Why more Americans pay no income tax

[CycloWizard]

So you are actually trying to argue that money is NOT property simply because it does not have "use value" (to dust a good ol' Marxist term off)? Is that really your reasoning here? 😀

You might have a case if you had qualified the term "property" to be something more specific but I don't see any attempt at such precision... 🙄

I think he's trying to say that, in his ideal world, money belongs to everyone.

 

[nonlnear]

I think he's trying to say that, in his ideal world, money belongs to everyone.

I was really hoping he wouldn't take that line of reasoning, which is why I didn't mention it. It would have been a little heavy on the straw man to think he might actually have been arguing that since currency notes are property of the government that possessing them does not entail ownership of property. Then again, it's not outside the realm of possible meanings, so we'll see...

 

[CycloWizard]

I was really hoping he wouldn't take that line of reasoning, which is why I didn't mention it. It would have been a little heavy on the straw man to think he might actually have been arguing that since currency notes are property of the government that possessing them does not entail ownership of property. Then again, it's not outside the realm of possible meanings, so we'll see...

But he already has - he simply lacks the wisdom to see his viewpoint for what it is and/or the courage to come out and say it. Burying the viewpoint in euphemisms doesn't hide its true nature, with the most glaring example (just from this thread) being:

We're coming to the end of that rope, obviously, so we'll need to find other ways to finance govt and society. When you need money, you get it from people who have it, and that's no longer the middle and working classes.

The only way this viewpoint can be held is if money doesn't belong to the person that "you get it from."

 

[boomerang]

And, uhh, boomerang, which ad hom are you actually applying, anyway? Am I a Communist or a Nazi? Take your pick- I can't be both...

To be honest, I really haven't paid close enough attention to your posts to know yet. I must admit, I was hoping you'd tip your hand but you're too smart for that.

I do know at this point that you're very much on board for redistribution of wealth. No question there. I already knew that anyone who thinks the bigger government so very much desired by the progressives can be paid for by the rich is both short sighted and incorrect. The numbers just don't support it. An intelligent person like you should be able to see that. Yet you support this movement.

My question is how far would you be willing to go to see your dream of redistribution achieved? With the press, Congress and the White House putting forth a full frontal attack, there is a very real possibility your dream will become a reality. The rub is that the majority of Americans do not support Socialism at that level. They don't feel that even the European form of Socialism (as it's being branded) is necessary or desirable.

So what would be done with those that will not acquiesce? Those that would not go along willingly? Those that might choose to fight if it comes to that?

Answer that question and I'll be able to tell you whether you're a Communist or a Nazi. But you're a smart guy so you've probably already seen through this. Yes, it's a trick question. Both the Communists and the Nazi's eliminated those that stood in the way of their vision. Eliminated them by the tens of millions.

How badly do you want to share in the fruits of others labor?

 

[Bowfinger]

I think he's trying to say that, in his ideal world, money belongs to everyone.

Just because your employer printed some imaginary numbers on your pay stub doesn't mean it was really your money. Part of what you "earn" belongs to society because it is our society -- i.e., America's extraordinary physical, financial, and educational resources, substantially funded through taxes -- that enabled you to "earn" your pay at all. Without it, you'd be digging for roots and grubs to survive, and your "wealth" would be measured in pretty rocks.

We got into this in more depth in the "Is it bad to be rich?" thread, but you bailed when I showed how your apparent belief you are self-made is an illusion. Our society has invested heavily in giving you the opportunities and resources you need to succeed. Taxes are the fair return on that investment.

 

[daishi5]

Just because your employer printed some imaginary numbers on your pay stub doesn't mean it was really your money. Part of what you "earn" belongs to society because it is our society -- i.e., America's extraordinary physical, financial, and educational resources, substantially funded through taxes -- that enabled you to "earn" your pay at all. Without it, you'd be digging for roots and grubs to survive, and your "wealth" would be measured in pretty rocks.

We got into this in more depth in the "Is it bad to be rich?" thread, but you bailed when I showed how your apparent belief you are self-made is an illusion. Our society has invested heavily in giving you the opportunities and resources you need to succeed. Taxes are the fair return on that investment.

That is not the statement Jhhnn made, and therefore not the statement cyclowizard is arguing against. Jhhnn said income is not property, which is wrong. Even when income is property, that does not preclude some of the income being the property of the government that is owed in the form of taxes.

