That's not how it works, though. You get that $30k too, on top of the $32k from your job. So you can work for $64k or stay home for $30k.
- the OP AC.
So a welder who makes $50K/year will now make less than the guy who used to make $32K/year. So the welder, and everyone else making over $30K/year are going to want substantial raises.
- the reply to the OP.
No, the welder makes 80K/year now. Jesus, when did math become hard on slashdot?
- the parent comment.
Of-course both are wrong.
A person making 50K a year will have to have substantial tax increases on him to subsidise the lower brackets. He will also get the 'basic income' subsidy. So if his new taxes towards the BI are 5K (for example), he is making 45K, if the BI is 30,000, he is now making 75K. That is a 50% raise for him.
OTOH if he stops working altogether to get the 30,000BI that's a 40% salary cut for a 100% reduction of work effort.
Would you give up your work today for 60% of your previous salary?
I think many people will do that. Of-course what they will find out fairly quickly is that the new 30,000 BI floor buys them nothing, since prices will go up to reflect the new reality of 30,000 = 0 effort, which may mean that 30,000 will only buy 3000 worth of goods previously or maybe less.
Realise though, that this is what is already happening for many Americans (and people from around the world) who live on welfare (any form of welfare, including SS payments and such) today. Their fixed income purchasing power is dropping to reflect the reality, which is that when everybody has the same 30,000 in their pocket, and this 30,000 takes no effort to receive, every selling position starts at a level that regards 30,000 as 0.
This means price and wage controls will have to kick in to prevent the BI from very quickly becoming irrelevant, this means command economy, this means the experimenting country will end up in the same gutter as the former USSR did.
Of-course the USA can continue with this longer because it has China (and others) subsidising its consumption by selling goods produced in other countries for the newly minted and conjured out of thin air US dollars. At the end of-course this ends up badly anyway, it ends up in a currency crisis.
You are the fucking moron. BI leads to a command economy because it is irrelevant what the minimum amount that everybody is going to be getting at the base, that amount will have 0 purchasing power, that will be the floor that will provide nothing at all and in order for it to provide something prices and wages will have to be controlled, there is no way around that economic certainty. You are the moron who sees no further than 0.000000000000001nm beyond his own nose, you are a complete idiot, nincompoop and also completely and totally irredeemably immoral at that. Enslaving even one individual for the expressed purpose of using that slave labour to ensure life or survival of any number of unproductive individuals is absolutely and irredeemably immoral.
Yes, it is immoral to keep people from starving in the streets with your ideology and BI is not just like a Soviet system, it pretty much is it. In the USSR people didn't pay taxes, there entire idea would have been preposterous, people simply made their pay levels across the country. For a specific stretch of the time you would have seen these pay levels: 19 rubles, 25 rubles, 40 rubles, 60 rubles, 80 rubles, 100 rubles, 120 rubles. 180 rubles, 200 rubles, 360 rubles. That was reality for some time, what did it actually mean? It meant that it doesn't matter, you could be a director, a teacher, a doctor, a factory worker, a construction worker. You had a set salary and you didn't know any other way.
Obviously the reality is that while everybody's productivity was comparatively tiny, everybody's salaries had nothing to do with their productivity. That WAS 'basic income'.
The joke went: we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us.
You don't understand anything, you are the idiot, and yes, it is immoral to enslave even one person to keep thousands alive.
This socialist experiment on a level of a country has been tried before, USSR pretty much had it, we had 'the right to work' and thus the 'right to basic income'.
The country does not exist anymore, I don't need even to get into the details of why this is a stupid (but also very importantly immoral) idea from the very beginning. If you think American system will handle it better than the Soviet system, go ahead, run your experiment. I will get a bucket of popcorn and a comfy chair, I want to see this mess happen IRL.
Are you people so selfish that you would deny basic support for all if our society could afford it?
- I have 0 interest in even 0.0000001% of slavery that you are promoting here. No chance in hell I would ever, in my sound mind support any form of socialism, any form of welferism, UBI or anything of the sort.
Myself and a number of other people I know took that exact risk, with our own money, nobody standing behind with any handout. That's what it takes - a risk that you may go hungry (I never quit working, going hungry simply means giving up on what I am doing to find any job that would prevent me from dying of starvation).
That risk was mine, the reward is mine, I am not interested in sharing my profit with anybody. My products and services, that is what I am willing to share for a correct compensation.
This VC doesn't understand any economics at all, being a VC doesn't change some people's understanding one bit.
