I'm sick of the Government

[43st]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
FYI, you can (and will) be arrested and convicted. Tax evasion is one of the easiest to prosecute. Openly admitting it on Internet forum, where the U.S. gov't can legally compel AnandTech to hand over your IP address should they have evidence you haven't paid your taxes, tells me you haven't quite thought it through.

There are many forms of tax resistance that aren't tax evasion, donating to a charity for example. I have a friend that doesn't pay 40% due to war spending, he's been doing it as long as I've known him, over 20 years. The IRS audits him every year though, so you need to keep tight books. 😛

 

[ericlp]

What if we ALL stopped paying our taxes. I hope the government has a LOT of time to prosecute each and everyone of us.

Want a friggen tax break for the thrid-fourth-fifth class? F*&K the rich, they are the ones getting all the breaks, if all the working stiffs told the government where to stick it....

Let's have a tax break for the working poor and tell W. Bush to go F himself.

What's funny ... they say, that your vote counts ... well, stop feeding the idiots that run this country and we'll see what counts in a REAL hurry.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

99% of the population literally can't avoid using gov't services, unless they totally isolate themselves in the wilderness somewhere and hunt for their own food. You don't have a choice for good reason; you're going to use gov't services whether you like it or not. And, logically, you should pay for that. Now, perhaps you could argue that you should have to pay only a certain percentage, but that could lead to all sorts of impractical legislative nightmares that would open the door to anyone with any arbitrary claim of not needing to pay a certain percentage of taxes due to their usage, unnecessarily log-jamming an already very busy legal system.

Ok, so I am going to use government services whether I like it or not, and I am going to pay for government services whether I like it or not... and logically it makes sense since the government has the IRS and guys with guns...hmmm...sounds a lot like the Mafia.

Freedom sounds like quite the nightmare...people 'arbitrarily' deciding what to pay for, log jamming craziness!

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: ericlp
What if we ALL stopped paying our taxes. I hope the government has a LOT of time to prosecute each and everyone of us.

Want a friggen tax break for the thrid-fourth-fifth class? F*&K the rich, they are the ones getting all the breaks, if all the working stiffs told the government where to stick it....

Let's have a tax break for the working poor and tell W. Bush to go F himself.

What's funny ... they say, that your vote counts ... well, stop feeding the idiots that run this country and we'll see what counts in a REAL hurry.

How are we supposed to stop paying our taxes when the government steals our money before we get our paychecks?

 

[ranmaniac]

Just start your own cult/religion and get tax-exempt status, it worked for L. Ron Hubbard.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: ericlp
What if we ALL stopped paying our taxes. I hope the government has a LOT of time to prosecute each and everyone of us.

Want a friggen tax break for the thrid-fourth-fifth class? F*&K the rich, they are the ones getting all the breaks, if all the working stiffs told the government where to stick it....

Let's have a tax break for the working poor and tell W. Bush to go F himself.

What's funny ... they say, that your vote counts ... well, stop feeding the idiots that run this country and we'll see what counts in a REAL hurry.

Funny that you should say that. He did lower the Federal taxes on the working poor to the point that they have almost none. and then he gave them handouts to boot that the "working rich" did not get any of.

Short memory?

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Originally posted by: ericlp
What if we ALL stopped paying our taxes. I hope the government has a LOT of time to prosecute each and everyone of us.

Want a friggen tax break for the third-fourth-fifth class? F*&K the rich, they are the ones getting all the breaks, if all the working stiffs told the government where to stick it....

Let's have a tax break for the working poor and tell W. Bush to go F himself.

What's funny ... they say, that your vote counts ... well, stop feeding the idiots that run this country and we'll see what counts in a REAL hurry.

How are we supposed to stop paying our taxes when the government steals our money before we get our paychecks?

There are two ways

1) Stop working for someone else and work for yourself.
2) Tell your employer to stop the withholding - see where that gets you




The government "steals" your money because it knows that the majority of people will not put aside funds to pay the taxes when the total is due.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Ok, so I am going to use government services whether I like it or not, and I am going to pay for government services whether I like it or not... and logically it makes sense since the government has the IRS and guys with guns...hmmm...sounds a lot like the Mafia.

