How we're getting smoked on taxes!

I've about had it with taxes...how about everyone else?

I'm an equal opportunity tax hater, too. I see Punitive taxes as equally bad to Social Justice taxes, Consumption Taxes, or Sin Taxes. Many different names...many different theories. The same general concept with all manner of pretty gift wrapping to make us feel better about being screwed for our last dollar.

Factoid: Most (Not all) revenue collection at State and Federal level is held and disbursed on a General Fund basis and no specific "account" for money in/money out to specific purposes exists ..or ever will.

There is absolutely something for everyone to literally feel good about being taxed for, and so, every look at taxing becomes an exercise in relativism. If you support any form of it, beyond the bare min. required by the Constitution? (the duties and responsibilities to be paid for are outlined, clearly..and didn't take thousands of pages to do it) Well, then everything after that becomes shades of grey and/or justified within the eyes of the one judging it.

I start this off with the above to frame just HOW OUT OF CONTROL the next story REALLY IS.

New York City Seeks Millions From FedEx for Cigarette Smuggling

This is the kind of story one glances across and moves on from, normally. Just another tax issue...but stop and really consider this one. Consider it carefully. THIS is what tyranny looks like. We've debated for years...what does a police state look like? THIS is what CAUSES the measures to define a Police State.....by economic motivation, to start out.

New York City filed a RICO lawsuit against Federal Express, accusing it of defying the state attorney general by shipping "several tons" of contraband, untaxed cigarettes ordered via Internet or regular mail from the Shinnecock Smoke Shop.

Don't be distracted by the fact Cigarettes happen to form the nature of the tax being pursued with extreme legal force. It's the force being used that is beyond all reason. RICO (or Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) is an Act passed by Nixon in 1970 to address Organized Crime where "Family Bosses" could order the operations for a vast criminal enterprise, yet never technically commit a crime themselves and during day to day life. It's been absurdly warped over the years to be a SLEDGEHAMMER (with penalties carrying up to Life in Prison on the criminal side and extraordinary punitive ability on the civil side) for a wide range of things.

This isn't about smoking, again. RICO is being sought here for TAX MONEY.

FedEx's sneakery deprived New York City of $15 in tax for each carton of cigarettes it delivered in the Big Apple, the city says. It seeks treble damages, under RICO, for the $15 tax it should have received for each carton FedEx delivered there.

Search: Courthouse News

One rampaging city's definition of "Sneakery" is my definition of NOT acting as Government Tax agents in place of authorized authority. To give some context and comparison for how this has little or nothing whatsoever to do with the actual cost to produce, market and sell the product but is entirely about the taxes related to it for stakes, I've dug up a couple listings of just HOW taxed this product has become for being a true cash cow of modern Government.

According to this by state look at prices, New York came out at over $12.00 PER PACK. By contrast, the lowest one in this example was $4.84 in West Virginia. There isn't some magic line of overhead cost to cross between Wheeling, WV and New York City. (beyond the OTHER forms of taxation to terminal extremes already imposed in New York).

To look at this from a larger perspective of State vs. State and before New York City's own taxing is brought into it?



As that map shows, STATE level taxing and without including Federal or local taxes range from the bottom $0.17 per pack here in Missouri to a crushing $4.37 per pack in New York State.

Lest anyone start to lose perspective and again fall into the emotional " but but but it's SMOKING!!" trap we're expected and carefully guided into? Take a look at a different map, also put together by the Tax Foundation (attribution is within the graphics)



The differences between states were a bit more dramatic when I owned my own truck, but that's pretty dramatic right there if one stops to consider it. The TAXES ALONE on a gallon for just STATE level taxes applied make the majority % of what I paid for a gallon of diesel the day before 9/11 happened. (I paid $0.89 a gallon in Resaca, Georgia on 9/10/01 ... It wasn't THAT long ago). Now Government has a fair share of that taken by tax alone ...in what we're expected to understand, largely by being unaware of *HOW* different states are to illustrate the points.

- - - - -

So, to wrap up a ranging look at how we're basically screwed in ways to make us smile about excessive taxing, should it NOW be permissible to chase the last dollar to the point of RICO cases against private shippers for NOT opening your private packages to act as State or Federal tax agents? Is THAT the job we want private business to assume, as extension of State authority?

...or should states get off their greedy butts and go knock on the doors of each and every resident THEY consider to be criminal tax evaders, rather than twist a company like Fedex into becoming Super-Snoops under threat of RICO?

