Taxes are theft

[Mavorpen]

The public sector is parallel to the private one.

No. No. No. No. No. No. The government isn't a business.

[Death Metal]

But taxes are already rebated to the payer. You're just making things more complicated. Again.

[Oppressorion]

So what do you guys think about this?

How does this sound?

Voluntaryism kind of sounds right somehow.

Compulsive taxation should be reduced to the bare minimum.Other than that,there should be a free (but minimally regulated) market where you can choose between the private or the public sector.

So,to wrap it all up.Here's a concept which allows the citizens to choose how big or small their Govt is,while at the same time guaranteeing basic benefits.

Tax Phase 1
A very low tax rate is mandatory for everyone.Should be really low.Let's call this a minimum mandatory tax (MMT).This ensures the very bare minimum of public benefits (such as public roads).

Tax Phase 2
A minimum level of livelihood (MLL) will be set in place.This sets a standard for access to basic food,water,sanitation,shelter,healthcare,education,physical security,social security - so on and so forth.It reflects the citizens' basic necessities.It is universal,meaning that it's the same for everybody.The MLL is something that the government guarantees no matter what.

Now you have 3 options:

Route A: Choose not to use the public sector at all to meet MLL requirements = Pay no taxes at all. (except for the MMT)

If you choose to go this way,you will first have to prove that you can afford to pay for your privately-sourced MLL. Then you will have to prove that you are actually meeting MLL requirements.This would be achieved by having to show the Government contracts with private companies that guarantee your MLL (such as the minimum set level of health insurance,social security,and so on).

Overview: You will not receive any public benefits at all other than what is covered by the MMT.

Route B: Choose to use both the public sector and the private sector to meet MLL requirements = Pay taxes proportional to the public benefits you receive.(+MMT)

You choose what percent of your income/assets' value/so and so forth/ you want to pay to the public sector as tax.You receive public benefits proportional to what you pay,and you choose the exact benefits (and how much of them) you want to receive (for example you can choose public education while relying on the private sector for your healthcare).If the percentage you choose to pay as tax isn't sufficient and/or your choice doesn't fulfill MLL requirements,then you will first have to prove that you can afford to pay for the rest of the benefits that are required to meet the MLL that you want to receive from the private sector.Then you will have to prove that you are actually meeting MLL requirements.This would be achieved by having to show the Government contracts with private companies that guarantee the rest of your MLL requirements (such as the minimum set level of health insurance,social security,and so on) are met.

Overview: You will choose what you want to receive from the public sector and what you want from the private sector.Your public benefits are proportional to how much you pay.

Route C: Choose to use the public sector only to meet MLL requirements = Pay taxes proportional to the public benefits you receive. (+MMT)

You choose what percent of your income/assets' value/so and so forth/ you want to pay to the public sector as tax.You receive public benefits proportional to what you pay,and you choose the exact benefits (and how much of them) you want to receive.If the percentage you choose to pay as tax is sufficient AND your choice fulfills MLL requirements,then there is nothing else to prove.From this point you can source anything above the MLL either from the public or the private sector,it's up to you.

Overview: Your MLL will be guaranteed by the taxes you pay.Your benefits are still proportional to how much you pay,meaning that the rest of your taxes that aren't taken up by the cost of the MLL are publicly-sourced extras on top of the MLL (such as a more comprehensive public healthcare insurance,a larger pension for you public social security,so on and so forth) which are also chosen by you.

---

The whole system and all private companies whose products/services ensure the citizens' MLL are carefully monitored and controlled by the Government.Although their contracts can be long-term,these companies are obliged to pay the cost of their clients' publicly-sourced MLL equivalent to the Government periodically - for example - each year.At the end of each year,this is rebated back to the companies.This ensures that in the event in which such a company would go bankrupt or for whatever other reason would be unable/unwilling/whatever to ensure its clients' MLL,then its' contracts will be terminated,publicly provided MLL will replace its' services for the year,and then when the year ended the citizen would have the option of either choosing another private provider or switching over to publicly sourced benefits.

For those that can't afford even the publicly sourced MLL,the Government will take a 3 step approach:

1.Providing career conciliation/reorientation,else
2.Employment in public institutions with payment in public benefits over money so as to reach MLL (note this is actually self-sustainable),else
3.Accepting whatever the citizen can afford and funding the difference to what is needed to achieve the MLL.

Repeat as needed.

Doesn't sound too bad now does it? Not exactly the soulless free-for-all capitalist arena that you'd expect from a concept which involves such a degree of public/private market freedom and tax choice.

