• Lucid Dreaming - Dream Views




    View Poll Results: Which is the most functional economic structure?

    Voters
    42. You may not vote on this poll
    • Free Market

      13 30.95%
    • Mixed Economy

      20 47.62%
    • Socialism

      9 21.43%
    Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
    Results 51 to 75 of 153
    1. #51
      Member
      Join Date
      Feb 2004
      Posts
      5,165
      Likes
      708
      Well I don't want to get rid of just income tax, I also want to get rid of social security tax. The combined hit from social security and income tax can be up to 50 percent of your pay, and that is for people down at the bottom of the tax scale! That is just ridiculous. The social security part isn't even going to any services for the vast majority of us. It aptly named social security because its a socialist program that redistributes wealth from the young(and often poor) to the older, while siphoning off a great deal due to inefficiency. Politicians don't even pretend its for our benefit anymore, everyone knows there isn't going to be social security benefits in 40 years from now.

      How the heck are people supposed to make a living when the government is taking their fair share of 50 percent of everything you make! And that is not including inflation, sale taxes, property taxes, or any other sort of tax. If they are taking 50 percent of my pay off the top, why the hell do I have to pay taxes on things I already own? Why are they taxing me for owning land or having a car?

      If there was no income tax, you might legitimately say, well if you drive you should pay to upkeep the roads, but if your sucking out 50 percent of my income, why are you hitting me up for even more?

      If you try to invest money, the government wants to take its cut on that as well. If you die, they want a piece of your wealth. They got their hands in everything. You stick your money under your bed and you hide it, well to bad! Here comes inflation, which eats away at the value of all money in the entire US, no one is untouched when it comes to inflation.

      Realistically people are paying upwards to 90 percent of everything they own directly to the government. So when people say they want even more government, they are insane. Any more government and you just becomes slaves to the system. People already feel like that today. Its crazy, you can't escape how freaking huge the government has come. Its horrible disgusting bloated monster that devours everything in front of it.

    2. #52
      Member Hercuflea's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      Gender
      Posts
      868
      Likes
      7
      DJ Entries
      2
      i personally think income tax and property tax are evil, but if i was forced to choose id take income tax over property tax. The government has no right or legitimate authority to say that it owns YOUR property

      ^ and yeah i consider bureaucracy a cancer
      "La bellezza del paessa di Galilei!"

    3. #53
      Xei
      UnitedKingdom Xei is offline
      Banned
      Join Date
      Aug 2005
      Posts
      9,984
      Likes
      3082
      Um... how does the government claim to own my property..?

      And how do you propose to pay for infrastructure, education, health etc.?

    4. #54
      Member Hercuflea's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      Gender
      Posts
      868
      Likes
      7
      DJ Entries
      2
      The government claims to own your property by taking it away if you do not pay a property tax. You dont truly own your property, you're only paying rent for it as long as they bill you a percentage of your net worth every year.

      You cut spending. I wont talk about Britain, but in America's case, we have no business spending a trillion dollars a year on our overseas military policing, warmongering, slaughter, and meddling in the affairs of other countries. That is the biggest money vacuum in our governments budget. We dont need to maintain bases in Japan, Germany, and Korea with tens of thousands of troops each. It has nothing to do with our national defense, its only putting an umbrella over our allies, protecting them from something that threatened them over 50 years ago. Not to mention Iraq.

      And the government has no business in healthcare.
      "La bellezza del paessa di Galilei!"

    5. #55
      widdershins modality Taosaur's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 2004
      Gender
      Location
      Ohiopolis
      Posts
      4,843
      Likes
      1003
      DJ Entries
      19
      Of the choices above, a mixed economy is not only the best, but the only realistic system. Anywhere more than three unrelated persons live in proximity, they will both establish resources and goals in common, and trade their property and services for agreed upon fair value. Anything resembling a Libertarian-style free market or a completely planned economy can only be established by force and maintained at great expense. It's not in the nature of markets to remain free, nor in the nature of wealth/power to remain evenly distributed, because both are prone to the human drive to seek advantage over others. A functional society needs to capitalize upon that drive, but a stable society also needs to temper it.