 

[CycloWizard]

Just because your employer printed some imaginary numbers on your pay stub doesn't mean it was really your money. Part of what you "earn" belongs to society because it is our society -- i.e., America's extraordinary physical, financial, and educational resources, substantially funded through taxes -- that enabled you to "earn" your pay at all. Without it, you'd be digging for roots and grubs to survive, and your "wealth" would be measured in pretty rocks.

We got into this in more depth in the "Is it bad to be rich?" thread, but you bailed when I showed how your apparent belief you are self-made is an illusion. Our society has invested heavily in giving you the opportunities and resources you need to succeed. Taxes are the fair return on that investment.

Society has invested in others a lot more than it has invested in me. Most of what I am is due to education, something which the government hasn't kicked in for at all. Instead of my being allowed to put my income towards that education by paying down my student loans, I'm forced to give it to someone else who has been arbitrarily deemed to be in greater need than I am so that they can receive a free education.

It is also telling that you consider society to have "invested" in humans, and that society is somehow entitled to a return on that investment. This is slavery, where one individual or group is simply an investment property of another individual or group. I never asked society to "invest" in me in any way, shape, or form, but now I'm forced to give society a return on this investment at an arbitrary rate. What investment vehicle can I access that offers such a return on my own investments? Has society not invested more in someone who attended public schools all of their life? Should society not expect a larger return on investment from this person than for me? Yet this is not how the return is calculated. The return is based on the yield rather than the investment. The more I make, the more you take, whether or not it has any proportionality to your so-called "investment." That is the injustice of slavery that you want to impose.

 

[mattpegher]

While these people are paying no taxes, AMT has me paying through the nose. I have a wife, three kids and a sick MiL. AMT gives me a deduction for my mortgage interest and charitable donations and nothing else. No per person credit, no employee business expenses. I don't get to deduct any health care expenses until I reach 7% of income because its supposed to be part of my standard deduction but I get no standard deduction. It cost me about 10k per year to maintain my ability to work yet because I am an employee this disappears with AMT. The truely rich get arround this because AMT doesn't touch them due to the fact that all their expenses get paid for. I don't mind carrying my load but I am sick of those who are riding on my back.

 

[Jhhnn]

Take a look at money, at some currency. It's a token, a symbol, a way for us to exchange goods and services at a higher level than barter. It has no intrinsic value beyond what's assigned to it. It's created by government. Without government, it has no value. Modern money, which is just entries in a database, is even more abstract, as is credit and any sort of financial instrument like stocks, bonds, derivatives, whatever.

Which is peripheral to the subject at hand, anyway. Government has the right and the obligation to tax and to redistribute both income and property to service the higher level of organization that it creates. Sometimes it allows those things to be redistributed in a way that concentrates them, aka capitalism, other times in ways that diffuse them back to the people who did the work that created the wealth in the first place. Too much either way simply does not serve the interests of the nation as a whole.

 

[daishi5]

Take a look at money, at some currency. It's a token, a symbol, a way for us to exchange goods and services at a higher level than barter. It has no intrinsic value beyond what's assigned to it. It's created by government. Without government, it has no value. Modern money, which is just entries in a database, is even more abstract, as is credit and any sort of financial instrument like stocks, bonds, derivatives, whatever.

Which is peripheral to the subject at hand, anyway. Government has the right and the obligation to tax and to redistribute both income and property to service the higher level of organization that it creates. Sometimes it allows those things to be redistributed in a way that concentrates them, aka capitalism, other times in ways that diffuse them back to the people who did the work that created the wealth in the first place. Too much either way simply does not serve the interests of the nation as a whole.

Money has value beyond exchange, it holds value for example. And the second part about the government, taxation, and forms of economic structure is also wrong. The government is not intrinsically a higher form of organization, whether by higher you mean better, or just more. A government can be better or more organized than private structures. Our government is very highly redundant and inefficient. Many of the inefficiencies are in place as a beauracratic safeguard against the power that the government wields.

Furthermore, capitalism is not a concentration of wealth, socialism is (the real meaning of socialism that is). When the government controls all of the means of production, all of the wealth is concentrated in their hands, and the distribution of that wealth is entirely dependant on how the government chooses to hand it out. No government so far has proven to be even close to effective at equalizing wealth, unless you count making everyone poor. Capitalism is merely when the means of production are owned by private citizens, or capitalists. The concentration of wealth you will see in a capitalist society is dependant on the structure of the markets in that society. With no market regulation, some industries will form monopolies. With too much government regulation, the government will create monopolies for its own profit. But, the claim that capitalism means concentration is unjustified.