Thing is, most users of public healthcare and welfare do so because, well, they can't afford the alternatives. If wealthier taxpayers opt-out (and they will), you're taking social funding away from those who need it most. That's how 'socialism' (Gasp! He said the word!) works - those who have the most give to those who would die otherwise. 'Compassion', I think, is the word to describe it.

[Salandriagado]

You don't think going to college helps you prepare for 'real jobs' or helps create an educated workforce/citizen-body?

Maybe there was a time when it once did, but nowadays I think it only hurts society that so many people are going to college and are graduating with what is the equivalent of tissue paper. That's a topic for another thread though.

You know what going to university gets you? It gets you the ability to understand that question that I asked yesterday, that you still haven't answered.

[Ostroeuropa]

Maybe there was a time when it once did, but nowadays I think it only hurts society that so many people are going to college and are graduating with what is the equivalent of tissue paper. That's a topic for another thread though.

You know what going to university gets you? It gets you the ability to understand that question that I asked yesterday, that you still haven't answered.

Question?

[Farnhamia]

You know what going to university gets you? It gets you the ability to understand that question that I asked yesterday, that you still haven't answered.

Question?

Yes, you in the back there.

[Salandriagado]

So you don't have any evidence.

Got it.

"Its statements and propositions are not derived from experience. They are, like those of logic and mathematics, a priori. They are not subject to verification or falsification on the ground of experience and facts."

welcome to the mises institute/sibland :-)

HINT: Mathematics doesn't work like that. Proofs within mathematics hold purely within their own axiomatic systems. Literally nothing is necessarily a priori true except for statements like "given axioms A, B and C, X, Y and Z are true.

[Salandriagado]

You know what going to university gets you? It gets you the ability to understand that question that I asked yesterday, that you still haven't answered.

Question?

Back where he was claiming to be "sharing his economic knowledge". The question:

Y = C(Y - T) + I(r*) + G +NX(e).


What is it and what does it mean?

It's a fairly simple (1st year UG) quantitative economics concept vaguely related to the claims that he was making at the time.

[Len Hyet]

Question?

Back where he was claiming to be "sharing his economic knowledge". The question:

Y = C(Y - T) + I(r*) + G +NX(e).


What is it and what does it mean?

It's a fairly simple (1st year UG) quantitative economics concept vaguely related to the claims that he was making at the time.

Interesting.

Total gibberish to me considering I'm in the 10th grade, but interesting none the less.

[Ostroeuropa]

Question?

Back where he was claiming to be "sharing his economic knowledge". The question:

Y = C(Y - T) + I(r*) + G +NX(e).


What is it and what does it mean?

It's a fairly simple (1st year UG) quantitative economics concept vaguely related to the claims that he was making at the time.

Won't spoil it then

[The Emerald Dawn]

Back where he was claiming to be "sharing his economic knowledge". The question:




It's a fairly simple (1st year UG) quantitative economics concept vaguely related to the claims that he was making at the time.

Interesting.

Total gibberish to me considering I'm in the 10th grade, but interesting none the less.

Trust me, hit the right level of education with regards to economic mathematics, and it's freaking gorgeous.

[Souseiseki]

Interesting.

Total gibberish to me considering I'm in the 10th grade, but interesting none the less.

Trust me, hit the right level of education with regards to economic mathematics, and it's freaking gorgeous.

i feel so left out

and so does yandere, probably

[Isolated China]

This is the last thing I will respond to.

They're a few things that will stop a private police from becoming a rowdy gang of bandits. Bandits have plagued anarchists since the dawn of time, and, as such, are their mortal enemies.

The army or the local militia can step up to the task of carrying out justice on corrupt private citizens.

Local Governments could be allowed to establish a local police force

People can, say, move into town and vote overwhelmingly for the establishment of a public police force funded by a sort of income tax. Though, I'm against income taxes, it would be alright in my opinion if small community had a majority that wouldn't mind income taxes in exchanged for a public police force.

It works better, because it's a local law, confined maybe to a town or small municipality where the benefits of such an institution would be more obvious. People who don't like the law could easily move out into another county or a state.

It's a lot different than forcing an entire country into an income tax where people pay for services that benefit people thousands of miles away from that, and it's more sensible too.

So you do admit taxes are beneficial and you DO benefit from the police?

[Condunum]

This is the last thing I will respond to.

They're a few things that will stop a private police from becoming a rowdy gang of bandits. Bandits have plagued anarchists since the dawn of time, and, as such, are their mortal enemies.

The army or the local militia can step up to the task of carrying out justice on corrupt private citizens.