      Quote Originally Posted by Absolute
      Also, if one thing was also realized, the less taxes there are, the more money there is to flow in the economy. Progress and production booms. Other issues of inflation come into play, though, depending on how much money was being pushed into the economy. It's a frustrating thing to compromise what to do in a world where consumer market behavior can either be predictable or unpredictable.
      In theory. In practice, boom times in the private sector are often built upon government initiatives and/or reliant upon government assistance, as with the railroads, WWII, the Apollo missions and the internet. Government exists precisely to take care of 'big picture' issues that get overlooked in the pursuit of profit. Tax money is not removed from the economy, just directed differently within it.
      If you have a sense of caring for others, you will manifest a kind of inner strength in spite of your own difficulties and problems. With this strength, your own problems will seem less significant and bothersome to you. By going beyond your own problems and taking care of others, you gain inner strength, self-confidence, courage, and a greater sense of calm.Dalai Lama



    6. #56
      Member
      Join Date
      Feb 2004
      Posts
      5,165
      Likes
      708
      If you outright own a piece of land, then there is no reason you should ever have to pay anyone. However the government will take it away from you if you do not pay property tax every year. You never really own it, your just renting it as Hercuflea pointed out.

    7. #57
      widdershins modality Taosaur's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 2004
      Gender
      Location
      Ohiopolis
      Posts
      4,843
      Likes
      1003
      DJ Entries
      19
      Quote Originally Posted by Alric View Post
      If you outright own a piece of land, then there is no reason you should ever have to pay anyone. However the government will take it away from you if you do not pay property tax every year. You never really own it, your just renting it as Hercuflea pointed out.
      "the government" in this case being your county or municipality. If you want to live in a county without property taxes, you will probably find it lacking hospitals, schools, libraries and serviceable roads and bridges, too.
      If you have a sense of caring for others, you will manifest a kind of inner strength in spite of your own difficulties and problems. With this strength, your own problems will seem less significant and bothersome to you. By going beyond your own problems and taking care of others, you gain inner strength, self-confidence, courage, and a greater sense of calm.Dalai Lama



    8. #58
      Member
      Join Date
      Feb 2004
      Posts
      5,165
      Likes
      708
      There is no reason it should, seeing as we pay so much in other taxes, it should cover everything. If they weren't so wasteful, its totally unneeded.

    9. #59
      widdershins modality Taosaur's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 2004
      Gender
      Location
      Ohiopolis
      Posts
      4,843
      Likes
      1003
      DJ Entries
      19
      Quote Originally Posted by Alric View Post
      There is no reason it should, seeing as we pay so much in other taxes, it should cover everything. If they weren't so wasteful, its totally unneeded.
      Yes, but see, a county is different from a state or nation. Most counties do get some assistance from the state and federal governments, but the main source of revenue for maintaining local core services comes from property tax. See how far you get telling the gas company, "But I already paid my electric bill!"
      If you have a sense of caring for others, you will manifest a kind of inner strength in spite of your own difficulties and problems. With this strength, your own problems will seem less significant and bothersome to you. By going beyond your own problems and taking care of others, you gain inner strength, self-confidence, courage, and a greater sense of calm.Dalai Lama



    10. #60
      Member
      Join Date
      Feb 2004
      Posts
      5,165
      Likes
      708
      There is no reason they can't pay for schools and stuff with the local sales tax, which I am pretty sure is what they do. Which makes a lot more sense, anyone who is buying stuff, pays sale tax. Schools and stuff are for everyone, not just people who own a home.

      The point is they make layers and layers of taxes, so that each dollar you get, you are paying dozens or more taxes on it, which is ridiculous.

    11. #61
      Member Hercuflea's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      Gender
      Posts
      868
      Likes
      7
      DJ Entries
      2
      True, there is no reason that just because there is no property tax, that there are no schools and fire stations, etc. The problem is that they are going to tell me that they own my property. And with a sales tax, even illegal aliens have to pay the tax, and seeing that there are 15 million plus of them in this country, it will generate a ton of revenue.
      "La bellezza del paessa di Galilei!"