After all...This example above is a Smoke Shop for how obvious it 'might' be for what is being shipped ...anyone believe it will have to be that blatant if this is forced and precedent set?

Start using Bitcoins.

Morning and Happy New Year,

Taxation is violence...pure and simple.
It must be destroyed if humanity is ever to be free.



-Peace-

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Doesn't each individual State have the right to set their own individual rates based upon what the States inhabitants agree to either by vote or consent? Seems reasonable to assume that the cost of infrastructure upkeep for example may be higher in NY NY than say in Newport News VA. Considering the vastly greater wear and tear amount of road, rail and foot traffic differences between the two.

I agree though, we are being taxed more and more on just about everything these days.

It will only get worse before it gets better. These are the things that happen when states get starved for revenue.

Remember, it's not your money; it's only their untaxed revenue.

However, my husband grasped your point right away. This is a very dangerous lawsuit. Shippers go out of their way to avoid knowing what they're shipping. It's NUNYA to them, and that lack of knowledge is supposed to be a legal protection for them. This lawsuit is basically seeking to criminalize them for not knowing what their customers are shipping and robs them of that protection.

Sin taxes are another pet peeve of mine. They're designed to punish people into stopping an action that the state deems irresponsible or wrong; however, that money from the sin tax never goes into a closed loop system if you really pay attention. So, when, if, the sin tax does its job and the revenue from it starts to flag, the state is left holding the bag and needing money. And once a state gets used to having money, we all know that cutting spending is never the answer.

So in actuality, the "sin tax" is really just an excuse for voters to use to vote for more taxes and feel self-righteous about it.

And lastly, this story is why you will never, ever see tobacco itself outlawed. It might be illegal for you to actually use it everywhere, but you will still be able to buy it. And this story is why.

dainoyfb
Start using Bitcoins.

Yeah.. right... when bitcoins spend like money accepted around the globe, in real world stores ..and can be represented by something outside 1's and 0's in the fantasy ether of cyberspace? I'll consider even looking at it. Until then, they put the F in Fake for a baseless currency concept..with a different twist.

The thread is totaly unrelated to Bitcoin tho, anyway. Thanks for stopping by.

This ties in with the NSA opening computers being shipped and inserting malware on them.
All part of the same move to make business quasi-governmental enforcers under "public-private partnerships".
Part of the same deal where certain interests get information from Law enforcement before others do as a "professional favor".
This is extortion and racketeering by the government.
They are bringing suit against the wrong party.

reply to post by ketsuko

However, my husband grasped your point right away. This is a very dangerous lawsuit. Shippers go out of their way to avoid knowing what they're shipping. It's NUNYA to them, and that lack of knowledge is supposed to be a legal protection for them. This lawsuit is basically seeking to criminalize them for not knowing what their customers are shipping and robs them of that protection.

You hit my greatest fear in this, dead on. IF private business can be made to account for what is inside sealed packages like this, under these circumstances? There is an enormous problem.

The only way business can then reasonably protect themselves from that liability is to invade the privacy of everyone using them. Not because they want to, or by any means I'm sure, would choose to put out the money and manpower for what full legal compliance could come to cover by such a theory ...but look at the flip side they face for failing to.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Call it what it is. It's not public-private. It's fascism.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Either that or they start refusing to ship from certain places entirely.

reply to post by ketsuko


That's possible...but someone has to move packages, so the underlying issue will remain for whoever does fill the role.

There is another side to this worth mentioning as I've thought about it. It probably forms a big piece for context, given the diverse nature of ATS for people not having local views of all issues...

In the mid 1990's when I first started trucking, I came onto the road just in time for what damn near became a second Indian War in how it was developing for awhile there. To those in Western New York, I imagine no more explanation is needed...

For those not around then or totally unaware of what was really a regional story as I recall it then...Efforts to force taxation for, among other things, cigarettes, had the local tribes ready to cut access to the Thruway from the PA line to Buffalo and threats of dropping the big 'power towers' crossing tribal land in today's definition of domestic terrorism were heard. One driving that thruway section at the time it was going on could see the Tribal folks with huge bonfires off to the sides of the roadway at night to remain highly visible in making their point. They won, too...as I recall.

They don't dare actually go pound every single door that bought a carton of cigarettes to cost tax money from. Voters smoke too.....So attack the company moving the legal product from one private customer to the other.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


In the 'fiat' economy there is absolutely no reason to tax the people, as they can and do simply print what they want and or need.