You seem to be equating government control with communism, where everyone owns an equal share. Communism is a state of no government or at least minimal government, where everyone is equally an owner. Socialism was supposed to bridge the gap between capitalism and communism. The government took control of everything, and then it would eventually hand everything out evenly. The problem is that every attempt to create a communist society through government action has never seen a government actually begin to spread the wealth. Once it has power, it never gives it up.

If you want to make an argument for increased government intervention or control, you need to argue why free markets have failed, how the government can make it better, why you believe the government will actually follow through, and how you structure the governments involvement to prevent a power grab.

 

[jycegrcia]

I think we should raise tax on people that make money over 500K by 2% and that would bring in more revenue than making all the poor middle and lower class people pay what some call their fair share. No sense in making poor people even poorer unless you want more crime.

 

[EagleKeeper]

It is the transfer of wealth from those that have it to those that do not which is the issue. A 2% tax if it was used to reduce the goverment deficit/spending might be acceptable.

A 2% handout would not be.

And why the $500K level?

 

[CycloWizard]

Take a look at money, at some currency. It's a token, a symbol, a way for us to exchange goods and services at a higher level than barter. It has no intrinsic value beyond what's assigned to it. It's created by government. Without government, it has no value. Modern money, which is just entries in a database, is even more abstract, as is credit and any sort of financial instrument like stocks, bonds, derivatives, whatever.

Which is peripheral to the subject at hand, anyway. Government has the right and the obligation to tax and to redistribute both income and property to service the higher level of organization that it creates. Sometimes it allows those things to be redistributed in a way that concentrates them, aka capitalism, other times in ways that diffuse them back to the people who did the work that created the wealth in the first place. Too much either way simply does not serve the interests of the nation as a whole.

Money has the same value as what someone else is willing to give for it or, in your case, take it for. For you, money has no value because you feel my money is your money. In your system, money, and therefore the time, effort, and intellect put into earning it, are worthless. You can see the flower of your system blossoming all around us in the US today, where an engineer sits at home posting in online forums during the day collecting a paycheck from a government job before writing a check to send that money back to the government. This is the world you wanted, so I hope you are happy with the way things are turning out.

 

[blackangst1]

I think we should raise tax on people that make money over 500K by 2% and that would bring in more revenue than making all the poor middle and lower class people pay what some call their fair share. No sense in making poor people even poorer unless you want more crime.

And how will that benefit anyone other than the ones holding that increased tax: the gtovernment?

 

[Jhhnn]

Money has the same value as what someone else is willing to give for it or, in your case, take it for. For you, money has no value because you feel my money is your money. In your system, money, and therefore the time, effort, and intellect put into earning it, are worthless. You can see the flower of your system blossoming all around us in the US today, where an engineer sits at home posting in online forums during the day collecting a paycheck from a government job before writing a check to send that money back to the government. This is the world you wanted, so I hope you are happy with the way things are turning out.

Heh. More denial and ad homs. You haven't actually countered anything I've offered, merely projected what you want it to mean onto what I actually said.

Workers of all kinds sit at home because american capitalists have offshored their jobs by investing elsewhere, and because the credit bubble offered in lieu of actual wages has popped.

What it amounts to is that wages that would have been paid to american workers are turned into greater profits by paying foreign workers less while profits that were formerly trimmed by taxes are now lent to the govt instead. Win-win for the very few at the very top, so long as they can keep the general population pacified with electronic trinkets, EIC payments and extended unemployment benefits- they're drawing interest by loaning the money to the govt to do it... it's not like current tax levels even begin to support the welfare for the rich system that's been created...

When and if the federal debt load forces change, the one thing that won't change is debt maintenance, which will become even more onerous in a post industrial economy and in a situation where lending is seen as more risky- interest rates will go up, and our ability to borrow will be curtailed. Meanwhile, the people who engineered the debt own it-

If I make $100M/yr from interest on govt securities, and pay 15% in taxes, it's not like I'm losing anything... and I have the govt to collect from the wretched peasants, just like in the middle ages. I won't have a title or anything, but I really won't need one... It's the New Royalty, the financial plutocracy...

 

[blackangst1]

Originally Posted by blackangst1
Money has the same value as what someone else is willing to give for it or, in your case, take it for. For you, money has no value because you feel my money is your money. In your system, money, and therefore the time, effort, and intellect put into earning it, are worthless. You can see the flower of your system blossoming all around us in the US today, where an engineer sits at home posting in online forums during the day collecting a paycheck from a government job before writing a check to send that money back to the government. This is the world you wanted, so I hope you are happy with the way things are turning out.