    12. #62
      The Supreme Echelon Absolute's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2006
      Gender
      Location
      Western Arizona, USA
      Posts
      275
      Likes
      0
      In theory. In practice, boom times in the private sector are often built upon government initiatives and/or reliant upon government assistance, as with the railroads, WWII, the Apollo missions and the internet. Government exists precisely to take care of 'big picture' issues that get overlooked in the pursuit of profit. Tax money is not removed from the economy, just directed differently within it.
      Not essentially, my friend. When we're talking about economic booms, a variety of factors come into play, including the governments role in handling regulation and managing capital derived from taxpayers. Booms can technically come from either end of high taxes or low taxes. For higher taxes, it will depend on how legitimate the government is operating all of their expenses. Creating employment through outsourcing of contractors and direct employment for development in the national infrastructure can create growth, yes. However, lower taxes for both consumers and businesses can also negate the fear of having too little.

      The problem that we're facing right now all has to do with fear and how everyone is operating under tight pockets. Essentially, there are four variables that justify the factors of high or low taxes:

      1) The competence that the government has in its regulatory procedures and how well it manages the capital from taxpayer dollars to produce economic growth.
      2) The employment available for the unemployed.
      3) The marginal cash versus debt that an average consumer holds.
      4) The amount of confidence or fear in the average consumer or investor to purchase products/services or do direct investments in derivatives, securities, and the overall general exchange markets.

      It boils down to confidence and competence, I'd say. What do you think, my friend?

      There is no reason they can't pay for schools and stuff with the local sales tax, which I am pretty sure is what they do. Which makes a lot more sense, anyone who is buying stuff, pays sale tax. Schools and stuff are for everyone, not just people who own a home.

      The point is they make layers and layers of taxes, so that each dollar you get, you are paying dozens or more taxes on it, which is ridiculous.
      True, there is no reason that just because there is no property tax, that there are no schools and fire stations, etc. The problem is that they are going to tell me that they own my property. And with a sales tax, even illegal aliens have to pay the tax, and seeing that there are 15 million plus of them in this country, it will generate a ton of revenue.
      The only predicament we run into is you're ruining the municipal structure for not just law enforcement and safety, but also education and infrastructure. The education sector is derived from tax levies produced by property taxes. Usually, they range only around two to three digits on an annual basis depending on where you live. You'll be noticing a lot of rises in tax levies since the federal government is currently tight.

      If the municipal levies were removed and you just went straight to sales taxes, then you'd be paying enormous prices to make up for that loss in standard stores, whether they're retail or or restaurant. I don't know what the exact ratios would be, but instead of going out to Wal-Mart to buy groceries for $100, what if you had to pay up to 50% to make up for that lost tax margin? And with the current markets in their state of spiral, consumers don't have the exact purchasing power they did prior to this catastrophe.

      What are your thoughts?
      Last edited by Absolute; 09-30-2009 at 02:57 AM.
      -Absolute Wisdom

      "Life is much like a barren road. You can choose to leave it and end up in a deserted wasteland, or you can follow the road to see what is beyond the horizon."

    13. #63
      Member
      Join Date
      Feb 2004
      Posts
      5,165
      Likes
      708
      The government is always tight. It is set up that way. Any time they have excess money they set up new things to spend it on, and if the economy goes down at all, they come up short. Instead of cutting back the new stuff, they just raise taxes. Its an endless cycle, with government getting bigger and bigger, and we keep paying more and more.

      I am not saying raise sale taxes to remove another tax. I am saying, cut spending so that the current sales tax covers everything, and they can start removing things like property tax all together. They could get rid of income tax for everyone, with making simple cuts that wouldn't effect anyone.

    14. #64
      Consciousness in the Void Universal Mind's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 2004
      Gender
      Location
      The Eternal Paradox
      Posts
      12,853
      Likes
      1031
      Schools should all be private any way. People work much harder than otherwise when they are competing for profits. It's a fact of human nature.

      Recommended Reading: Why Government Doesn't Work by Harry Browne
      Quote Originally Posted by really View Post
      God cannot destroy himself because He is Omnipotent.


    15. #65
      The Supreme Echelon Absolute's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2006
      Gender
      Location
      Western Arizona, USA
      Posts
      275
      Likes
      0
      Schools should all be private any way. People work much harder than otherwise when they are competing for profits. It's a fact of human nature.
      Oh, I totally agree there. The question is, though, will everyone get the chance to have a good education regardless of what type of family they're born into.
      -Absolute Wisdom

      "Life is much like a barren road. You can choose to leave it and end up in a deserted wasteland, or you can follow the road to see what is beyond the horizon."