Simply put, they only tax the people to impose economic hardship, thus enforcing another layer of control.....

True story........sad as it is.

reply to post by oblvion


Don't forget that printing fiat money is another form of tax as it makes what we have left worth that much less thus increasing our hardship that much more. It's a silent tax the most people don't even comprehend.

ketsuko
reply to post by oblvion

 

Don't forget that printing fiat money is another form of tax as it makes what we have left worth that much less thus increasing our hardship that much more. It's a silent tax the most people don't even comprehend.

that is the scariest part....

99 percent of folks don't even realize that every day their money in their pockets is being taxed whether they spend it or save it or invest etc....

It is quite simple, elementary economics really, and most cannot even understand that.

It hurts my soul that soo many are sooo blind to the reality that is smacking them in the face every single day.

How can I punch you in the face and call it wind and you believe me? I am not able to fathom it, despite much effort on my part.

People are stupid.......it really is that simple unfortunately.

reply to post by oblvion


It's easy. They point to the way everything gets more expensive and finger corporate greed. People are only too willing to believe them.

Yes, corporations want to make money. It's what businesses do, but does no one remember how inflation works or where it comes from? That's a factor, too.

ketsuko
reply to post by oblvion

 

It's easy. They point to the way everything gets more expensive and finger corporate greed. People are only too willing to believe them.

Yes, corporations want to make money. It's what businesses do, but does no one remember how inflation works or where it comes from? That's a factor, too.

The problem and the solution are both father easy from my perspective.

We have a 'paracitic' economy, where business always takes as much as possible at all times, while always giving back as little as possible at all times in return for their 'efforts,'.

We need a 'symbiotic' business model, where the returns of the worker ' you know those that are actually 'producing'' are at least equal to the returns of the company. In short, if Walmart makes 400,000,000 net this year, their workers ' those that actually made all that money possible should receive at least half the profits through either hourly wages, or more likely a large year end bonus ' as they would not know what the total profits were until the end of the business year's.
This will never happen though, as it would help all, and those :

reply to post by oblvion

Continued from above as this tablet blows.......,

As those in power only care about themselves and no one else, even though as a stipulation of our employment we are expected to think of 'their' company and 'its' interests before our own......---

Really pathetic actually when you think about it.

reply to post by oblvion


Ok, except that Walmart's employees aren't actually producing anything, either. That goes to the ones in China who made all the stuff.

Basically, we are almost exclusively a service economy these days where the majority of workers do basic services. And how much is that worth ... really? Do they deserve a major share of things for ringing things up at a cash register when almost anyone else in the world can do that, too?

Or, my husband does work at a company that manufactures a product in this country. He doesn't actually do many of the day-to-day producing tasks, but he understands them and could do them if needed. His job is to monitor testing data on the products and to notice trends and make sure everything is falling within specs and within regulatory guidelines and figure out why if it's not. Most of the workers who do the productive tasks cannot do his job although he could do any of theirs. This is why he is paid more than they are even though it appears that he does less "productive" work.

And if the company had to replace my husband or one of the floor workers, they would have a much harder time replacing my husband than they would the floor workers. This also is why he commands more - there are far fewer people who can do what he does so they command a higher salary to attract.

reply to post by ketsuko


Your husband fulfills a needed role in the company, and is a 'worker' helping to bring the 'companies' products to market, thus making the 'company' much profit, though it did nothing, your husband did something.

So why should your husband only profit $15 an hour while the worthless entity 'the company' did nothing but profited $100 an hour?

Companies do not even 'exist'.

This the same as saying you owe my car money. You can't owe my car money it isn't alive, it is simply an object, an abstract notion of 'being'.

People are real, they posess and use resources, my car should not not have more right to the majority of your husbands labors than he does.

My car can't even use them, and doesn't even need them, it can't starve to death, it was never even alive, your husband can, as he is alive.

If your husband drives my car to make money, he should get at least a equal share, including of course the mechanic that keeps it going etc.....

My car, an inanimate object should not get to keep most of the resources earned by using it, it took a living being to use, that does need resources, that living being deserves an equivalent share.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Great story/point.

I think we are screwed on taxes because we get taxed on what we earn, then we get taxed when we spend it.

My wife and I watched the Sopranos a couple years ago from start to finish over the course of about 2-3 weeks. I had just spent a few days delving into Smedley Butler, and immediately began to see how government and mafia are not all that different.