No, you don't get it; you literally, physically cannot avoid using gov't services. You physically cannot avoid using roads/bridges/freeways today, tomorrow, the next day, etc., and guess what, they are paid for by state or federal governments. For crying out loud, you are communicating to me, right now, via a form of technology (TCP/IP protocol stack) that was developed by the U.S. Department of Defense. A large portion of the routers and switches that power the Internet are located in highly sensitive departments of the U.S. gov't. You are, without much choice, tied to the U.S. and the services they provide. This is not the end of the world, it is a logical progression of power based on need. Now, you can argue the merit of having to pay for some social services, certainly, but to not want to pay taxes while using publicly-funded roads, water, food, etc., shows a fundamental disconnect with common sense.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Why can't the government privatize these services? Trash pickup, water, social security, prescription drugs, (soon-to-be) mortgages? Is the free market incapable of handling these services? Why should my money be stolen for the services I don't use or need?

Can you name a single, solitary example, in the history of the planet, where privatized trash, roads, water, social programs, drugs, and mortgages worked out better for said populous than those same gov't-funded has worked out for the U.S. overall? I'll give you the short, resounding answer; no you cannot. It's a solution not based in any reality that has ever worked. The incentive for private firms is to turn a profit, not to protect American citizens.

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

How are we supposed to stop paying our taxes when the government steals our money before we get our paychecks?

You have a choice, actually; file your own tax returns by becoming an independent contractor. Start your own business. All perfectly legal, and nothing is taken from your paycheck. Of course, if you're not honest in reporting your income/expenses, that's when you'll get into trouble.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Ok, so I am going to use government services whether I like it or not, and I am going to pay for government services whether I like it or not... and logically it makes sense since the government has the IRS and guys with guns...hmmm...sounds a lot like the Mafia.

No, you don't get it; you literally, physically cannot avoid using gov't services. You physically cannot avoid using roads/bridges/freeways today, tomorrow, the next day, etc., and guess what, they are paid for by state or federal governments. For crying out loud, you are communicating to me, right now, via a form of technology (TCP/IP protocol stack) that was developed by the U.S. Department of Defense. A large portion of the routers and switches that power the Internet are located in highly sensitive departments of the U.S. gov't. You are, without much choice, tied to the U.S. and the services they provide. This is not the end of the world, it is a logical progression of power based on need. Now, you can argue the merit of having to pay for some social services, certainly, but to not want to pay taxes while using publicly-funded roads, water, food, etc., shows a fundamental disconnect with common sense.

That is my point. You are putting me in a situation where I have no choices. I can't withhold taxes from the government, and I can't stop them from monopolizing bridge construction. If there are no options here, how is an obligation created? Government moves in and says they will build a bridge, and the fact that they have built it, and shut everyone else out of the bridge building business creates an obligation for me to pay for it whether I use the bridge or not? Dubious logic. And if this logic applies to the government why doesn't it apply to anyone else? If I mow your lawn can I force you to pay for my service?

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

That is my point. You are putting me in a situation where I have no choices. I can't withhold taxes from the government, and I can't stop them from monopolizing bridge construction. If there are no options here, how is an obligation created? Government moves in and says they will build a bridge, and the fact that they have built it, and shut everyone else out of the bridge building business creates an obligation for me to pay for it whether I use the bridge or not? Dubious logic. And if this logic applies to the government why doesn't it apply to anyone else? If I mow your lawn can I force you to pay for my service?

It's perfectly reasonable and it's why this logical progression occurred in the first place. Your claim implies that private firms should build bridges and roads, for example. What you don't realize is that federal, state and local gov'ts already use private contractors and materials anyway (Vulcan, for example). How about providing for the national defense, is that something that can be done by private firms. No, it cannot, protecting American citizens here at home (via military and intelligence) is something private firms don't have the same incentive nor the same set of laws or loyalties that U.S. gov't employees have in the military or gov't agencies.

You act as if there are better alternatives to providing these services than gov't-funded solutions, yet you provide no specific alternatives. Again, who, and how?

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Ok, so I am going to use government services whether I like it or not, and I am going to pay for government services whether I like it or not... and logically it makes sense since the government has the IRS and guys with guns...hmmm...sounds a lot like the Mafia.