I'd say "Sell them, and you'll never buy another piece of American military equipment again, and there won't be a single US soldier within your borders within six months."
- well sure, because USA cannot afford that military if Saudi didn't pay for it by holding those American bonds. This is the underhanded way of paying for USA military presence - buying American bonds. Sell them and Americans have no money to do things like to run its military.
Saudis must sell those treasuries immediately if there is a court decision that they could be liable for all the losses of 9/11 because those treasuries would be worthless to them, since those are the assets that can be frozen by USA courts should Americans file their lawsuits. What American court would NOT grant a victory to an American citizen or a company as a matter of fact (insurance companies, the city of New York, other companies whose value fell because of 9/11). Saudis would be fools not to dump the treasuries immediately, they would lose them anyway.
- it will only hurt Obama, which is why he opposes this bill. Sanders and Clinton are all for it, because it is political suicide in USA to oppose it for the ones running for office. For Obama this is a true problem, a trillion dollars worth of USA Treasuries that NOBODY wants will hurt the USA economy immediately. If Saudis want USA military they should pay for it above board, in this regard Trump is at least correct.
So you do know where I am, yes? By the way, I moved my business a long time ago, myself, I move around, I don't consider myself a slave to any government on this planet.
Here is a good sub-list of things that shouldn't exist:
Publicly funded:
A standing army, the FDA, the EPA, clean, drinkable water coming from every faucet, 24-hour emergency rooms, fully-staffed hospitals waiting to give you life-saving care, fire departments, 12 years of public education, child-abuse investigators, controls on what toxic chemicals can be poured into your drinking water, nationwide 911 service, a national highway system, social services, drug treatment centers, Medicaid and Medicare, Social Security, community colleges, public schools, water and sewer systems, parks and recreation services, food inspection, electrical utilities, gas service, a National School Lunch Program, Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, foster care services, School Breakfast Programs, State Children's Insurance Programs, Unemployment insurance, Worker's Comp, Senior Community Service Employment Programs, street lights, mass transit, zoning, planning, building permits and inspection, housing and development programs, road maintenance, the State Board of Health, building inspections, building and fire codes, disaster relief, FEMA, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the FBI, flood mitigation, pollution inspections, drug treatment centers, the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), the Library of Congress, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and on and on and on.
Those things must not exist as government 'services', they are affront to individual rights, liberties and dignity.
I'm not sure why industry changed. It could be a bad batch of MBA's trained via education fads to chase short-term, or maybe the pressure of global competition putting companies in semi-panic survival mode. But it has changed.
- well I am sure. I am sure that the reality is very different from the way 99% of people see it in case of government and individual rights. It is different because the 99% have been conditioned in the way that blinds them, makes it impossible for them to understand what is going on.
The problem is that USA became a socialist country starting with the Sherman's act of destruction of private property rights, FDR, all of the 'great society' crap, Federal reserve and fake money, IRS and income and wealth taxation, SS, Medicare, wage and price controls. All of these ideas led to the 1971 default on the dollar and since then the inflation has been rampant, double digits, much higher than any officials would admit and they are very busy changing the way that inflation (and thus GDP) get reported.
USA productivity is destroyed because there are no savings, no actual savings. There is no money. I am not talking about paper that the Fed and the banks are creating, I am not even talking about the slave contributions made to the Treasury through IRS and taxes. I am talking about real money, something that became taboo in USA and much of the rest of the modern world, something that is destroying productivity and economics everywhere.
Without real productivity there are no real savings, without real savings there are no investments, no investments means no research also.
Thus, government has to step in the fill the void. I don't see the private sector growing more interested in medium- and long-term R&D again. It's not whether the government sucks, it's whether the alternative is worse.
- the government has destroyed the ability of the free individual (private sector) to save money and thus to be able to afford research and development. Government can only print or borrow (borrowing is future taxation, printing is underhanded taxation of all dollar denominated assets now).
Government 'stepping in and filling the void' would be ironic since the government is the void that sucked all the life out of the economy.
The solution is obvious but you have to recognize the root problem, but you have been conditioned to look at it and right through it without ever recognising it.
1$1$, actually a dollar sign can be drawn with two vertical lines close to each other over one S. Obviously U$A money are all about funding terrorism....
The only reason those papers are of any interest is specifically because of the politicians in them and how they have all this money while being politicians, money that they are making while being politicians. People using bank accounts all over the world is not a revelation, many people have bank accounts in many countries, none of that is interesting (except for those who want to steal), but politicians having money, whose nature is indecipherable, that is of interest. There are politicians there, heads of government with money that cannot be explained by their salaries and benefits at all.
