It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
1. Do not use Medicare.
2. Do not use Social Security
3. Do not become a member of the US military, who are paid with tax dollars.
4. Do not ask the National Guard to help you after a disaster.
5. Do not call 911 when you get hurt.
6. Do not call the police to stop intruders in your home.
7. Do not summon the fire department to save your burning home.
8. Do not drive on any paved road, highway, and interstate or drive on any bridge.
9. Do not use public restrooms.
10. Do not send your kids to public schools.
Originally posted by outandopen
I think the question was more geared towards federal income taxes. Quite a few of the "entitlements" you listed were state and property taxes. A lot of people want the Fed dimantled other than for military needs and those would be paid through state coffers. Personally I don't think there is an OUT, So that would be like me seeing being a property tax payer...I think only homeowners kids should go to public school use the police and fire etc. Since the majority of state and city services are paid for by homeowners. But that doesn't work now does it. So my point is there is no CURE.
Originally posted by Resonant
The purpose of taxes is reasonable and logical, however, I think it's obviously out of control. There are a lot of unnecessary taxes instituted to circumvent raising the sort of taxes that are on people's radar (e.g. property taxes, income taxes, etc.). The problem is that you cannot raise taxes on a populous that is experiencing an economic climate, such as this, that is collapsing with every passing second. Or, well, you can, but it's political suicide (and obviously if you're a career politician, you're going to want to do whatever it takes to keep your job, even at the cost of others). Politicians fail to think logically about the current tax code reform that needs to take place. Income tax for instance doesn't "need" to exist, but it's the easiest way to tax everyone. The problem with taxing those at different levels is that it leads to a lot of class tension and only encourages to rifts and walls. Taxes on lower income families should rise to meet those in middle and upper class, or all brackets should meet somewhere in the middle. The only exception I see is for those living below poverty, but the difference really shouldn't be vast. People operate on incentives. If lower income brackets are paying lower taxes there are more incentives to not work as hard and to not earn as much, and that goes further too, digging deeper into what sort of aspirations you're essentially "allowing" people to have. "Would I rather go to school for eight or nine years to become a psychiatrist and be taxes 30%+ on my income? Or should I go to school for four to six years and be left with about the same?" This is just one example, but wouldn't you want to push your citizens towards education?
Originally posted by SirClem
reply to post by Flatfish
The ASSETS that the federal government controls, but WE own, empowers the very few that are in control of those revenues. It is our assets that these criminals are using as collateral to fund their wars, while they ask us to make the cash flow work.
The individual states have their own assets and their own CAFR. Comprehensive Annual Finance Report. The REAL balance sheet. Through YOUR taxes, the government(s) are empowered to purchase or condemn private property, and reap the revenues. That is called "income producing assets", money that flows into the federal coffers.
The practice of condemnation was transplanted into the American colonies with the common law. In the early years, unimproved land could be taken without compensation; this practice was accepted because land was so abundant that it could be cheaply replaced. When it came time to draft the United States Constitution, differing views on eminent domain were voiced. Thomas Jefferson favored eliminating all remnants of feudalism, and pushed for allodial ownership.[2] James Madison, who wrote the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, had a more moderate view, and struck a compromise that sought to at least protect property rights somewhat by explicitly mandating compensation and using the term "public use" rather than "public purpose", "public interest", or "public benefit".[3]
On June 23, 2006, the first anniversary of the Kelo decision (see above), President George W. Bush issued Executive Order 13406 which stated in Section I that the federal government must limit its use of taking private property for "public use" with "just compensation", which is also stated in the constitution, for the "purpose of benefiting the general public." The order limits this use by stating that it may not be used "for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken".[15] However, eminent domain is more often exercised by local and state governments, albeit often with funds obtained from the federal government.
Originally posted by Dasher
reply to post by Dasher
Please read my post very carefully. I choose my words very specifically and the ideas I am trying to convey are very precise. Nevertheless, for those vulgar minds which cannot follow healthy rhetoric:
Local taxes should trickle up to national needs. National taxes are a perversion of monetary flow, as though your blood is pumped by your feet and hands instead of your heart.
1. Do not use Medicare.
2. Do not use Social Security
3. Do not become a member of the US military, who are paid with tax dollars.
4. Do not ask the National Guard to help you after a disaster.
5. Do not call 911 when you get hurt.
6. Do not call the police to stop intruders in your home.
7. Do not summon the fire department to save your burning home.
8. Do not drive on any paved road, highway, and interstate or drive on any bridge.
9. Do not use public restrooms.
10. Do not send your kids to public schools.
Originally posted by Dasher
reply to post by patternfinder
Your post is moot as you clearly did not understand what I was communicating.
You are only serving to obfuscate the ideas I am sharing. Please be more careful in the future.
Re-read my posts carefully and you will see that the resolution I offer would necessarily cut out and dry up the Federal Reserve.
only that to some degree, they are necessary and that in some little way, each and every one of us should feel good about paying our fair share.