Heh. More denial and ad homs. You haven't actually countered anything I've offered, merely projected what you want it to mean onto what I actually said.

Workers of all kinds sit at home because american capitalists have offshored their jobs by investing elsewhere, and because the credit bubble offered in lieu of actual wages has popped.

What it amounts to is that wages that would have been paid to american workers are turned into greater profits by paying foreign workers less while profits that were formerly trimmed by taxes are now lent to the govt instead. Win-win for the very few at the very top, so long as they can keep the general population pacified with electronic trinkets, EIC payments and extended unemployment benefits- they're drawing interest by loaning the money to the govt to do it... it's not like current tax levels even begin to support the welfare for the rich system that's been created...

When and if the federal debt load forces change, the one thing that won't change is debt maintenance, which will become even more onerous in a post industrial economy and in a situation where lending is seen as more risky- interest rates will go up, and our ability to borrow will be curtailed. Meanwhile, the people who engineered the debt own it-

If I make $100M/yr from interest on govt securities, and pay 15% in taxes, it's not like I'm losing anything... and I have the govt to collect from the wretched peasants, just like in the middle ages. I won't have a title or anything, but I really won't need one... It's the New Royalty, the financial plutocracy...

So, besides being clueless on this subject, youre clueless on how to quote the right person.

Awesome.

 

[Jhhnn]

Thanks for the heads-up on the misattribution, blackangst1...

Neither you nor CycloWizard have actually addressed the content of what I've said, however...

I realize it challenges the core of your belief structure, and that it's a whole lot easier to dismiss it than to actually evaluate it, because you'd need to examine what you believe to do that...

The beauty of Faith is that those who know how to manipulate it do so with complete impunity from those they're manipulating... which is what's been happening to middle class conservatives for at least 30 years...

 

[blackangst1]

Thanks for the heads-up on the misattribution, blackangst1...

Neither you nor CycloWizard have actually addressed the content of what I've said, however...

I realize it challenges the core of your belief structure, and that it's a whole lot easier to dismiss it than to actually evaluate it, because you'd need to examine what you believe to do that...

The beauty of Faith is that those who know how to manipulate it do so with complete impunity from those they're manipulating... which is what's been happening to middle class conservatives for at least 30 years...

NP. I havent addressed it because I think your position is severely flawed. So much so that its best I dont reply. Others have similar views I do and have already made the points.

 

[Jhhnn]

NP. I havent addressed it because I think your position is severely flawed. So much so that its best I dont reply. Others have similar views I do and have already made the points.

So, even though you really have nothing to say, you say it anyway... taking solace in denial and the fact that you believe what you believe because you believe it...

 

[CycloWizard]

Heh. More denial and ad homs. You haven't actually countered anything I've offered, merely projected what you want it to mean onto what I actually said.

Workers of all kinds sit at home because american capitalists have offshored their jobs by investing elsewhere, and because the credit bubble offered in lieu of actual wages has popped.

What it amounts to is that wages that would have been paid to american workers are turned into greater profits by paying foreign workers less while profits that were formerly trimmed by taxes are now lent to the govt instead. Win-win for the very few at the very top, so long as they can keep the general population pacified with electronic trinkets, EIC payments and extended unemployment benefits- they're drawing interest by loaning the money to the govt to do it... it's not like current tax levels even begin to support the welfare for the rich system that's been created...

When and if the federal debt load forces change, the one thing that won't change is debt maintenance, which will become even more onerous in a post industrial economy and in a situation where lending is seen as more risky- interest rates will go up, and our ability to borrow will be curtailed. Meanwhile, the people who engineered the debt own it-

If I make $100M/yr from interest on govt securities, and pay 15% in taxes, it's not like I'm losing anything... and I have the govt to collect from the wretched peasants, just like in the middle ages. I won't have a title or anything, but I really won't need one... It's the New Royalty, the financial plutocracy...

There was no denial, and certainly no personal attack, in my post. I told you how it is. Reality is independent of your perception of it or your attempt to make it meaningless through the use of palliatives. I am the PhD engineer with a government job who sat at home today posting on the forum while collecting a paycheck. You cheered for these rules, now you get to play by them.

 

[werepossum]

Thanks for the heads-up on the misattribution, blackangst1...

Neither you nor CycloWizard have actually addressed the content of what I've said, however...

I realize it challenges the core of your belief structure, and that it's a whole lot easier to dismiss it than to actually evaluate it, because you'd need to examine what you believe to do that...

