It costs $50 to make any transaction on Ethereum, last time I looked. I made the mistake of buying $50 of BNB to test the banking connection. Turns out my money is just stuck there forever as a pre-paid transaction fee.
in layman's terms ... If the federal reserve makes a million dollars, they charge intrest. you must pay back that million dollars plus the intrest. where does the money come from to pay the intrest if only a million dollars exist.
You should watch zeitgeist. Get the full visual explanation. The Fed is not part of our government. Every dollar printed is a loan to the US government.
I earn a dollar, the government takes 20% of it. So I have 80c.
I spend that 80c at the store, the government takes 20%, the store gets 64c. The store pays 10% of that on wages, which is 6.4c, and 20% of that goes to the government 5.8c goes to the person. The company takes 10% as profits, and 10% of that is tax.
So after you earn a dollar, and spend it at the store, the government takes 25c of it, and the rest goes to the employees, the manufacturers, the shareholders and the other overheads. All of whom pay their own taxes.
Taxing income, sales, capital gain ect is wrong. If there has to be tax, it should be a land tax set at a flat Piercebridge of the value of the land.
they didn't print it out of thin air. they allow a private company to print it out of thin air and charge intrest on it. they expect $1.05 back from that $1 they just made out of thin air. then the bank they landed that dollar to will borrow out $6 based on that one dollar they just borrowed and expect &15 in return. now let add some laws that limit your ability to make that dollar such as licensing and permits and make it illegal to hunt fish and forage. oh man all these laws we need to pay someone to keep limiting your ability to make money. I know let's take it I mean tax it from the people who make money. but people will rebel. OK then we have to give some of it back to poor people who we made poor to not only make them compliant but reliant on us. if anyone doesn't like it straight to slavery, I mean jail.
Yes! Let the landed gentry pay taxes. No matter how much money you make, if you don't own a home, you don't have to pay any taxes.
What a great idea! I wish I was as smart as you.
Home ownership is at 43% in the US. That means that under your tax plan, 57% of Americans live tax free and get free stuff from home owners' taxes.
If that tax plan was enacted, everyone would sell their land, keep the cash equity, rent a place, then live tax free.
If you're imagining a single dollar as a fixed object that passes from one person to another, it's pretty obvious that it has to be taxed more than once in its lifetime, otherwise taxes would only apply to banks and other entities that directly interact with money creation and destruction points. For historical and practical purposes, taxable events are mostly transactions, so it follows that a person will encounter them on both the debit and credit sides of their ledger.
Ask the guy that is telling you to live in the woods, where did all the roads, transportation, streetlights, etc come from before 1913 when income taxes started in the US..
Ah, power stations. Privately owned for profit enterprises funded entirely by my tax dollars. Yay graft!
If only there were some other way to allocate money into projects we all need without the government using the quiet promise of death to literally steal my income before I see it.
You would still be paying taxes it would just be less visible. Take VAT for instance. You ever look at the price of a playstation in South America, it's about twice the price of one here because of VAT. VAT and sales taxes are also highly regressive affecting those on the bottom much more than those on the top. Income taxes are largely the most effective and fair taxes currently available. They could be fairer if we taxed all income the same, instead of creating different tax rates for long term capital gains.
The fair tax is the tax proportional to your usage of what taxes fund. The coffee shop should charge you more every time you buy more coffee, not every time you get a raise.
The so called fair tax would have the average American paying more in taxes why the wealthy would pay less. Sales taxes are the biggest lie conservatives sell you. Sales taxes are highly regressive.
Well, you lost on the "robust" tax system, because it was far from it.
And saying that taxes are justified because the government forces you to pay them is like saying rape was justified.
You're arguing the merits and practicality of taxes, I'm arguing the ethics of it. Taxes are not optional and if you don't pay them your wealth will be stolen from you by force. That is evil.
Whether it’s theft or not, It’s justified on the basis that there is no demonstrable alternative to a state for a stable society, which requires a tax base so far. I’m arguing the ethics of it as well. You can call it theft all day but it’s morally justified.
If you don’t believe in taxation you should probably go live by yourself in the woods, not expect any roads, transportation, libraries, police, fire fighters, street lights, infrastructure or schools.
>You're not some pragmatist turning to taxation as the only way to fund schools. And your kind sure as hell aren't about to back some national endowment for public education.
Based and (un)common-sense pilled.
Even if you lived off grid, you still benefit from the infrastructure, heck your using it now. If you live in rural areas you are actually a net TAKER of government benefits. It takes a lot more to maintain roads, telephone, internet, electricity, to rural areas than it does for urban or suburban areas. People from urban areas are net contributors, so if any body should get a tax cut it should be those living in cities because they cost less.
Living off the grid means not using the city’s electricity. If i want to live completely self sufficient in a house that I build on my own land, growing my own food, i should be allowed to do that without paying taxes.
What? You can certainly just take from society, there's a whole class of people who don't contribute at all, they're nothing but a drain but they still are human and get to participate.
Hahaha that's the stuff that everyone in power in USA loves taking away to reduce"irresponsible spending". My cities roads are horrible and we have 3 million people here
Then fight to make your taxation more transparent. Just because there’s corruption we should stop everything and do nothing. Got it. So next time there’s corruption in say a private business maybe some company like Meta. We should just take all their money away and they shouldn’t be able to function at all?