I don't want anybody to pay any income or wealth taxes to any government, I do however want to expose all the money that governments and politicians steal.
What is this 'fair share' exactly, when we are talking about a company that actually creates wealth by reducing costs, building services and products, providing people with jobs, providing people with investment and other business opportunities?
AFAIC the only fair tax on any income and wealth is 0.
The Panama papers show that it is the government that steals from people, with politicians stealing money from the very people that are paying taxes, so what the fuck are you talking about?
The Tsar Bomba was never a weapon, it was a spectacle, a device made to intimidate imagination but not to be a weapon against any enemy (except if the enemy is common sense). It could not be put onto an ICBM but also it could not be put into a normal aircraft. The Tu95 bomber used to drop it had to be modified, parts of fuselage removed and mid section fuel tanks removed. With the device weighing abo8ut 27 tons and with more than half of the fuel tanks gone the airplane could never make it from Russia to USA.
Is K-12 education theft? Is funding our military theft? Is funding of roads, police, and fire departments theft?
- in that order: yes. yes. yes. yes. yes.
My answer to all of your questions related to government doing anything at all is yes, it is theft, all of it must be done privately, however you choose to do it is none of my business, it's yours. Nobody should have any money stolen from them in form of any income or wealth taxes, it is theft and it is the worst thing from economic perspective, it is also the most immoral way of doing things, it presumes ownership of the individual by the State, that is my primary driver, economy is the secondary one.
As to you saying that "you are paying", no, you are not paying yet, you are about to pay with a completely destroyed economy and annihilation of your standard of living.
All income and wealth related taxes are theft, I am not a hypocrite. I am for Constitutional capitation and excise taxes if you actually care to understand.
You can hate what I am saying all you like, but this is theft.
So is inflation (money printing by the Federal reserve), so are income and wealth related taxes, all of the above will be used to "forgive" somebody's 'loans'.
This is simply theft, nothing else. The money is taken from tax payers and transferred to people in whatever group that makes the politician get browny points with the electorate. Obama is not going for reelections himself, the economy is dead pretty much, he won't admit it, he is doing all the propaganda together with Yellen to make it look pretty before elections, where he hopes to push Clinton through.
In any case, a government 'forgiving' loans is theft. A government printing money (and the Fed is not supposed to be part of government, but please) is theft. Income taxes and wealth taxes are theft.
Once it is established that government can tax income and wealth the only question is: how much today will you be able to keep of what you make? You are a slave of the system and if you are one of the vast majority who hope to profit from this system by benefiting from all the money transfer do not forget this simple fact: you are destroying the system, you are not making it any better or stronger or any more moral by condoning theft from the productive and transfer to the unproductive because the productive will be moving their money and thus jobs and products out and they are moving, do not for a second think you will really get what you are voting for in the long run. In the long run your economy and your society that relies on this economy are done.
As if infrastructure, healthcare, education, etc. come from government that conjures up the resources without taxes. The infrastructure, etc., anything government is involved in (AFAIC none of it is government business, I digress), all of the money for it comes from taxes in the first place and all taxes originally come from businesses doing something that actually contributes to society. Society and economy only exist because companies build the products and services that people need, companies hire people, companies provide investment opportunities and eventually capital. To say that companies do not contribute to society is like to say that the Solar System does not contribute to life on Earth.
Google, Apple, Tesla, FB, HP even were created by one or a couple of guys and some private investors, these are the people that own the companies, they are multi billionaires, they are the 'fat cats, skimming off the top', their day of work is in taking enormous risk of doing something new that very few others ever do. The people working for them take no risk in applying for a job, working for somebody else makes the company more productive based on the job the company created but without the company that job does not exist. That product or service does not exist. That investment opportunity does not exist. Even that tax base does not exist.
AFAIC people that start companies have paid their 'fair share' many times over simply by building the business and should not be paying any government abt amount in any form of an income of wealth taxes at all.
You think you can be productive without businesses you work for? Not unless you start your own one.
I didn't shift responsibility to businesses, where did you read that? I said that all people need to understand that system security should be part of the core functionality, the push for security has to come from all sides, it cannot be only businesses if the users don't care and it cannot be just users if businesses are not listening.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not how it works, though. You get that $30k too, on top of the $32k from your job. So you can work for $64k or stay home for $30k.
- the OP AC.
So a welder who makes $50K/year will now make less than the guy who used to make $32K/year. So the welder, and everyone else making over $30K/year are going to want substantial raises.