The beauty of Faith is that those who know how to manipulate it do so with complete impunity from those they're manipulating... which is what's been happening to middle class conservatives for at least 30 years...

You seem to think you hold some sort of truth, but what you say is nothing new. It's as old as the first caveman demanding a share of the meat even though he was too bone idle to join the hunt. Your words challenge the core beliefs of no one; they are merely another tortured attempt at justification of why another's labor should become your reward for no better reason than your mere existence.

 

[Jhhnn]

There was no denial, and certainly no personal attack, in my post. I told you how it is. Reality is independent of your perception of it or your attempt to make it meaningless through the use of palliatives. I am the PhD engineer with a government job who sat at home today posting on the forum while collecting a paycheck. You cheered for these rules, now you get to play by them.

Heh. So why do you work for the govt, rather than private industry, which you champion so strongly? Because private industry isn't hiring in America, but rather in China, so a job had to be created in the govt to validate your credentials?

You're probably being paid with money borrowed from the world's financial elite, come to think of it.

It's not like I made things the way they are- look to the people who formulated the whole free market world economy trickledown deception- you know, the one where we get richer if they get richer, except that hasn't happened- we just got a bigger line of credit... more federal debt to service... less stable economy... more un and under employment... they still get richer, though...

If paying much reduced wages and taxrates while lending to the govt to create the palliative of the social safety net weren't to their advantage, things wouldn't be that way. Not to mention that they lend the govt money to protect their foreign interests and expand their markets with military might.

It's obviously more profitable than the New Deal, which the guys at the top have repudiated, obviously- the deal where american capital hired american workers to make american products to benefit the nation as a whole? Where bankers' tendencies to crash the economy every decade or so were blunted, tamed, smoothed out? Where no-doc variable rate short term securitized mortgages didn't exist, because they were illegal?

For you, and werepossum, I'll offer a quote from J K Galbraith-

The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

 

[werepossum]

Heh. So why do you work for the govt, rather than private industry, which you champion so strongly? Because private industry isn't hiring in America, but rather in China, so a job had to be created in the govt to validate your credentials?

You're probably being paid with money borrowed from the world's financial elite, come to think of it.

It's not like I made things the way they are- look to the people who formulated the whole free market world economy trickledown deception- you know, the one where we get richer if they get richer, except that hasn't happened- we just got a bigger line of credit... more federal debt to service... less stable economy... more un and under employment... they still get richer, though...

If paying much reduced wages and taxrates while lending to the govt to create the palliative of the social safety net weren't to their advantage, things wouldn't be that way. Not to mention that they lend the govt money to protect their foreign interests and expand their markets with military might.

It's obviously more profitable than the New Deal, which the guys at the top have repudiated, obviously- the deal where american capital hired american workers to make american products to benefit the nation as a whole? Where bankers' tendencies to crash the economy every decade or so were blunted, tamed, smoothed out? Where no-doc variable rate short term securitized mortgages didn't exist, because they were illegal?

For you, and werepossum, I'll offer a quote from J K Galbraith-

It truly amazes me that progressives like you might actually think (sorry, feel) that you wanting part of my paycheck is okay, but me not wanting to give you part of my paycheck is selfishness. By your version of selfishness the most selfless are those on welfare who consume but produce nothing, and the most selfish are those high earners in New York City who have more than half their earnings taken in taxes. That is just bizarre.

I'd also be willing to bet that old J. K. had a team of accountants minimizing HIS tax burden, the better to furnish and maintain his several luxurious homes, and that his estate was sheltered in trusts to better avoid the death tax. Liberals always want different rules for themselves.

 

[CycloWizard]

Heh. So why do you work for the govt, rather than private industry, which you champion so strongly? Because private industry isn't hiring in America, but rather in China, so a job had to be created in the govt to validate your credentials?

You're probably being paid with money borrowed from the world's financial elite, come to think of it.

It's not like I made things the way they are- look to the people who formulated the whole free market world economy trickledown deception- you know, the one where we get richer if they get richer, except that hasn't happened- we just got a bigger line of credit... more federal debt to service... less stable economy... more un and under employment... they still get richer, though...

If paying much reduced wages and taxrates while lending to the govt to create the palliative of the social safety net weren't to their advantage, things wouldn't be that way. Not to mention that they lend the govt money to protect their foreign interests and expand their markets with military might.