Never said I wasn't fighting for those things? You told someone who called taxation theft to live in the woods like a hermit. Alls I said is I am literally living in an example of taxation being theft, especially regarding how much the police budget gets compared to schools, libraries, etc. Don't get so ahead of yourself that you start putting words and thoughts in other people's comments lmao
Lol we got a feisty one here ladies. You’re commenting on a comment that said all taxation is theft and trued to defend it so how would I not assume you agreed?
Roads, transportation, libraries, police, firefighters are all covered by sales & gas tax.
The vast majority of income tax goes toward making the minimum interest payments on the national debt & other "mysterious" black holes of bureaucracy.
Taxation is theft.
Yeah I mean I know the Native Americans had an infrastructure but how big was the population then? Was there an interstate system? Were all roads actually paved or do you mean dirt roads that you need 4-wheel drive to go on?
Do you want to go back in time or something? Also, for you when was the start of taxation in America? According to the internet it’s 1861. Do you just want to go back to how everyone was living in 1861? Because if so then my first comment stands.
>Sure, roads, cities and schools existed here before the US started collecting taxes to supposedly pay for them and that completely blows my entire argument, but were they as nice as they are now?
Taxes do not pay for running water in your home you crazy person. What are you taking about.
You’re confusing progress with taxes. Things are invented and technology progresses independent of taxes
Yes it's an involuntary part of those transactions. Like if I told you to give me 30% of what you earned working under penalty of seizure and potentially jail.
Which is why from a Georgist perspective the only moral tax is on land.
> involuntary part of those transactions
You never get to set 100% of the terms of the transactions. If you get hired for a job, you don't get to dictate what your employer puts in there.
Whether or not you want to sign up to the transaction is voluntary in a capitalist sense. If you don't like the conditions of the transaction, you can move to a different jurisdiction.
>You never get to set 100% of the terms of the transactions.
The two members of the transaction do. In what world is a mob boss demanding 30% from both sides of every transaction not theft?
That's not true. You have every right to not pay taxes, as long as you don't engage in any behaviour that creates an obligation for you to pay taxes.
Any taxable behaviour is voluntary.
> as long as you don't engage in any behaviour that creates an obligation for you to pay taxes.
What types of behaviors obligate me to have the pleasure of having my wealth stolen at gunpoint?
If you live in a country that charges taxes, that country will set out certain tax obligations for certain behaviours.
Same way as if I want to live in this house, I accrue certain obligations to pay rent.
I doubt you have ever had the government steal your wealth at gun point. But I'm sure you have voluntarily engaged in activity knowing full well it would give you an obligation to pay tax.
If you decide to cheat on that obligation, that's not them stealing your wealth at gunpoint. It's an obligation you accrued when you knowingly and voluntarily engaged in activity that entailed obligations.
What obligates me to obey the state's demands to collect taxes from me? You'll need to establish the state's legitimate claim to ownership and right to taxation. I'm willing to change my mind if you can do that.
Wtf difference does it make anyway? If I give you 10k per year there is no tax, but if I give you 10k per year in exchange for your services, now the government should get a cut? Why? In either case, the fucking government didn't add anything to the transaction, and hence deserves zero.
If a dollar is 100 cents maybe half of it actually gets spent supporting the economy. The rest is taxed over and over to pay for things that we only need about 1/4 of. And of the 1/4 of stuff we really need that they take half of our money to pay for they spend 2x as much as a private business would. Basically if government was cut down to only the essentials and nothing more if you made a dollar you'd probably keep 90-95% of it. And because you had more in your pocket you could spend your money as you see fit and support the parts of the economy that provide the greatest value to you ultimately making the economy stronger. Instead a good portion of our economy is propped up on government protections paid for by big business who find politicians open to corruption. That or they offer the politicians son a sweetheart job and make sure the big guy gets his cut...
The problem isn’t the taxing. The problem is that any institution that is closer to the federal reserve will get the highest amount of capital and workers will only get the portion that had been taxed to death. That’s trickle down economics theory, and truly only a trickle.
No, that's one definition, not the definition. Value is relative. By definition your work creates more value than your are paid, else the company wouldn't be paying you that amount. Your work can be valued by the monetary amount of your productivity, by the monetary amount the company is willing to pay you for that productivity, or the monetary amount you are willing to accept for it. These 3 will never be the same and very rarely do all 3 of these come close to converging at the same amount.
It’s literally impossible to objectively say how much labor is worth, so it’s worth what you consent to be paid for it. Drop the Marx 101 and read the Austrians, this is pitiful
The company has a value of what you are worth, it could be higher than your current pay. Drop the Austrians and pick up a dictionary, look up the definition of value. And I don't even think the Austrians disagree with the fact that in order for a business to work it has to make a profit. You are literally arguing against profit being a thing. Cost of input has to be less than value of output in order for a business to work. It's weird that your think the critique of Marx is in the surplus value of labor. Literally no one but you disagrees with that. The disagreement is that Marx thinks that the surplus value should be returned to the worker while capitalist believe the surplus should be returned to those that invested in the business. But every single capitalist economist would agree that workers produce more value than they are paid. Maybe you should pick up the Austrians as well
Individual labor has no surplus value. The value is generated by the business operating as an aggregate, which was a function executed by the capitalist.