    16. #66
      Xei
      UnitedKingdom Xei is offline
      Banned
      Join Date
      Aug 2005
      Posts
      9,984
      Likes
      3082
      Of course schools shouldn't be exclusively private. That codemns every single child born to a poor family to a crap future. That's the exact opposite of supposed American values, and indeed my values; social mobility. I can't think of a single advanced country with such a system.

    17. #67
      Consciousness in the Void Universal Mind's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 2004
      Gender
      Location
      The Eternal Paradox
      Posts
      12,853
      Likes
      1031
      Quote Originally Posted by Xei View Post
      Of course schools shouldn't be exclusively private. That codemns every single child born to a poor family to a crap future. That's the exact opposite of supposed American values, and indeed my values; social mobility. I can't think of a single advanced country with such a system.
      The government should provide vouchers to students who truly can't afford schools, and the "crap" schools would be steps above the schools existing on the "crap" level now. Privatization would not be a step back for any school. Competition would bring about enormous improvement.
      Quote Originally Posted by really View Post
      God cannot destroy himself because He is Omnipotent.


    18. #68
      The Supreme Echelon Absolute's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2006
      Gender
      Location
      Western Arizona, USA
      Posts
      275
      Likes
      0
      Hm... That could actually work, but... then that leaves in the problem of how limited is the voucher? What's the cap on how much the voucher covers?
      -Absolute Wisdom

      "Life is much like a barren road. You can choose to leave it and end up in a deserted wasteland, or you can follow the road to see what is beyond the horizon."

    19. #69
      Member Hercuflea's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      Gender
      Posts
      868
      Likes
      7
      DJ Entries
      2
      Quote Originally Posted by Absolute View Post
      Not essentially, my friend. When we're talking about economic booms, a variety of factors come into play, including the governments role in handling regulation and managing capital derived from taxpayers. Booms can technically come from either end of high taxes or low taxes. For higher taxes, it will depend on how legitimate the government is operating all of their expenses. Creating employment through outsourcing of contractors and direct employment for development in the national infrastructure can create growth, yes. However, lower taxes for both consumers and businesses can also negate the fear of having too little.

      The problem that we're facing right now all has to do with fear and how everyone is operating under tight pockets. Essentially, there are four variables that justify the factors of high or low taxes:

      1) The competence that the government has in its regulatory procedures and how well it manages the capital from taxpayer dollars to produce economic growth.
      2) The employment available for the unemployed.
      3) The marginal cash versus debt that an average consumer holds.
      4) The amount of confidence or fear in the average consumer or investor to purchase products/services or do direct investments in derivatives, securities, and the overall general exchange markets.

      It boils down to confidence and competence, I'd say. What do you think, my friend?





      The only predicament we run into is you're ruining the municipal structure for not just law enforcement and safety, but also education and infrastructure. The education sector is derived from tax levies produced by property taxes. Usually, they range only around two to three digits on an annual basis depending on where you live. You'll be noticing a lot of rises in tax levies since the federal government is currently tight.

      If the municipal levies were removed and you just went straight to sales taxes, then you'd be paying enormous prices to make up for that loss in standard stores, whether they're retail or or restaurant. I don't know what the exact ratios would be, but instead of going out to Wal-Mart to buy groceries for $100, what if you had to pay up to 50% to make up for that lost tax margin? And with the current markets in their state of spiral, consumers don't have the exact purchasing power they did prior to this catastrophe.

      What are your thoughts?
      MY thoughts: The State government should be the one doing ALL revenue collection. I mean every form of taxation needs to be done by the state government. All constitutionally grounded actions made by the federal government should be done by funds given to the federal government by the states directly, but not a direct tax on the people.

      Also, the counties are political subdivisions of the States, so all of their money needs to come from the State, but the States are not political subdivisions of the Federal Government; they are sovereign. So basically, a State sales tax would be good enough to fund the functional needs of the State, and some of the proceeds should be set aside, and given to the Federal Government so that it can carry out its constitutionally delegated powers. Anything beyond this is unnecessary government waste.
      "La bellezza del paessa di Galilei!"

