage of the price is tax.
- it is a compound tax, but to the consumer every step in the process does not matter, the simplicity of not bothering with collecting all of the papers over the year and then having to FILE a tax form and not really knowing what is going to happen - will you really owe a tax or be paid something back or will you really be audited and then you are on a 'black list' for at least 4 years, and they will go over the last 7-8 years of your tax returns and your spending, receipts, etc. This is a nightmare.
Compared to that, not knowing what the value added tax was at every step of production of a plastic bucket is trivial. You see the final price or the final price + a percentage that is tax, you are done. You don't need to keep the receipts, you don't need to worry that IRS will come after you because you claimed that bucket against your taxes or whatever you did, etc.
It's trivial and insignificant compared to the costs associated with filing income taxes, and especially if IRS comes after you and then you are properly fucked, because the law doesn't exist there to make everybody a law abiding citizen, it exists to ensure that nobody can ever be a 'law abiding citizen', because even the law enforcers themselves don't understand the law (as proven by the fact that only 85% of IRS related court cases have a 'guilty' verdict, so in at least 15% of cases IRS is wrong in its own understanding of the law, whatever it is.)
Lawyers and accountants and IRS agents and cops and courts and judges and unequal application of that broken law and who knows what else - that's what you get with income taxes.
Much simpler is a flat income tax (including flat corporate tax).
- what is INCOME tax? I explain that there is no such thing. It's a long post, with SCOTUS decision references, thus I don't copy and paste it here, just link to it.
Banks withold 10% of returns on investments. Employers withold 10% of paychecks/bonuses/cost of perks. Businesses pay a flat 10% on profit. It is *very* simple for everyone to understand. If you allow no deductions at all, it is incredibly simple.
- are there deductions under your plan?
Can a company deduct payroll from its revenue?
Can a person deduct his losses against his investment?
Just that alone increases the total tax from 'flat' 10% to something else altogether and it's immediately open to discussion and banks definitely cannot WITHHOLD any amount based on investment revenue, who said it's the total PROFIT? Total profit is all revenues minus all expenses at least, never mind various special cases that you didn't address and that will immediately put a huge hole in talking about 'simplicity'.
There is no simplicity at all with taxing work.
The advantage over consumption taxes is that everyone pays the same percentage. With a consumption tax, poor people spend every cent they make (often more, since they are in debt). Rich people don't (they have money in investments). Pretty much the definition of poor and rich. Thus, poor people actually pay a greater percentage of their income on tax than the rich (anti-progressive?)
- huge problem with socialists is that they don't understand economics at all.
Any amount of money that is not spent is re-invested, and it is not government, that creates wealth and real jobs as a consequence of trying to make a buck, it's private enterprise.
Society needs as little government as humanly possible because any amount allocated to the government is the amount that is not used to grow the economy and growth of economy is not some esoteric useless concept, it's what allows us to a
Consumption taxes are not inherently simpler than income taxes
- I am just going to respond to this, the rest I won't touch with you.
Consumption taxes are not just 'inherently simpler' than income taxes, they are infinitely simpler for the consumers.
What does one have to do to file taxes? At the minimum buy a software package and install it on a computer (so must own and operate a computer) and then go over forms, but this means having to pull out various papers collected over the year (or more than one year), receipts, statements, payslips, etc.
Otherwise all of that information must be collected and brought to a tax accountant.
Tax accountants must be hired, workplace must be supplied to them.
When it comes to more complex stuff - tax lawyers must be hired. Sometimes IRS comes in and audits you.
Then there are corporations. GE filed 57,000 pages as its tax return and managed to pay no taxes to US government as I understand, good for them.
====
Compare all of this to consumption taxes: you come to a store, the tax is either already in the price or it is applied to the total on the cash register. You don't have to keep the receipt even if you don't care about returning the item.
It's the store that has to take a percentage of its sales and send the check (or electronic payment) to the government.
Don't need IRS, why? Because it's not store's money, it's client's money, the law is simple and can be understood by a person as opposed to income tax/payroll tax/corporate tax/death tax/capital gains tax/other type of so called "income" tax law.
I show why income taxes are illegal and illegally collected here, and part of it the fact that nobody can understand the law and even based on that fact it's illegal, never mind the fact that there is no such concept as 'income', it's all profit tax, and it can only apply to corporations legally.
But saying that there is no difference between how complex income tax is compared to consumption tax is ridiculous.
All the unproductive jobs and resources spent that are used to file income tax, then fight the IRS, and what happens to people who lose this battle (85% of cases).... With consumption tax you pay it and forget about it, nobody is coming to get you, so if you don't get it, shut up.
A little typo: I don't mean to imply that identity theft is a 'correction' of the IRS fraud, only that what IRS does on daily basis is fraud and this guy is just a small part of that entire fraudster operation.