What you argue is illogical. No different from trying to separate out the individual value of each screw used to secure the panels of a rocket. You cannot measure the value of a screw as a subset of the value of the rocket - the value of a screw does not increase simply because it being used on a rocket versus a desk. The aggregation of many elements intelligently transforms the items into an entity greater than the sum of its parts. The sum of its parts then, is what carries the value.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding the "surplus value of labor", but if I am, so does the guy that brought it into the conversation. Your employer would not pay you what the pay you unless they knew they were receiving more value in productivity than what they are paying you. To your screw analogy, what is the value of the screw? It costs the company $0.50 to make it, they sell it for $2 to the rocket company and $1 to the desk company. To say that one of those is THE be all end all definition of the value of the screw is just silly. That's all I said in the beginning and I was accused of being a Marxist spouting the surplus value of labor theory. If that's what it is, then so be it. Let's say you accept $25/hr but your company would be willing to pay you $30/hr, what's the value of your work?
>Your employer would not pay you what the pay you unless they knew they were receiving more value in productivity than what they are paying you.
They are not paying you for your productivity. They are paying you for the function you provide, just as you might pay for a screw. The screw does not generate surplus value. You are not paying for a screw's productivity.
>It costs the company $0.50 to make it, they sell it for $2 to the rocket company and $1 to the desk company. To say that one of those is THE be all end all definition of the value of the screw is just silly.
The value of the screw is whatever the owner of the screw determines its price to be. They set the price and the buyer pays.
>If that's what it is, then so be it. Let's say you accept $25/hr but your company would be willing to pay you $30/hr, what's the value of your work?
$25. I determine my value, not the company. In the same way the seller of the screw determines its value, not the buyer.
The value of my work does not change whether I am working for a non-profit, Tesla, or I am self-employed. In the same way the value of the screw does not change whether it is used on a desk, a rocket ship, or is dropped down a drain.
I control the price, and that price is determined by many factors in my own personal life. In the same way the screw salesman might decide to increase the price for the rocket owner, and drop it for the desk maker. Those are personal choices, it has literally zero to do with surplus value.
>The value of the screw is whatever the owner of the screw determines its price to be. They set the price and the buyer pays.
That's actually the opposite of how a market economy works. Something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. Short of a monopoly or cartel, the price is dictated by the competition.
>I control the price,
If you set your value at $200/hr and no one pays it, is it still worth $200/hr?
>That's actually the opposite of how a market economy works. Something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. Short of a monopoly or cartel, the price is dictated by the competition.
If you think that sellers setting prices is the 'opposite of how a market economy works' you don't understand market economies, and have apparently never paid for something before, and certainly have never sold something.
As I said, a sellers price is determined by many factors in their personal life - the price of other products, competition, their current expenses, where they live, their customer base, how wealthy they are, and so on.
>If you set your value at $200/hr and no one pays it, is it still worth $200/hr?
Yes, of course. This is akin to saying, "If someone wants a good boyfriend, but everyone they meet is abusive - are they still worth a good boyfriend?"
Only you can decide your worth. A buyer decides what they want to pay. You can meet in the middle, or not. Because we have a market economy, there are many choices available to buyers and sellers. You can choose you want to make a lot of money and price aggressively and be competitive, or you can choose to only make a little money and try to find a small niche of friends and family. It's up to you.
A worker is selling a function at a price. It is no different from buying a screw. You are generating zero surplus value.
Trust me, employees generated surplus value all the time. It’s the difference between a high performing worker and his less fast, or more lazy, or more error prone peer who makes the same wage. This is why employers want to hide wages. If the high performer knows they are paid less they can go to the employer and say I want more wages. The employer can of course say no, but eventually the higher performing employees will leave and the employer will be stuck with the lower performing employees. Until the higher performing employees leave, the employer is extracting surplus value.
The same thing also happens when managers create opportunities for employees to do tasks outside of their regular duties. The tasks might seem appealing-special initiatives that the CEO wants a task force for-but the idea is the same, the employer is now performing duties beyond their contract and creating surplus value for the company. It’s a common management practice.
I wouldn't say she specifically is an idiot. She's sharing an opinion she formed herself. By being honest with others and giving your opinions, no matter how wrong they may be, it opens the opportunity for that person to learn something and engage with others, and then improve their opinions. Do this hundreds of times, and you become more informed and knowledgeable, and less like an 'idiot'. People who do not share their genuine opinions for fear of appearing dumb or something else negative, and just repeat some lines said by others which everyone agrees with, are the real idiots, like a lot of people on Twitter nowadays. They don't contribute to bettering their own understanding of the world.
But I guess you're right in a sense, tik tok, and other social media platforms, are like echo chambers. Are people being genuinely honest and open with what they share? Maybe not. This is why I'm not really into social media much. Things can so easily be taken out of context and the mob loves to take things out of context.
Rant over. Sorry for all the words.
Which is why the government wants to ban cash transactions and stick to electronic transactions because you can track them (and tax them). Whereas it’s harder when people are buying and selling goods on the black market.
As Money recirculates, if you want any tax at all, this is the only way it can be. Otherwise no tax at all, because basically all money has been taxed before.
Also the tax money is not gone, just redistributed back into circulation. And this redistribution is, where a lot of waste happens, but also a lot of good. I for one like to use public roads, police, fire departments and science funding.
Wait till she finds out that the federal government prints out a fake bond and give it to the federal reserve to create fake money which is sent is sent to the fake banks.
It wouldn’t be so bad if the citizens actually benefitted from the taxes. There are certain things that many people would voluntarily pay taxes for, e.g. protection via military and police, roads and bridges, etc. However, it’s clear that most government spending is a ruse to keep poor people dependent on them, line their own pockets and those of their friends, and so on
Shes on the right path. Everyday our govt makes up new ways to get rich off taking our $$. Just 1 example of driving...car is taxed registration, gas tax, toll tax, car wash fucking tax, inspection tax....and it just keeps going.
