Is it bad to be "rich"?

[sandorski]

You're right. You get to decide what services are valuable or not. I have no say. I have no representation in our government. My obligations are imposed by those who do not impose the same obligations on themselves. My only out is to stop being a productive member of society. What's mine is yours, but what's your isn't mine.

You seem to have fallen into the trap of thinking that you know anything. Protip: you don't. Your whole argument is simply that of a third grader, "Neener neener - my politicians are in power and I can take whatever I want!" I combat this by producing nothing of value so that you can't take anything from me. This is my way of flipping illiterate assholes like you the bird.

Sorry Dude, you're the one(one of the Ones anyway) always whining non-stop about this shit. However you have demonstrated no undue hardship other than some ability to Whine and Complain.

 

[CycloWizard]

Sorry Dude, you're the one(one of the Ones anyway) always whining non-stop about this shit. However you have demonstrated no undue hardship other than some ability to Whine and Complain.

And here we complete the circle. We've reached the point where you tell me to shut up and take my medicine as you shove it down my throat. DIAF.

 

[sandorski]

waaaaah

It's ok.

 

[CycloWizard]

It's ok.

When you can't argue, make up something the other person said. Looks like you and your buddy razor are on the same page there. I can't imagine how mindless you must be to have the evil of your position exposed in plain English yet defend it. I guess it might be hard to understand what I'm saying when you can't cobble together an entire sentence in correct English.

 

[sandorski]

When you can't argue, make up something the other person said. Looks like you and your buddy razor are on the same page there. I can't imagine how mindless you must be to have the evil of your position exposed in plain English yet defend it. I guess it might be hard to understand what I'm saying when you can't cobble together an entire sentence in correct English.

Srsly Dude, it's ok.

 

[CycloWizard]

Srsly Dude, it's ok.

Your position is evil. No, that's not ok.

 

[Toastedlightly]

... they have society to thank for their greatness? Not really.

Society gave them the tools and instruments, they were the artist. Are they the reason for greatness? No. Did they allow that person to be great? I think so.

But that begs the question what is "owed"? I believe that giving others the same opportunity they experienced is the way they can pay back what they "owe". Now what gives people the same opportunity is up for debate.

I use the term "owed" to jive with everyone in this thread.

 

[sandorski]

Society gave them the tools and instruments, they were the artist. Are they the reason for greatness? No. Did they allow that person to be great? I think so.

But that begs the question what is "owed"? I believe that giving others the same opportunity they experienced is the way they can pay back what they "owe". Now what gives people the same opportunity is up for debate.

I use the term "owed" to jive with everyone in this thread.

One way to answer that question is to examine what your Predecessors willingly Paid. Some Paid near 100% of Income above certain Income Levels, many others Paid with their Lives. In the Historical context US Tax Payers have nothing to complain about and should be ashamed at the fuss they're making on the issue.

 

[Tom]

It is within the context of your rationale for the justification of a certain taxation regime. That much is clear from the thread. You and Bowfinger argue for the legitimacy of broad and essentially limitless taxation, as being justified by the rich benefits which "society" brings. This all within a framework which marginalizes the possibility that many such benefits could be provided very well by institutional frameworks which do not employ forced coercion to raise their funds.

True the post I quoted does not explicitly talk about government but I only quoted the most recent post as a means of addressing you directly while preserving continuity. If it makes it easier to interpret, please take my comment as addressing the totality of your posts in the thread.

I'm not in favor of "limitless" taxes. I'm in favor of taxes that pay for the services government provides.

I am perfectly willing to listen to ideas about alternatives to government services, but I don't start from the point of view that there's some inherent weakness in government in comparison to other means of advancing society.

And in a representative democracy paying taxes isn't "forced coercion", it's part of being a member of that society. You don't have to participate, but if you look at the world, there aren't any places I'd rather live than in a modern democratic country. They are by far the most productive and innovative in human history.

btw, the biggest contribution productive people make to society isn't the taxes they pay to government, it's the work they do and the people they support, for most people that is families mainly. I wanted to ad that so you don't think I think government is all important.

 

[nonlnear]

I'm not in favor of "limitless" taxes. I'm in favor of taxes that pay for the services government provides.