Local Governments could be allowed to establish a local police force

People can, say, move into town and vote overwhelmingly for the establishment of a public police force funded by a sort of income tax. Though, I'm against income taxes, it would be alright in my opinion if small community had a majority that wouldn't mind income taxes in exchanged for a public police force.

It works better, because it's a local law, confined maybe to a town or small municipality where the benefits of such an institution would be more obvious. People who don't like the law could easily move out into another county or a state.

It's a lot different than forcing an entire country into an income tax where people pay for services that benefit people thousands of miles away from that, and it's more sensible too.

So you do admit taxes are beneficial and you DO benefit from the police?

He doesn't want to abolish taxes.

[Chinese Regions]

So you do admit taxes are beneficial and you DO benefit from the police?

He doesn't want to abolish taxes.

Only income

[Isolated China]

So you do admit taxes are beneficial and you DO benefit from the police?

He doesn't want to abolish taxes.

He still admitted to not paying taxes, since they don't 'benefit' him in any way.

He doesn't want to abolish taxes.

Only income

Income taxes, you mean? Or, I should say the taxes he refuses to pay since he's a hypocrite.

[Len Hyet]

Interesting.

Total gibberish to me considering I'm in the 10th grade, but interesting none the less.

Trust me, hit the right level of education with regards to economic mathematics, and it's freaking gorgeous.

Explain? Pwease?

Trust me, hit the right level of education with regards to economic mathematics, and it's freaking gorgeous.

i feel so left out

and so does yandere, probably

[Chestaan]

Back where he was claiming to be "sharing his economic knowledge". The question:




It's a fairly simple (1st year UG) quantitative economics concept vaguely related to the claims that he was making at the time.

Interesting.

Total gibberish to me considering I'm in the 10th grade, but interesting none the less.

It's just an equation that states that income (Y) is equal to Consumption (C), plus Investment (I), plus Government Spending (G) plus net exports (NX). Net exports being exports minus imports.

Consumption is equal to income minus taxes (Y-T), Investment depends on the interest rate (r*) and net exports depends on the exchange rate (e).

[Len Hyet]

Interesting.

Total gibberish to me considering I'm in the 10th grade, but interesting none the less.

It's just an equation that states that income (Y) is equal to Consumption (C), plus Investment (I), plus Government Spending (G) plus net exports (NX). Net exports being exports minus imports.

Consumption is equal to income minus taxes (Y-T), Investment depends on the interest rate (r*) and net exports depends on the exchange rate (e).

Huh. Wow. That does make sense.

[The Emerald Dawn]

It's just an equation that states that income (Y) is equal to Consumption (C), plus Investment (I), plus Government Spending (G) plus net exports (NX). Net exports being exports minus imports.

Consumption is equal to income minus taxes (Y-T), Investment depends on the interest rate (r*) and net exports depends on the exchange rate (e).

Huh. Wow. That does make sense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mundell%E2%80%93Fleming_model

Also look up the unholy trinity of Macroeconomics. Since we're giving away the secret in the thread.

[Chestaan]

Huh. Wow. That does make sense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mundell%E2%80%93Fleming_model

Also look up the unholy trinity of Macroeconomics. Since we're giving away the secret in the thread.

That's a bit more complicated though. I don't mean learning it off, but actually understanding why it is true.

[The Emerald Dawn]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mundell%E2%80%93Fleming_model

Also look up the unholy trinity of Macroeconomics. Since we're giving away the secret in the thread.

That's a bit more complicated though. I don't mean learning it off, but actually understanding why it is true.

Well yes, but you popped Pandora's Crate by giving away Salandriagado's question's answer. I'm just saying why it makes me misty eyed to see stuff like that in practice instead of in classrooms.

[Len Hyet]

That's a bit more complicated though. I don't mean learning it off, but actually understanding why it is true.

Well yes, but you popped Pandora's Crate by giving away Salandriagado's question's answer. I'm just saying why it makes me misty eyed to see stuff like that in practice instead of in classrooms.

Impressive.

I'm going to go take an Economics class now.

[Salandriagado]

Well yes, but you popped Pandora's Crate by giving away Salandriagado's question's answer. I'm just saying why it makes me misty eyed to see stuff like that in practice instead of in classrooms.

Impressive.

I'm going to go take an Economics class now.

Yay.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Well yes, but you popped Pandora's Crate by giving away Salandriagado's question's answer. I'm just saying why it makes me misty eyed to see stuff like that in practice instead of in classrooms.

Impressive.

I'm going to go take an Economics class now.

I give to you the five of high.