- the reply to the OP.
No, the welder makes 80K/year now. Jesus, when did math become hard on slashdot?
- the parent comment.
Of-course both are wrong.
A person making 50K a year will have to have substantial tax increases on him to subsidise the lower brackets. He will also get the 'basic income' subsidy. So if his new taxes towards the BI are 5K (for example), he is making 45K, if the BI is 30,000, he is now making 75K. That is a 50% raise for him.
OTOH if he stops working altogether to get the 30,000BI that's a 40% salary cut for a 100% reduction of work effort.
Would you give up your work today for 60% of your previous salary?
I think many people will do that. Of-course what they will find out fairly quickly is that the new 30,000 BI floor buys them nothing, since prices will go up to reflect the new reality of 30,000 = 0 effort, which may mean that 30,000 will only buy 3000 worth of goods previously or maybe less.
Realise though, that this is what is already happening for many Americans (and people from around the world) who live on welfare (any form of welfare, including SS payments and such) today. Their fixed income purchasing power is dropping to reflect the reality, which is that when everybody has the same 30,000 in their pocket, and this 30,000 takes no effort to receive, every selling position starts at a level that regards 30,000 as 0.
This means price and wage controls will have to kick in to prevent the BI from very quickly becoming irrelevant, this means command economy, this means the experimenting country will end up in the same gutter as the former USSR did.
Of-course the USA can continue with this longer because it has China (and others) subsidising its consumption by selling goods produced in other countries for the newly minted and conjured out of thin air US dollars. At the end of-course this ends up badly anyway, it ends up in a currency crisis.
Today this crisis seems inevitable.
you know it was a damned daring person who refused to be typecast and shoved into a box.
- but the box always wins at the end. Too soon?
You are the fucking moron. BI leads to a command economy because it is irrelevant what the minimum amount that everybody is going to be getting at the base, that amount will have 0 purchasing power, that will be the floor that will provide nothing at all and in order for it to provide something prices and wages will have to be controlled, there is no way around that economic certainty. You are the moron who sees no further than 0.000000000000001nm beyond his own nose, you are a complete idiot, nincompoop and also completely and totally irredeemably immoral at that. Enslaving even one individual for the expressed purpose of using that slave labour to ensure life or survival of any number of unproductive individuals is absolutely and irredeemably immoral.
Yes, it is immoral to keep people from starving in the streets with your ideology and BI is not just like a Soviet system, it pretty much is it. In the USSR people didn't pay taxes, there entire idea would have been preposterous, people simply made their pay levels across the country. For a specific stretch of the time you would have seen these pay levels: 19 rubles, 25 rubles, 40 rubles, 60 rubles, 80 rubles, 100 rubles, 120 rubles. 180 rubles, 200 rubles, 360 rubles. That was reality for some time, what did it actually mean? It meant that it doesn't matter, you could be a director, a teacher, a doctor, a factory worker, a construction worker. You had a set salary and you didn't know any other way.
Obviously the reality is that while everybody's productivity was comparatively tiny, everybody's salaries had nothing to do with their productivity. That WAS 'basic income'.
The joke went: we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us.
You don't understand anything, you are the idiot, and yes, it is immoral to enslave even one person to keep thousands alive.
This socialist experiment on a level of a country has been tried before, USSR pretty much had it, we had 'the right to work' and thus the 'right to basic income'.
The country does not exist anymore, I don't need even to get into the details of why this is a stupid (but also very importantly immoral) idea from the very beginning. If you think American system will handle it better than the Soviet system, go ahead, run your experiment. I will get a bucket of popcorn and a comfy chair, I want to see this mess happen IRL.
Are you people so selfish that you would deny basic support for all if our society could afford it?
- I have 0 interest in even 0.0000001% of slavery that you are promoting here. No chance in hell I would ever, in my sound mind support any form of socialism, any form of welferism, UBI or anything of the sort.
Myself and a number of other people I know took that exact risk, with our own money, nobody standing behind with any handout. That's what it takes - a risk that you may go hungry (I never quit working, going hungry simply means giving up on what I am doing to find any job that would prevent me from dying of starvation).
That risk was mine, the reward is mine, I am not interested in sharing my profit with anybody. My products and services, that is what I am willing to share for a correct compensation.
This VC doesn't understand any economics at all, being a VC doesn't change some people's understanding one bit.
Florida, ha! :) Money hidden in several jurisdictions... I have business interests in a number of different countries and I do not reside in the USA.