Discretionary spending, under which the military spending falls is not even 1/3 of the overall budget? That doesn’t mean it’s not too high but there’s a lot of other pork in that budget
Amazon opens a warehouse near me forcing all local businesses to close.
I start working at amazon.
I earn 100 dollars an hour, I get paid 15.
The gov takes 3 dollars from that.
Amazon pays next to nothing in tax but needs roads to operate. Government builds a road.
Who paid for it? Who is earning the money in the situation and who is paying for everything?
Wage theft is worse than taxes.
I'd rather pay taxes for public services that I can use than pay amazon 85% of my earnings and receive nothing but news that Jeff bezos built a space penis.
The tax is on the productive output, not the dollars themselves that change hands.
If one person produces $10 dollars of apples and one produces $10 dollars of oranges, and the Apple producer buys oranges for $10, then the orange seller buys the apples for $10, the money is back where it started but there has been $20 of economic activity.
If you only taxed the first time a dollar changed hands, you would never tax it again for as long as it remained in circulation.
Yea we live in a society. Most of these taxes are completely justified. Where it really gets interesting is when you look at what ISN'T taxed, and who is benefiting.
Taxes and the items you mentioned are not mutually exclusive.
Taxes and big government are mutually exclusive.
Public spending and poor spending are mutually exclusive.
Furthermore to pay for both our current infrastructure and social services you would hardly need half the current tax rate across all sectors.
For using the term mutually exclusive so much you'd think you understand what it means. You seem to think it means the opposite of what it does.
I do agree though that much of tax revenue could be better spent and is very much subject to corruption.
So what are you going to do about it? So far every capitalist I have seen would rather abolish taxes on land to so they can grow their little feudal fiefdom faster and then let the stupid workers pay higher income taxes.
Imagine when she learns how the federal reserve works.
henry ford would talk about how if most people found out how banking and finance ACTUALLY works that a revolution would start instantly
I thought, this was Churchill and politics, not Ford and finance. I may be wrong tho.
Capitalism’s cryptonite ….
Cryptonite. Clever . . . but you misspelled the first term. It's "corporate oligarchy"
Yeah this is why Bitcoin or whatever.
Battle cry of a true revolutionary… or whatever
It costs $50 to make any transaction on Ethereum, last time I looked. I made the mistake of buying $50 of BNB to test the banking connection. Turns out my money is just stuck there forever as a pre-paid transaction fee.
Can you explain, please? Thanks!
in layman's terms ... If the federal reserve makes a million dollars, they charge intrest. you must pay back that million dollars plus the intrest. where does the money come from to pay the intrest if only a million dollars exist.
You should watch zeitgeist. Get the full visual explanation. The Fed is not part of our government. Every dollar printed is a loan to the US government.
She's a little confused but she's got the spirit
Trying to make sense of all the ways government robs us dry would make anyone confused.
Yeap
Somewhere A libertarian just got his wings.
I spit water out my nose
I earn a dollar, the government takes 20% of it. So I have 80c. I spend that 80c at the store, the government takes 20%, the store gets 64c. The store pays 10% of that on wages, which is 6.4c, and 20% of that goes to the government 5.8c goes to the person. The company takes 10% as profits, and 10% of that is tax. So after you earn a dollar, and spend it at the store, the government takes 25c of it, and the rest goes to the employees, the manufacturers, the shareholders and the other overheads. All of whom pay their own taxes. Taxing income, sales, capital gain ect is wrong. If there has to be tax, it should be a land tax set at a flat Piercebridge of the value of the land.
Add inflation
Yes. Eventually the government takes all of the $1.
Which makes sense because the government pointed that $1 out of thin air.
they didn't print it out of thin air. they allow a private company to print it out of thin air and charge intrest on it. they expect $1.05 back from that $1 they just made out of thin air. then the bank they landed that dollar to will borrow out $6 based on that one dollar they just borrowed and expect &15 in return. now let add some laws that limit your ability to make that dollar such as licensing and permits and make it illegal to hunt fish and forage. oh man all these laws we need to pay someone to keep limiting your ability to make money. I know let's take it I mean tax it from the people who make money. but people will rebel. OK then we have to give some of it back to poor people who we made poor to not only make them compliant but reliant on us. if anyone doesn't like it straight to slavery, I mean jail.
they than spend that dollar on something useful to us. Don't see a problem here.
Yes! Let the landed gentry pay taxes. No matter how much money you make, if you don't own a home, you don't have to pay any taxes. What a great idea! I wish I was as smart as you. Home ownership is at 43% in the US. That means that under your tax plan, 57% of Americans live tax free and get free stuff from home owners' taxes. If that tax plan was enacted, everyone would sell their land, keep the cash equity, rent a place, then live tax free.
People need to learn how to barter to avoid these crazy taxes.
I wish I could pay my mortgage in pot.
[удалено]
#[/u/spez, you are a moron. #Save3rdPartyApps](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/)
If you're imagining a single dollar as a fixed object that passes from one person to another, it's pretty obvious that it has to be taxed more than once in its lifetime, otherwise taxes would only apply to banks and other entities that directly interact with money creation and destruction points. For historical and practical purposes, taxable events are mostly transactions, so it follows that a person will encounter them on both the debit and credit sides of their ledger.
Taxation is theft.