No, you don't get it; you literally, physically cannot avoid using gov't services. You physically cannot avoid using roads/bridges/freeways today, tomorrow, the next day, etc., and guess what, they are paid for by state or federal governments. For crying out loud, you are communicating to me, right now, via a form of technology (TCP/IP protocol stack) that was developed by the U.S. Department of Defense. A large portion of the routers and switches that power the Internet are located in highly sensitive departments of the U.S. gov't. You are, without much choice, tied to the U.S. and the services they provide. This is not the end of the world, it is a logical progression of power based on need. Now, you can argue the merit of having to pay for some social services, certainly, but to not want to pay taxes while using publicly-funded roads, water, food, etc., shows a fundamental disconnect with common sense.

That is my point. You are putting me in a situation where I have no choices. I can't withhold taxes from the government, and I can't stop them from monopolizing bridge construction. If there are no options here, how is an obligation created? Government moves in and says they will build a bridge, and the fact that they have built it, and shut everyone else out of the bridge building business creates an obligation for me to pay for it whether I use the bridge or not? Dubious logic. And if this logic applies to the government why doesn't it apply to anyone else? If I mow your lawn can I force you to pay for my service?

The contractor with the lowest bid is awarded the project. The government doesn't build bridges or roads.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
You act as if there are better alternatives to providing these services than gov't-funded solutions, yet you provide no specific alternatives. Again, who, and how?

The better alternative is secession and local government taking over those responsibilities.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
You act as if there are better alternatives to providing these services than gov't-funded solutions, yet you provide no specific alternatives. Again, who, and how?

The better alternative is secession and local government taking over those responsibilities.

You mean state secession, Civil War style?

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife


The contractor with the lowest bid is awarded the project. The government doesn't build bridges or roads.

It funds and controls the construction though, effectively shutting out all other competition. Their game becomes the only one in town.

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Why can't the government privatize these services? Trash pickup, water, social security, prescription drugs, (soon-to-be) mortgages? Is the free market incapable of handling these services? Why should my money be stolen for the services I don't use or need?

Can you name a single, solitary example, in the history of the planet, where privatized trash, roads, water, social programs, drugs, and mortgages worked out better for said populous than those same gov't-funded has worked out for the U.S. overall? I'll give you the short, resounding answer; no you cannot. It's a solution not based in any reality that has ever worked. The incentive for private firms is to turn a profit, not to protect American citizens.

Sure, here's one. Social Security rate of return continues to dwindle towards 0% (isn't it at like ~2%) while a successfully privatized insurance system like Chile's has a rate of return of about 14%. The incentive to produce profit is a great way to protect American citizens because it gives them the money to take care of themselves.

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

How are we supposed to stop paying our taxes when the government steals our money before we get our paychecks?

You have a choice, actually; file your own tax returns by becoming an independent contractor. Start your own business. All perfectly legal, and nothing is taken from your paycheck. Of course, if you're not honest in reporting your income/expenses, that's when you'll get into trouble.

But if I keep my part time jobs then they'll still tax me. And that's all I can do right now as I'm in college.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Sure, here's one. Social Security rate of return continues to dwindle towards 0% (isn't it at like ~2%) while a successfully privatized insurance system like Chile's has a rate of return of about 14%.

Social Security is broken and most people on both sides of the spectrum agree with that. Except they don't agree that privatizing Social Security is the way to fix it. Of all the programs you could privatize, I suppose SS would be the best example. I'm not aware of Chile's ROI on privatized insurance, but I'd like to see a reference/link to it.

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX
The incentive to produce profit is a great way to protect American citizens because it gives them the money to take care of themselves.

Except it actually hasn't worked in practice. Blackwater being a prime example, but I could also easily argue many others.

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

But if I keep my part time jobs then they'll still tax me. And that's all I can do right now as I'm in college.

It's your choice to keep your part-time jobs, not the government's. Like I said, you have the option of taking another route; independent contractor for a web site (for example, when I wrote for AnandTech), or start your own business.

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

Sure, here's one. Social Security rate of return continues to dwindle towards 0% (isn't it at like ~2%) while a successfully privatized insurance system like Chile's has a rate of return of about 14%.