I'd say "Sell them, and you'll never buy another piece of American military equipment again, and there won't be a single US soldier within your borders within six months."
- well sure, because USA cannot afford that military if Saudi didn't pay for it by holding those American bonds. This is the underhanded way of paying for USA military presence - buying American bonds. Sell them and Americans have no money to do things like to run its military.
Saudis must sell those treasuries immediately if there is a court decision that they could be liable for all the losses of 9/11 because those treasuries would be worthless to them, since those are the assets that can be frozen by USA courts should Americans file their lawsuits. What American court would NOT grant a victory to an American citizen or a company as a matter of fact (insurance companies, the city of New York, other companies whose value fell because of 9/11). Saudis would be fools not to dump the treasuries immediately, they would lose them anyway.
It can only hurt the Saudis.
- it will only hurt Obama, which is why he opposes this bill. Sanders and Clinton are all for it, because it is political suicide in USA to oppose it for the ones running for office. For Obama this is a true problem, a trillion dollars worth of USA Treasuries that NOBODY wants will hurt the USA economy immediately. If Saudis want USA military they should pay for it above board, in this regard Trump is at least correct.
So you do know where I am, yes? By the way, I moved my business a long time ago, myself, I move around, I don't consider myself a slave to any government on this planet.
Here is a good sub-list of things that shouldn't exist:
Publicly funded:
A standing army, the FDA, the EPA, clean, drinkable water coming from every faucet, 24-hour emergency rooms, fully-staffed hospitals waiting to give you life-saving care, fire departments, 12 years of public education, child-abuse investigators, controls on what toxic chemicals can be poured into your drinking water, nationwide 911 service, a national highway system, social services, drug treatment centers, Medicaid and Medicare, Social Security, community colleges, public schools, water and sewer systems, parks and recreation services, food inspection, electrical utilities, gas service, a National School Lunch Program, Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, foster care services, School Breakfast Programs, State Children's Insurance Programs, Unemployment insurance, Worker's Comp, Senior Community Service Employment Programs, street lights, mass transit, zoning, planning, building permits and inspection, housing and development programs, road maintenance, the State Board of Health, building inspections, building and fire codes, disaster relief, FEMA, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the FBI, flood mitigation, pollution inspections, drug treatment centers, the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), the Library of Congress, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and on and on and on.
Those things must not exist as government 'services', they are affront to individual rights, liberties and dignity.
I'm not sure why industry changed. It could be a bad batch of MBA's trained via education fads to chase short-term, or maybe the pressure of global competition putting companies in semi-panic survival mode. But it has changed.
- well I am sure. I am sure that the reality is very different from the way 99% of people see it in case of government and individual rights. It is different because the 99% have been conditioned in the way that blinds them, makes it impossible for them to understand what is going on.
The problem is that USA became a socialist country starting with the Sherman's act of destruction of private property rights, FDR, all of the 'great society' crap, Federal reserve and fake money, IRS and income and wealth taxation, SS, Medicare, wage and price controls. All of these ideas led to the 1971 default on the dollar and since then the inflation has been rampant, double digits, much higher than any officials would admit and they are very busy changing the way that inflation (and thus GDP) get reported.
USA productivity is destroyed because there are no savings, no actual savings. There is no money. I am not talking about paper that the Fed and the banks are creating, I am not even talking about the slave contributions made to the Treasury through IRS and taxes. I am talking about real money, something that became taboo in USA and much of the rest of the modern world, something that is destroying productivity and economics everywhere.
Without real productivity there are no real savings, without real savings there are no investments, no investments means no research also.
Thus, government has to step in the fill the void. I don't see the private sector growing more interested in medium- and long-term R&D again. It's not whether the government sucks, it's whether the alternative is worse.
- the government has destroyed the ability of the free individual (private sector) to save money and thus to be able to afford research and development. Government can only print or borrow (borrowing is future taxation, printing is underhanded taxation of all dollar denominated assets now).
Government 'stepping in and filling the void' would be ironic since the government is the void that sucked all the life out of the economy.
The solution is obvious but you have to recognize the root problem, but you have been conditioned to look at it and right through it without ever recognising it.
1$1$, actually a dollar sign can be drawn with two vertical lines close to each other over one S. Obviously U$A money are all about funding terrorism....
The only reason those papers are of any interest is specifically because of the politicians in them and how they have all this money while being politicians, money that they are making while being politicians. People using bank accounts all over the world is not a revelation, many people have bank accounts in many countries, none of that is interesting (except for those who want to steal), but politicians having money, whose nature is indecipherable, that is of interest. There are politicians there, heads of government with money that cannot be explained by their salaries and benefits at all.