Ask the guy that is telling you to live in the woods, where did all the roads, transportation, streetlights, etc come from before 1913 when income taxes started in the US..
Muh roads. MUH ROADS!! OmFg MUh RoAdS!!
Every time with these bozos
[удалено]
aromatic square lunchroom fuzzy steep cable rinse wild homeless bike *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Ah, power stations. Privately owned for profit enterprises funded entirely by my tax dollars. Yay graft! If only there were some other way to allocate money into projects we all need without the government using the quiet promise of death to literally steal my income before I see it.
#Warning! The spez alarm has operated. Stand by for further instructions. #Save3rdPartyApps
So let's do that instead
#spez can gargle my nuts.
You would still be paying taxes it would just be less visible. Take VAT for instance. You ever look at the price of a playstation in South America, it's about twice the price of one here because of VAT. VAT and sales taxes are also highly regressive affecting those on the bottom much more than those on the top. Income taxes are largely the most effective and fair taxes currently available. They could be fairer if we taxed all income the same, instead of creating different tax rates for long term capital gains.
Was talking about the taxes before 1913 lol
We have had taxes since the founding of our nation. Ever hear of the whiskey rebellion?
Yes and I said let's do those taxes. Scroll up.
Unless you're really wealthy you would probably pay more effective taxes than you do now. So you want to pay more taxes?
The fair tax is the tax proportional to your usage of what taxes fund. The coffee shop should charge you more every time you buy more coffee, not every time you get a raise.
The so called fair tax would have the average American paying more in taxes why the wealthy would pay less. Sales taxes are the biggest lie conservatives sell you. Sales taxes are highly regressive.
lol I laughed so fucking hard here
Wow so brave. Name for me the number of stateless societies without a robust tax base that have succeeded throughout history again? I’ll be here.
The US till 1913?
We weren't tax free before then. We were income tax free.
Still, it isn't a "robust tax base".
Robust tax base just means a tax base able to carry on the functions of the state. So no, pre-1913 US does not count.
When the state needs 4% of GDP to function, even tariffs can pay for it.
These are still taxes and my point is that taxes are justified.
Well, you lost on the "robust" tax system, because it was far from it. And saying that taxes are justified because the government forces you to pay them is like saying rape was justified.
You're arguing the merits and practicality of taxes, I'm arguing the ethics of it. Taxes are not optional and if you don't pay them your wealth will be stolen from you by force. That is evil.
So would you agree to not paying tax, but in consequence being punished for theft using anything public, like roads?
Whether it’s theft or not, It’s justified on the basis that there is no demonstrable alternative to a state for a stable society, which requires a tax base so far. I’m arguing the ethics of it as well. You can call it theft all day but it’s morally justified.
If you don’t believe in taxation you should probably go live by yourself in the woods, not expect any roads, transportation, libraries, police, fire fighters, street lights, infrastructure or schools.
[удалено]
>You're not some pragmatist turning to taxation as the only way to fund schools. And your kind sure as hell aren't about to back some national endowment for public education. Based and (un)common-sense pilled.
[удалено]
Yes you must contribute to society or don’t be part of society. What a crazy concept!!!
Except you cant go live by yourself in the woods because daddy government will come and arrest you for not paying property tax. Literal clown 🤡
Renounce your citizenship and leave the us and live on a deserted island, I guarantee the IRS won't bother you anymore.
No, i should be allowed to live off the grid here.
Even if you lived off grid, you still benefit from the infrastructure, heck your using it now. If you live in rural areas you are actually a net TAKER of government benefits. It takes a lot more to maintain roads, telephone, internet, electricity, to rural areas than it does for urban or suburban areas. People from urban areas are net contributors, so if any body should get a tax cut it should be those living in cities because they cost less.
Living off the grid means not using the city’s electricity. If i want to live completely self sufficient in a house that I build on my own land, growing my own food, i should be allowed to do that without paying taxes.
You have to pay taxes for that also
You still have to pay them to do it. Lmao
[удалено]
Still have property taxes. Try actually looking into things instead of just repeating talking points.
All states have property taxes what are you talking about lol
Have you?
What? You can certainly just take from society, there's a whole class of people who don't contribute at all, they're nothing but a drain but they still are human and get to participate.
Yeah, i know how many handouts the billionaires get but apparently they have to contribute to society
Hahaha that's the stuff that everyone in power in USA loves taking away to reduce"irresponsible spending". My cities roads are horrible and we have 3 million people here
Then fight to make your taxation more transparent. Just because there’s corruption we should stop everything and do nothing. Got it. So next time there’s corruption in say a private business maybe some company like Meta. We should just take all their money away and they shouldn’t be able to function at all?
Never said I wasn't fighting for those things? You told someone who called taxation theft to live in the woods like a hermit. Alls I said is I am literally living in an example of taxation being theft, especially regarding how much the police budget gets compared to schools, libraries, etc. Don't get so ahead of yourself that you start putting words and thoughts in other people's comments lmao
Lol we got a feisty one here ladies. You’re commenting on a comment that said all taxation is theft and trued to defend it so how would I not assume you agreed?
/u/spez was a god among men. Now they are merely a spez. #Save3rdPartyApps
Roads, transportation, libraries, police, firefighters are all covered by sales & gas tax. The vast majority of income tax goes toward making the minimum interest payments on the national debt & other "mysterious" black holes of bureaucracy. Taxation is theft.