By limitless I meant that I didn't see any a priori standard whereby you limit the scope or extent of taxation. It seems it's simply "tax however much it takes to cover whatever the government wants to do", not "take all the money". The lack of limit I meant was that you didn't seem to see any natural standard which limits the scope of the services the government should choose to provide (and tax for).

And in a representative democracy paying taxes isn't "forced coercion"

So it's voluntary then?

How can you seriously deny that it's forced? Is it so hard to state the plain and obvious truth: it IS forced coercion, AND you advocate that forced coercion. It only sounds evil because we blindly buy into the infantile notion that all forced coercion is bad. This leads us to lie to ourselves about the nature of our beliefs. I freely admit that taxation is forced coercion, extracted at gunpoint, AND that there are certain government purposes for which I advocate this coercion. The honesty feels weird at first, but once you get used to it it's very liberating.

The problem with this measure of honesty is that it's destructive to certain ideologies. When you ask yourself: am I willing to advocate the imprisonment of my neighbors because they do not wish to support my favored program, it kind of recasts the whole discussion. I am willing to imprison my neighbors for refusing to pay for courts, an effective representative legislative body with a strictly limited jurisdiction, police, certain safety regulators, a couple other regulators (banking, securities, and insurance mainly - the industries that are created by legislative magic in the first place), national defense, and not a lot more. (Common carrier utilities can be set up in a way that doesn't require the use of tax funds.) I could probably be convinced to put schools on that list if it were within a choice based system, i.e. 100% voucher.

it's part of being a member of that society.

How does that contradict the claim that taxes are forced coercion? I missed that bit... Do you by chance adhere to some flavor of social contract theory?

You don't have to participate, but if you look at the world, there aren't any places I'd rather live than in a modern democratic country. They are by far the most productive and innovative in human history.

I agree. From the first sentence in this snippet I'm reading hints of social contract type thinking. I don't want to go down that road until you confirm or deny it though...

btw, the biggest contribution productive people make to society isn't the taxes they pay to government, it's the work they do and the people they support, for most people that is families mainly. I wanted to ad that so you don't think I think government is all important.

I believe that most people I meet online and in real life are for the most part pretty reasonable people when it comes right down to it.

Coming back to the point at hand: Whenever anyone says they think tax funds should be used to support X, they are making the claim that they think it is right to imprison anyone who refuses to pay for X. This is an absolutely irrefutable claim. Anyone who refuses to evaluate their vision of government through that lens is lying to themselves about the nature of their political beliefs.

 

[Praxis1452]

That is what I have been saying all along, yet due to what I can only describe as issues with literacy, people have decided that I believe Einstein and everyone else didn't gain any insight from previous work. If you read the thread, you'll never find a claim stating anything similar to that. I've read Einstein's own writings on the subject. I've cited over 500 distinct articles in my own publications. Frankly, the only way anyone could arrive at the conclusion that I think a discovery is completely achieved by the innovator is illiteracy, idiocy, or strawman argument. The only claim I've made is that the janitor's contribution to innovation is not equal to that of the PhD scientist in the lab actually doing the work. Anyone who disagrees with this assertion is an idiot and/or a communist (if there is even a difference).

What sandorski and razor have tried to do is create an abstract idea. The idea that you owe something to society, which of course we all do. They however flinch at the actual representation of the cost. They flinch because that cost would need to be defined, and once defined, can be paid. Instead, the cost is abstract, it is whatever they want to it to be, and in this manner is an endless justification for all costs that they impose. And what will the justify with it? Whatever policy they wish to advance.

In effect, the cost you put on society is not some monetary amount that can be paid but an abstract limitless quantity that you are forever indebted, like a slave.

The fact is that I do not believe sandorski can name a monetary amount, that once paid, would free a person from being eternally indebted to such a society. Afterwards, a person would be given no discount on the price of the public goods they utilize and pay it in full.

If there exists no price, just obligation, then truly we are all slaves to a society not of our choosing.