It's obviously more profitable than the New Deal, which the guys at the top have repudiated, obviously- the deal where american capital hired american workers to make american products to benefit the nation as a whole? Where bankers' tendencies to crash the economy every decade or so were blunted, tamed, smoothed out? Where no-doc variable rate short term securitized mortgages didn't exist, because they were illegal?

For you, and werepossum, I'll offer a quote from J K Galbraith-

I work for government because government penalized me for being me (a white, middle-class male). No matter how hard I worked, I would always be taking out loans to pay my way while government took the money I earned to pay for someone else's. When money isn't property, I am a slave to the government who says that money has value. I fight this by working for the government so that it can only take what it has already given me. I generate nothing of value at work because the government gives me nothing of value in return. I piss my intellect away rather than using it to improve the lives of people because people have decided with their votes that my intellect has no real value to them. If they refuse to value it, then I refuse to give them any benefits in return. They have damned me by leaving me no choice but to squander my talents, and they have damned themselves by creating a system in which this is my only peaceful option. The engineer who was developing a treatment for a condition affecting every person on earth now sits on the couch posting crap online all day. This is the world you want - I'm just playing by your rules. Things have already started hitting the fan because I'm not the only one, but it's going to get a lot worse.

 

[Bowfinger]

Society has invested in others a lot more than it has invested in me.

Likely true. Life isn't fair.

Most of what I am is due to education,

Nonsense. Most of what you are is due to safe food, clean water, electricity, roads, safe neighborhoods, and all the other things that not only gave you the free time to gain an education (as opposed to spending your day gathering berries), but helped ensure you'd survive to adulthood so you could actually make something of yourself. I posed this to you in some detail in the thread you're now avoiding.

something which the government hasn't kicked in for at all.

Highly doubtful. Even assuming you went to private K-12 schools, government still kicked in the myriad of benefits mentioned above ... to you, your school, your teachers, your parents, etc. Moreover, it's a sure bet your college receives significant government benefit whether it's public or private, both indirectly and directly. You also mention school loans. You do understand that most (virtually all?) school loans are supported by the federal government, even if you got them from private lenders?

While the government may not have directly handed you a pile of money to go to school, it's a sure bet it supported you indirectly.

Instead of my being allowed to put my income towards that education by paying down my student loans,

What? The government is taking every dollar you make? Every single one? You don't get to keep anything you can use to pay on your loans? That's weird given that most people only pay a portion of their income in taxes.

Wait. Are you maybe really saying you don't get to keep as much as you want to buy toys and pay your loans? Or maybe you foolishly borrowed way more than you should have based on unrealistic dreams of the phat six-figure income you'd make when you graduated? Is that what this is really all about, that you're not rolling in dough the way you expected? Are you maybe blaming taxes for your own poor decisions?

I'm forced to give it to someone else who has been arbitrarily deemed to be in greater need than I am so that they can receive a free education.

Quite a pity party you've got going there. Surely you recognize that education is a very small slice of the tax pie? Seems there are far more worthy candidates for your resentment.

It is also telling that you consider society to have "invested" in humans, and that society is somehow entitled to a return on that investment. This is slavery, where one individual or group is simply an investment property of another individual or group.

Hogwash! I own shares in Microsoft. Is Bill Gates my slave? Most businessmen have investors if their businesses are of any size. Are they slaves since someone else is entitled to a share of their success? You're falling more and more to emotional hyperbole rather than offering any attempt at logical and reasoned discussion.

I never asked society to "invest" in me in any way, shape, or form, but now I'm forced to give society a return on this investment at an arbitrary rate.

Not really. You can always choose to leave, to haul yourself off to some remote island where you won't have to pay for all the infrastructure that isn't there. That would be a great way to teach society a lesson, that it will get nothing for its investment in you.

Oh, wait. You don't actually want to give up the benefits of American society, do you? You just don't want to pay for them. You want to be a leech.

What investment vehicle can I access that offers such a return on my own investments?

Umm, most stocks to name just one example.

Has society not invested more in someone who attended public schools all of their life? Should society not expect a larger return on investment from this person than for me? Yet this is not how the return is calculated. The return is based on the yield rather than the investment. The more I make, the more you take, whether or not it has any proportionality to your so-called "investment." That is the injustice of slavery that you want to impose.

No, that's the way investments generally work. First, let's recognize it's just an analogy I came up with to try to explain the justness of taxes in a way financially savvy folks might relate to. That said, return on investment is generally based on how well the investment does. The investor takes the risk hoping the investment will hit it big, producing a high return on the investment. If the investment does poorly, the investor gets much less, or may lose his investment entirely.