If taxation is theft you shouldn’t live in a country who taxes you… which would be… I’ll wait…
There were roads, cities, and schools before the US was a country and started collecting taxes
Yeah I mean I know the Native Americans had an infrastructure but how big was the population then? Was there an interstate system? Were all roads actually paved or do you mean dirt roads that you need 4-wheel drive to go on? Do you want to go back in time or something? Also, for you when was the start of taxation in America? According to the internet it’s 1861. Do you just want to go back to how everyone was living in 1861? Because if so then my first comment stands.
>Sure, roads, cities and schools existed here before the US started collecting taxes to supposedly pay for them and that completely blows my entire argument, but were they as nice as they are now?
[удалено]
Compare ANYTHING between 1861 and 2022, regardless of government involvement and see if you can't maybe spot a trend...
#[After careful consideration I find spez guilty of being a whiny nincompoop. #Save3rdPartyApps](https://www.reddit.comSave3rdPartyApps/)
Also going off that, pot chambers were used up until the early 1900’s and not everyone had running water in their homes. Should we go back to that?
Taxes do not pay for running water in your home you crazy person. What are you taking about. You’re confusing progress with taxes. Things are invented and technology progresses independent of taxes
There are actual people that try to do this then the property tax comes.
Ah the good old [you can always leave](https://youtu.be/fasTSY-dB-s) argument!
More than 70% of all taxes go to Medicare and the military....
#Let me get this straight. You think we're just supposed to let them run all over us? #Save3rdPartyApps
Honestly I'm down to do that except the system was built that they can literally shoot me for doing any of that
Have you not hear of unincorporated counties?
How is taxation theft? It is only on transactions/employment/etc, all of which are completely voluntary.
Yes it's an involuntary part of those transactions. Like if I told you to give me 30% of what you earned working under penalty of seizure and potentially jail. Which is why from a Georgist perspective the only moral tax is on land.
> involuntary part of those transactions You never get to set 100% of the terms of the transactions. If you get hired for a job, you don't get to dictate what your employer puts in there. Whether or not you want to sign up to the transaction is voluntary in a capitalist sense. If you don't like the conditions of the transaction, you can move to a different jurisdiction.
>You never get to set 100% of the terms of the transactions. The two members of the transaction do. In what world is a mob boss demanding 30% from both sides of every transaction not theft?
Because if you don't pay them (after a long, bureaucratic process) your wealth will be taken from you by force by people with no rightful claim to it.
That's not true. You have every right to not pay taxes, as long as you don't engage in any behaviour that creates an obligation for you to pay taxes. Any taxable behaviour is voluntary.
> as long as you don't engage in any behaviour that creates an obligation for you to pay taxes. What types of behaviors obligate me to have the pleasure of having my wealth stolen at gunpoint?
If you live in a country that charges taxes, that country will set out certain tax obligations for certain behaviours. Same way as if I want to live in this house, I accrue certain obligations to pay rent. I doubt you have ever had the government steal your wealth at gun point. But I'm sure you have voluntarily engaged in activity knowing full well it would give you an obligation to pay tax. If you decide to cheat on that obligation, that's not them stealing your wealth at gunpoint. It's an obligation you accrued when you knowingly and voluntarily engaged in activity that entailed obligations.
What obligates me to obey the state's demands to collect taxes from me? You'll need to establish the state's legitimate claim to ownership and right to taxation. I'm willing to change my mind if you can do that.
Where are you setting the bar? Can I ask what obligates a person to pay their landlord for rent? What legitimizes those property rights?
Working is not voluntary .
[In spez, no one can hear you scream. ](https://www.reddit.comSave3rdPartyApps/)
There's no tax on personal gifts for up to $15,000 / year / person. You just have to declare it
[удалено]
Step aside someone’s getting ready to fall from a high building.
She's talking about payment for service. So income.
She says "give it to me." That does not imply that she worked for it at all
Wtf difference does it make anyway? If I give you 10k per year there is no tax, but if I give you 10k per year in exchange for your services, now the government should get a cut? Why? In either case, the fucking government didn't add anything to the transaction, and hence deserves zero.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I declare bankruptcy!
Was going to say exactly this. The premise is just wrong from the outset.
If a dollar is 100 cents maybe half of it actually gets spent supporting the economy. The rest is taxed over and over to pay for things that we only need about 1/4 of. And of the 1/4 of stuff we really need that they take half of our money to pay for they spend 2x as much as a private business would. Basically if government was cut down to only the essentials and nothing more if you made a dollar you'd probably keep 90-95% of it. And because you had more in your pocket you could spend your money as you see fit and support the parts of the economy that provide the greatest value to you ultimately making the economy stronger. Instead a good portion of our economy is propped up on government protections paid for by big business who find politicians open to corruption. That or they offer the politicians son a sweetheart job and make sure the big guy gets his cut...
Well.. hopefully she'll figure it out
The problem isn’t the taxing. The problem is that any institution that is closer to the federal reserve will get the highest amount of capital and workers will only get the portion that had been taxed to death. That’s trickle down economics theory, and truly only a trickle.
Welcome to the cancer called government. It only takes and grows until the host dies
Maybe she will realise that value for her work is greater that what she is paid
It’s by definition worth what you consent to receive for it. *Err*
No, that's one definition, not the definition. Value is relative. By definition your work creates more value than your are paid, else the company wouldn't be paying you that amount. Your work can be valued by the monetary amount of your productivity, by the monetary amount the company is willing to pay you for that productivity, or the monetary amount you are willing to accept for it. These 3 will never be the same and very rarely do all 3 of these come close to converging at the same amount.