I don't want anybody to pay any income or wealth taxes to any government, I do however want to expose all the money that governments and politicians steal.
What is this 'fair share' exactly, when we are talking about a company that actually creates wealth by reducing costs, building services and products, providing people with jobs, providing people with investment and other business opportunities?
AFAIC the only fair tax on any income and wealth is 0.
The Panama papers show that it is the government that steals from people, with politicians stealing money from the very people that are paying taxes, so what the fuck are you talking about?
The Tsar Bomba was never a weapon, it was a spectacle, a device made to intimidate imagination but not to be a weapon against any enemy (except if the enemy is common sense). It could not be put onto an ICBM but also it could not be put into a normal aircraft. The Tu95 bomber used to drop it had to be modified, parts of fuselage removed and mid section fuel tanks removed. With the device weighing abo8ut 27 tons and with more than half of the fuel tanks gone the airplane could never make it from Russia to USA.
The blind and corrupt leading the blind and uninformed.
Is K-12 education theft? Is funding our military theft? Is funding of roads, police, and fire departments theft?
- in that order: yes. yes. yes. yes. yes.
My answer to all of your questions related to government doing anything at all is yes, it is theft, all of it must be done privately, however you choose to do it is none of my business, it's yours. Nobody should have any money stolen from them in form of any income or wealth taxes, it is theft and it is the worst thing from economic perspective, it is also the most immoral way of doing things, it presumes ownership of the individual by the State, that is my primary driver, economy is the secondary one.
As to you saying that "you are paying", no, you are not paying yet, you are about to pay with a completely destroyed economy and annihilation of your standard of living.
All income and wealth related taxes are theft, I am not a hypocrite. I am for Constitutional capitation and excise taxes if you actually care to understand.
You can hate what I am saying all you like, but this is theft.
So is inflation (money printing by the Federal reserve), so are income and wealth related taxes, all of the above will be used to "forgive" somebody's 'loans'.
This is simply theft, nothing else. The money is taken from tax payers and transferred to people in whatever group that makes the politician get browny points with the electorate. Obama is not going for reelections himself, the economy is dead pretty much, he won't admit it, he is doing all the propaganda together with Yellen to make it look pretty before elections, where he hopes to push Clinton through.
In any case, a government 'forgiving' loans is theft. A government printing money (and the Fed is not supposed to be part of government, but please) is theft. Income taxes and wealth taxes are theft.
Once it is established that government can tax income and wealth the only question is: how much today will you be able to keep of what you make? You are a slave of the system and if you are one of the vast majority who hope to profit from this system by benefiting from all the money transfer do not forget this simple fact: you are destroying the system, you are not making it any better or stronger or any more moral by condoning theft from the productive and transfer to the unproductive because the productive will be moving their money and thus jobs and products out and they are moving, do not for a second think you will really get what you are voting for in the long run. In the long run your economy and your society that relies on this economy are done.
Repost with a user name, I will definitely take your arguments and disassemble them for you one by one.
As if infrastructure, healthcare, education, etc. come from government that conjures up the resources without taxes. The infrastructure, etc., anything government is involved in (AFAIC none of it is government business, I digress), all of the money for it comes from taxes in the first place and all taxes originally come from businesses doing something that actually contributes to society. Society and economy only exist because companies build the products and services that people need, companies hire people, companies provide investment opportunities and eventually capital. To say that companies do not contribute to society is like to say that the Solar System does not contribute to life on Earth.
Google, Apple, Tesla, FB, HP even were created by one or a couple of guys and some private investors, these are the people that own the companies, they are multi billionaires, they are the 'fat cats, skimming off the top', their day of work is in taking enormous risk of doing something new that very few others ever do. The people working for them take no risk in applying for a job, working for somebody else makes the company more productive based on the job the company created but without the company that job does not exist. That product or service does not exist. That investment opportunity does not exist. Even that tax base does not exist.
AFAIC people that start companies have paid their 'fair share' many times over simply by building the business and should not be paying any government abt amount in any form of an income of wealth taxes at all.
You think you can be productive without businesses you work for? Not unless you start your own one.
I didn't shift responsibility to businesses, where did you read that? I said that all people need to understand that system security should be part of the core functionality, the push for security has to come from all sides, it cannot be only businesses if the users don't care and it cannot be just users if businesses are not listening.