 

[sandorski]

What sandorski and razor have tried to do is create an abstract idea. The idea that you owe something to society, which of course we all do. They however flinch at the actual representation of the cost. They flinch because that cost would need to be defined, and once defined, can be paid. Instead, the cost is abstract, it is whatever they want to it to be, and in this manner is an endless justification for all costs that they impose. And what will the justify with it? Whatever policy they wish to advance.

In effect, the cost you put on society is not some monetary amount that can be paid but an abstract limitless quantity that you are forever indebted, like a slave.

The fact is that I do not believe sandorski can name a monetary amount, that once paid, would free a person from being eternally indebted to such a society. Afterwards, a person would be given no discount on the price of the public goods they utilize and pay it in full.

If there exists no price, just obligation, then truly we are all slaves to a society not of our choosing.

The Monetary Amount is very simple: It's the Cost of providing the Service(s). It's not Rocket Science.

 

[CycloWizard]

What sandorski and razor have tried to do is create an abstract idea. The idea that you owe something to society, which of course we all do. They however flinch at the actual representation of the cost. They flinch because that cost would need to be defined, and once defined, can be paid. Instead, the cost is abstract, it is whatever they want to it to be, and in this manner is an endless justification for all costs that they impose. And what will the justify with it? Whatever policy they wish to advance.

In effect, the cost you put on society is not some monetary amount that can be paid but an abstract limitless quantity that you are forever indebted, like a slave.

The fact is that I do not believe sandorski can name a monetary amount, that once paid, would free a person from being eternally indebted to such a society. Afterwards, a person would be given no discount on the price of the public goods they utilize and pay it in full.

If there exists no price, just obligation, then truly we are all slaves to a society not of our choosing.

This is exactly what I've stated (though it may have been in the other thread? I'm getting them confused at this point) numerous times. To them, society is like the mob: once you're in, you're in and there's no way out. Once you owe them, you always owe them. Except they don't see society as a mob, they see it as a teddy bear.

 

[CycloWizard]

The Monetary Amount is very simple: It's the Cost of providing the Service(s). It's not Rocket Science.

And as long as you don't define "service(s)," the cost is unlimited, just as he said. We're not as dumb as you need us to be to pull this one off.

 

[sandorski]

And as long as you don't define "service(s)," the cost is unlimited, just as he said. We're not as dumb as you need us to be to pull this one off.

Oy vey. Sorry, your dumb enough to come to stupid conclusions.

 

[CycloWizard]

Oy vey. Sorry, your dumb enough to come to stupid conclusions.

Irony aside, why not list the service(s) that I must pay for to be financially "square" with "society?"

 

[sandorski]

Irony aside, why not list the service(s) that I must pay for to be financially "square" with "society?"

No. Why don't you explain what makes you so special that you get a sweet deal that your forefathers didn't have. Then explain why you feel that you have any Right to whine and complain about it.

US Society was pretty damn sweet before you came along and it was largely because of the Services you now want gone. Perhaps you should learn to appreciate your position before you go and destroy it with your Ideological Blindness?

 

[CycloWizard]

No. Why don't you explain what makes you so special that you get a sweet deal that your forefathers didn't have. Then explain why you feel that you have any Right to whine and complain about it.

US Society was pretty damn sweet before you came along and it was largely because of the Services you now want gone. Perhaps you should learn to appreciate your position before you go and destroy it with your Ideological Blindness?

That's what I thought. You want me to write you a blank check for "service(s)," but you can't even be bothered to tell me what I'm paying for. You should be a politician. Henceforth, until you tell me what the services I'm required to pay for as part of my sweet deal here, I will assume that you mean hookers and blow.

Man, Obama must be throwing some crazy parties at the White House to run up over a trillion dollars in new loans to pay for all of those hookers and blow! What does a guy have to do to get an invitation to such a party? I'm expected to pay for it, but I'm not allowed near the place.

edit: Oh, and my forefathers would kick you in the nuts for suggesting that I shut up and pay my taxes without even asking what they're being spent on. Your party is in power now, so we all just need to get in line, pay our dues, and keep our mouths shut, huh? I'm not so sure now whether you really are this evil or if you are just stupid enough to believe the crap you keep pushing.

 

[sandorski]

That's what I thought. You want me to write you a blank check for "service(s)," but you can't even be bothered to tell me what I'm paying for. You should be a politician. Henceforth, until you tell me what the services I'm required to pay for as part of my sweet deal here, I will assume that you mean hookers and blow.