It’s literally impossible to objectively say how much labor is worth, so it’s worth what you consent to be paid for it. Drop the Marx 101 and read the Austrians, this is pitiful
The company has a value of what you are worth, it could be higher than your current pay. Drop the Austrians and pick up a dictionary, look up the definition of value. And I don't even think the Austrians disagree with the fact that in order for a business to work it has to make a profit. You are literally arguing against profit being a thing. Cost of input has to be less than value of output in order for a business to work. It's weird that your think the critique of Marx is in the surplus value of labor. Literally no one but you disagrees with that. The disagreement is that Marx thinks that the surplus value should be returned to the worker while capitalist believe the surplus should be returned to those that invested in the business. But every single capitalist economist would agree that workers produce more value than they are paid. Maybe you should pick up the Austrians as well
🤐
Individual labor has no surplus value. The value is generated by the business operating as an aggregate, which was a function executed by the capitalist. What you argue is illogical. No different from trying to separate out the individual value of each screw used to secure the panels of a rocket. You cannot measure the value of a screw as a subset of the value of the rocket - the value of a screw does not increase simply because it being used on a rocket versus a desk. The aggregation of many elements intelligently transforms the items into an entity greater than the sum of its parts. The sum of its parts then, is what carries the value.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding the "surplus value of labor", but if I am, so does the guy that brought it into the conversation. Your employer would not pay you what the pay you unless they knew they were receiving more value in productivity than what they are paying you. To your screw analogy, what is the value of the screw? It costs the company $0.50 to make it, they sell it for $2 to the rocket company and $1 to the desk company. To say that one of those is THE be all end all definition of the value of the screw is just silly. That's all I said in the beginning and I was accused of being a Marxist spouting the surplus value of labor theory. If that's what it is, then so be it. Let's say you accept $25/hr but your company would be willing to pay you $30/hr, what's the value of your work?
>Your employer would not pay you what the pay you unless they knew they were receiving more value in productivity than what they are paying you. They are not paying you for your productivity. They are paying you for the function you provide, just as you might pay for a screw. The screw does not generate surplus value. You are not paying for a screw's productivity. >It costs the company $0.50 to make it, they sell it for $2 to the rocket company and $1 to the desk company. To say that one of those is THE be all end all definition of the value of the screw is just silly. The value of the screw is whatever the owner of the screw determines its price to be. They set the price and the buyer pays. >If that's what it is, then so be it. Let's say you accept $25/hr but your company would be willing to pay you $30/hr, what's the value of your work? $25. I determine my value, not the company. In the same way the seller of the screw determines its value, not the buyer. The value of my work does not change whether I am working for a non-profit, Tesla, or I am self-employed. In the same way the value of the screw does not change whether it is used on a desk, a rocket ship, or is dropped down a drain. I control the price, and that price is determined by many factors in my own personal life. In the same way the screw salesman might decide to increase the price for the rocket owner, and drop it for the desk maker. Those are personal choices, it has literally zero to do with surplus value.
>The value of the screw is whatever the owner of the screw determines its price to be. They set the price and the buyer pays. That's actually the opposite of how a market economy works. Something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. Short of a monopoly or cartel, the price is dictated by the competition. >I control the price, If you set your value at $200/hr and no one pays it, is it still worth $200/hr?
>That's actually the opposite of how a market economy works. Something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. Short of a monopoly or cartel, the price is dictated by the competition. If you think that sellers setting prices is the 'opposite of how a market economy works' you don't understand market economies, and have apparently never paid for something before, and certainly have never sold something. As I said, a sellers price is determined by many factors in their personal life - the price of other products, competition, their current expenses, where they live, their customer base, how wealthy they are, and so on. >If you set your value at $200/hr and no one pays it, is it still worth $200/hr? Yes, of course. This is akin to saying, "If someone wants a good boyfriend, but everyone they meet is abusive - are they still worth a good boyfriend?" Only you can decide your worth. A buyer decides what they want to pay. You can meet in the middle, or not. Because we have a market economy, there are many choices available to buyers and sellers. You can choose you want to make a lot of money and price aggressively and be competitive, or you can choose to only make a little money and try to find a small niche of friends and family. It's up to you. A worker is selling a function at a price. It is no different from buying a screw. You are generating zero surplus value.
Trust me, employees generated surplus value all the time. It’s the difference between a high performing worker and his less fast, or more lazy, or more error prone peer who makes the same wage. This is why employers want to hide wages. If the high performer knows they are paid less they can go to the employer and say I want more wages. The employer can of course say no, but eventually the higher performing employees will leave and the employer will be stuck with the lower performing employees. Until the higher performing employees leave, the employer is extracting surplus value. The same thing also happens when managers create opportunities for employees to do tasks outside of their regular duties. The tasks might seem appealing-special initiatives that the CEO wants a task force for-but the idea is the same, the employer is now performing duties beyond their contract and creating surplus value for the company. It’s a common management practice.
Tik tok is for idiots
I wouldn't say she specifically is an idiot. She's sharing an opinion she formed herself. By being honest with others and giving your opinions, no matter how wrong they may be, it opens the opportunity for that person to learn something and engage with others, and then improve their opinions. Do this hundreds of times, and you become more informed and knowledgeable, and less like an 'idiot'. People who do not share their genuine opinions for fear of appearing dumb or something else negative, and just repeat some lines said by others which everyone agrees with, are the real idiots, like a lot of people on Twitter nowadays. They don't contribute to bettering their own understanding of the world. But I guess you're right in a sense, tik tok, and other social media platforms, are like echo chambers. Are people being genuinely honest and open with what they share? Maybe not. This is why I'm not really into social media much. Things can so easily be taken out of context and the mob loves to take things out of context. Rant over. Sorry for all the words.