Social Security is broken and most people on both sides of the spectrum agree with that. Except they don't agree that privatizing Social Security is the way to fix it. Of all the programs you could privatize, I suppose SS would be the best example. I'm not aware of Chile's ROI on privatized insurance, but I'd like to see a reference/link to it.

Here's a good article I was able to find on Chile's system. link

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX
The incentive to produce profit is a great way to protect American citizens because it gives them the money to take care of themselves.

Except it actually hasn't worked in practice. Blackwater being a prime example, but I could also easily argue many others.

Blackwater is not a product of the free market, but a product of the government. Taxpayers have no incentive to fund killing machines and export them to other countries. Its more economical to negotiate and trade with other countries than it is to invade and plunder them.

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX

But if I keep my part time jobs then they'll still tax me. And that's all I can do right now as I'm in college.

It's your choice to keep your part-time jobs, not the government's. Like I said, you have the option of taking another route; independent contractor for a web site (for example, when I wrote for AnandTech), or start your own business.

Oh right its my fault the government steals money from me. Me and my work ethic..

 

[nullzero]

Originally posted by: necine

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: necine
I am considering not paying my taxes as a form of civil disobedience. This bailout is the straw... I don't support the bailout, iraq war, infringement on my civil liberties. I think I'm done. Thoughts?

Are you self employed and if not how are you going to avoid payroll deductions?

I can just change my W-4 so they don't take anything out. No, I work for a company and have a small side business.

Work under the table is the best way to avoid this. Buy some property in another country and prepare to move there. This country is crumbling away before our eyes (I would keep up with you taxes... at the rate we are going there will be no government as we know it to collect.) I suggest everyone prepare for the worst and get ready for a finacial collapse.

 

[TheSlamma]

Originally posted by: babylon5
You're better off to immigrate to another country than try to stop paying taxes here.

I agree with this guy :thumbsup:

 

[KIRBYEE]

.

 

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE

Originally posted by: necine
I am considering not paying my taxes as a form of civil disobedience. This bailout is the straw... I don't support the bailout, iraq war, infringement on my civil liberties. I think I'm done. Thoughts?

I love you. :heart:

The government has no business in stealing your money. :thumbsup:

I'm not sure how private roads, private courts, private police or private fire stations would work. For other "services" provided by the government, I support privatization.

They aren't stealing your money while you agree to live. If you don't like your taxes, lobby to change them, attempt to get around them (ask Wesley Snipes how that is working), or leave. Those are your options.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: BarneyFife


The contractor with the lowest bid is awarded the project. The government doesn't build bridges or roads.

It funds and controls the construction though, effectively shutting out all other competition. Their game becomes the only one in town.

Wrong.

The bidding process is open to any firms that can prequalify.

Then the bids are evaluated for cost/benifit.

Very few construction projects are issued as no-bid.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Is this a serious question? The U.S. gov't has to generate revenue from Americans that use the services that they provide; safe food supply, water supply, roads, infrastructure, etc. The gov't cannot allow U.S. citizens to simply stop paying taxes, otherwise we'd have a massive problem with funding these essential human needs.

So absolutely nothing the U.S. government does warrants a tax revolt of any kind? You do realize the U.S. government was founded on a tax revolt initially, correct?

And you do realize that the British empire in the late 18th century and colonial America has absolutely no relevance in this discussion about the need to pay taxes for public services, correct? The British provided no services to the colonies then, while the U.S. gov't currently provides services in exponentially higher quantity. There is no way you can get around this reality; you use gov't services everyday unless you live in a log cabin in the middle of nowhere and hunt for your food and boil your water.

So how do I opt out of these services as well as paying for them?

By moving out of the country. Fire services, police, etc don't have time to ask you if you've opted in to the program or not when you're unconscious on the floor of your burning house.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: BarneyFife


The contractor with the lowest bid is awarded the project. The government doesn't build bridges or roads.

It funds and controls the construction though, effectively shutting out all other competition. Their game becomes the only one in town.

Wrong.

The bidding process is open to any firms that can prequalify.

Then the bids are evaluated for cost/benifit.

Very few construction projects are issued as no-bid.

But they regulate the entire process, which was my point from the beginning.