Man, Obama must be throwing some crazy parties at the White House to run up over a trillion dollars in new loans to pay for all of those hookers and blow! What does a guy have to do to get an invitation to such a party? I'm expected to pay for it, but I'm not allowed near the place.

edit: Oh, and my forefathers would kick you in the nuts for suggesting that I shut up and pay my taxes without even asking what they're being spent on. Your party is in power now, so we all just need to get in line, pay our dues, and keep our mouths shut, huh? I'm not so sure now whether you really are this evil or if you are just stupid enough to believe the crap you keep pushing.

I doubt your forefathers would be kickng me, they'd be too dismayed at your Me-Only self absorption.

I'm sorry, there are too many Services for me to even know about and/or remember. The vast majority of essential though and they allow you the Quality of Life you now enjoy.

I have no Party, I'll remind you that I'm a damned Foreigner and have no Party in Power or otherwise.

 

[CycloWizard]

I doubt your forefathers would be kickng me, they'd be too dismayed at your Me-Only self absorption.

Anyone in my family would be proud that I don't blindly bend over and take it when an idiot tells me that, "It's for the greater good. Just shut up and make a blank check out to..." This is exactly what you're doing. If that's self-absorption, then so be it.

I'm sorry, there are too many Services for me to even know about and/or remember. The vast majority of essential though and they allow you the Quality of Life you now enjoy.

So many essential services that you can't even try to list them? If these services are so essential and give such a great quality of life, why aren't most of the people in this country paying for them?

I have no Party, I'll remind you that I'm a damned Foreigner and have no Party in Power or otherwise.

Oh, that's right, you're a Canadian. That obviously gives you the right to tell me to mind my own business and keep my mouth shut when I rail against idiotic policies in my own country, doesn't it? It's amazing that you haven't drowned in the shower.

 

[sandorski]

Anyone in my family would be proud that I don't blindly bend over and take it when an idiot tells me that, "It's for the greater good. Just shut up and make a blank check out to..." This is exactly what you're doing. If that's self-absorption, then so be it.

So many essential services that you can't even try to list them? If these services are so essential and give such a great quality of life, why aren't most of the people in this country paying for them?

Oh, that's right, you're a Canadian. That obviously gives you the right to tell me to mind my own business and keep my mouth shut when I rail against idiotic policies in my own country, doesn't it? It's amazing that you haven't drowned in the shower.

Ah, there you go again. There are Agencies performing tasks day and night keeping Al Qaida and others from bringing you harms. Some are known, some are not, but they are there, for one example.

I suppose I should just let you wail on and on with your nonsense. Clearly you're blind to your own stupidity and can't absorb simple concepts beyond what you've been told on the Radio and Fox News.

 

[CycloWizard]

Ah, there you go again. There are Agencies performing tasks day and night keeping Al Qaida and others from bringing you harms. Some are known, some are not, but they are there, for one example.

I suppose I should just let you wail on and on with your nonsense. Clearly you're blind to your own stupidity and can't absorb simple concepts beyond what you've been told on the Radio and Fox News.

Wow. You have damned yourself with your mindlessness. Congratulations - you are the first person to warrant a spot on my ignore list. Continue on your way to oblivion.

 

[sandorski]

Wow. You have damned yourself with your mindlessness. Congratulations - you are the first person to warrant a spot on my ignore list. Continue on your way to oblivion.

sweet

 

[Praxis1452]

The Monetary Amount is very simple: It's the Cost of providing the Service(s). It's not Rocket Science.

Not all services are necessary, nor are all of them run efficiently. Protesting the use of money for these services, and demanding itemized listings of costs most certainly is useful in business. If Obama helped push something along these lines forward, I would very much support it.

Unfortunately the sentiment you have espoused in this thread is not this at all.

 

[alkemyst]

The problem is most people think they are far more self-sufficient then they are (these are also the types that think they could take someone like Bruce Lee if they got the jump on him).

It's more of validating their greed and laziness.

I don't agree so much with the income tax, but taxes / fees are definitely needed in our society.