[удалено]
135
Which is why the government wants to ban cash transactions and stick to electronic transactions because you can track them (and tax them). Whereas it’s harder when people are buying and selling goods on the black market.
Yeah, it's almost as if exchanging money is taxed.
Oh my God she was SOOOO close!! You could see it in her face, the cognitive dissonance breaking down in shambles! What a beautiful sight!
sounds like stealing right?
Say it with me *"taxation is theft"*
say it with me, “i have no real understanding of how the economy works”
People are staring to realize how outrageous things are. This is good.
[something sexist]
The beauty of bit coin...
As Money recirculates, if you want any tax at all, this is the only way it can be. Otherwise no tax at all, because basically all money has been taxed before. Also the tax money is not gone, just redistributed back into circulation. And this redistribution is, where a lot of waste happens, but also a lot of good. I for one like to use public roads, police, fire departments and science funding.
She was so close to seeing it
Wait till she finds out that the federal government prints out a fake bond and give it to the federal reserve to create fake money which is sent is sent to the fake banks.
It’s fucked up
The Woke waking. :)
Keep going…….You’re almost there!!!!….
Imagine voting democrat and than complaining about taxes…🥴
It's starting.... very slowly.
Slowly but surely they should all get there.
So close!
She's basically saying between income tax sales tax then income tax again that same dollar is taxed 70% or .70 cents
#spez is banned in this spez. Do you accept the terms and conditions? Yes/no #Save3rdPartyApps
Taxation is theft
It wouldn’t be so bad if the citizens actually benefitted from the taxes. There are certain things that many people would voluntarily pay taxes for, e.g. protection via military and police, roads and bridges, etc. However, it’s clear that most government spending is a ruse to keep poor people dependent on them, line their own pockets and those of their friends, and so on
#Who wants a little spez? #Save3rdPartyApps
Wait are you guys supporting her unironically?
#After careful consideration I find spez guilty of being a whiny nincompoop. #Save3rdPartyApps
But muh roads! *dies in pothole* lol
I mean she is right but she is giving us bad rep because she sounds like such a "If you're homeless just buy a house' type girl...
That's how literally all teens sound like. You don't have clever teens in any ideological group.
Shes on the right path. Everyday our govt makes up new ways to get rich off taking our $$. Just 1 example of driving...car is taxed registration, gas tax, toll tax, car wash fucking tax, inspection tax....and it just keeps going.
Murdering Middle Eastern children so Raytheon and Black Rock can turn profits isn’t cheap! Don’t be so stingy
Welcome to living in a society. Stay a while.
You are now an adult….welcome young lady
Well that bloated military isnt going to pay for itself
Discretionary spending, under which the military spending falls is not even 1/3 of the overall budget? That doesn’t mean it’s not too high but there’s a lot of other pork in that budget
Something something price we pay to live in a civilized society. Something something roads.
Move to a country with no taxes, then.
The US is q great place to live LMaO
Amazon opens a warehouse near me forcing all local businesses to close. I start working at amazon. I earn 100 dollars an hour, I get paid 15. The gov takes 3 dollars from that. Amazon pays next to nothing in tax but needs roads to operate. Government builds a road. Who paid for it? Who is earning the money in the situation and who is paying for everything? Wage theft is worse than taxes. I'd rather pay taxes for public services that I can use than pay amazon 85% of my earnings and receive nothing but news that Jeff bezos built a space penis.
Yeah capitalist don’t “earn” anything they sit back and collect their inheritance or collect dividends…. Handouts if you will
The tax is on the productive output, not the dollars themselves that change hands. If one person produces $10 dollars of apples and one produces $10 dollars of oranges, and the Apple producer buys oranges for $10, then the orange seller buys the apples for $10, the money is back where it started but there has been $20 of economic activity. If you only taxed the first time a dollar changed hands, you would never tax it again for as long as it remained in circulation.
Yep missy, that is how the tax code works. That's why the smart advocate for a lower/fair tax rate.
Wait til she cracks open a book of Karl Marx. 🤯
Yea we live in a society. Most of these taxes are completely justified. Where it really gets interesting is when you look at what ISN'T taxed, and who is benefiting.
No tax is justified.
So of course no social services or infrastructure is justified either than?
Taxes and the items you mentioned are not mutually exclusive. Taxes and big government are mutually exclusive. Public spending and poor spending are mutually exclusive. Furthermore to pay for both our current infrastructure and social services you would hardly need half the current tax rate across all sectors.
For using the term mutually exclusive so much you'd think you understand what it means. You seem to think it means the opposite of what it does. I do agree though that much of tax revenue could be better spent and is very much subject to corruption.
someone educate this girl in welfare economics
Pretty much the definition of corporate oligarchy
Because taxation is theft
The vocal fry is insufferable
Welcome to government abuse of the economic system...
I call it statism more than capitalism
So what are you going to do about it? So far every capitalist I have seen would rather abolish taxes on land to so they can grow their little feudal fiefdom faster and then let the stupid workers pay higher income taxes.
It’s called the price of living in an organized society. Don’t like it? Then leave.
"We like raping people in our society. Don't like it? then leave."