    20. #70
      The Supreme Echelon Absolute's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2006
      Gender
      Location
      Western Arizona, USA
      Posts
      275
      Likes
      0
      If you could provide mathematical research behind this proposition, would you mind posting it or PMing me? It could work, but I'd have to see the numbers involved. =D
      -Absolute Wisdom

      "Life is much like a barren road. You can choose to leave it and end up in a deserted wasteland, or you can follow the road to see what is beyond the horizon."

    21. #71
      Member Hercuflea's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      Gender
      Posts
      868
      Likes
      7
      DJ Entries
      2
      Well, there aren't really any numbers on it, because the days of the States giving the Federal Government ALL of its money are long gone, since before the civil war i believe. And i dont think the States have ever given the counties all of their money, either, but that is just the method i would use if i had my way.

      And one more thing, the only trade restriction/tax i think the Fed should be able to do is tariffs. Furthermore, these tariffs/trade restrictions should only be put on nations that we have declared war on and are currently fighting, such as, in the past, the British Empire, or Nazi Germany.
      "La bellezza del paessa di Galilei!"

    22. #72
      Consciousness in the Void Universal Mind's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 2004
      Gender
      Location
      The Eternal Paradox
      Posts
      12,853
      Likes
      1031
      Quote Originally Posted by Absolute View Post
      Hm... That could actually work, but... then that leaves in the problem of how limited is the voucher? What's the cap on how much the voucher covers?
      Probably enough to go to the least expensive schools. It wouldn't be fair to give away more money to each student than what others are paying for themselves. Legislators could vote on what's fair. That part isn't a problem.
      Quote Originally Posted by really View Post
      God cannot destroy himself because He is Omnipotent.


    23. #73
      Member Indecent Exposure's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2006
      Location
      Stoke, England
      Posts
      1,226
      Likes
      14
      Quote Originally Posted by Hercuflea View Post
      And the government has no business in healthcare.
      No of course not; we should just let poor people die.
      "...You want to reclaim your mind and get it out of the hands of the cultural engineers who want to turn you into a half-baked moron consuming all this trash that's being manufactured out of the bones of a dying world..." - Terence McKenna

      Previously known as imran_p

    24. #74
      Consciousness in the Void Universal Mind's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 2004
      Gender
      Location
      The Eternal Paradox
      Posts
      12,853
      Likes
      1031
      Quote Originally Posted by imran_p View Post
      No of course not; we should just let poor people die.
      The warped system that results from mass handouts results in a lot more people dying. If the government would interfere less economically instead of more, the economy would be so much better that most people could afford health insurance and the ones who can't could be taken care of by volunteer organizations. Capitalism benefits a nation as a whole. Socialism decays it.
      Quote Originally Posted by really View Post
      God cannot destroy himself because He is Omnipotent.


    25. #75
      Member
      Join Date
      Jun 2009
      Location
      Dutchland , one day i'll get out of there....
      Posts
      16
      Likes
      0
      Mixed economy , simple for me to vote for that....

      I will tell you my personal reason for it : I think the whole capitalistic system is gone crazy and out of controll on a wordwide scale . Everyone is making everyone CRAZY It reminds me somewhat of a pop-concert or other large crowd where everybody wants to get to the front-row , people get squashed in the process....

      We all need to take a step back and look for what is really important human-wise. The whole BIG problem is that if a country would decide that they would take on this more humane "route" they would be surpassed by others that don't take the human factor that seriously production and other-wise , it's a global problem.

      It seems we are all fighting each other , and that brings both the best in a person and the world , and the worst .......we need to get smarter. Share what is for the benefit of all.

      The warped system that results from mass handouts results in a lot more people dying. If the government would interfere less economically instead of more, the economy would be so much better that most people could afford health insurance and the ones who can't could be taken care of by volunteer organizations. Capitalism benefits a nation as a whole. Socialism decays it.
      > UM : How on earth can you write this down so "easily" ? What if we would change something small in youre own personal life and YOU would have to rely on "volunteer organisations". For sure , there will always be a have and have-not's society , that's only natural in the universe it seems . But do you want it to be that harsh ?

      On a personal note : I've read such a lot of posts from you these past months and they are always interesting , just like the other great posters that are always here frequently on DV. You dissappoint me now I wish i could have a great long argument with you now about this but my typing-skills are simply not that quick as yours ( this all took me probably a half hour with 1 1/2 finger)
      I might try though with short sentences ....please review your ideas for the benefit of all

    Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •