eltigrechico:

sugashane:

eltigrechico:

sugashane:

eltigrechico:

sugashane:

eltigrechico:

how complicit are we in the U.S. Government’s various crimes if we pay income taxes?

How complicit is someone who gets robbed at gun point and then their money is used to buy explosives. 

I guess it depends on the person’s opinion of taxation. Like, if you like taxation, you’re complicit. If you pay taxes out of fear of violence against you, you’re just a victim in a long chain of victims. 

Well it’s not the same as getting robbed by a mugger on the street. This is more like a mugger that comes around once a month, and the less money you have on you the less he takes, etc etc. by which I mean,

There are ways to avoid taxation because you know its coming. And, unlike the mugger, you know what these people are doing with the money, and it’s damned awful.

My point is just to what extent do we have a duty to avoid/resist/evade taxation? And to what extent does our failure/refusal to do so make us complicit in U.S. Government crimes done partially with our money?

Just a question I think we need to think about

It’s easy to say that one can avoid taxation or the violence of taxation. But I’ll tell you as someone who had a very, very (VERY) expensive 8-year legal battle with the IRS. It’s not fun. And they have all the power in the world. Even if they are wrong and admit that they are wrong, the paperwork and red-tape process can literally kill someone who doesn’t have alternative means of support. 

Maybe one day I’ll share my little story of how the IRS wrongly thought I owed then a million dollars and took 5+ years to correct their own stupid accounting error. 

Yeah, never said it was fun.

Turns out ethics isn’t fun.

Wow, all the revolutionary anarchism stuff goes right out the window when you have to actually do something that might cause you trouble, huh?

Wait, what? What’s going out the window? You lost me there. 

You just dismissed the whole question of the moral necessity (or not) of tax resistance by saying “its easy to say you can avoid taxes, but boy howdy dealing with the IRS sure ain’t fun.”

as if that has anything to do with the moral question

im not saying we definitely have a moral duty to not pay taxes, but i don’t think the question should be so easily dismissed because the results aren’t “fun”.

I mean, you’re an anarchist for god sakes and you’ve just introduced the principle that a criteria for judging the necessity of a given strategy for combating the state should be whether or not its ‘fun’

Ahh. No, you misunderstood me to a degree. And I guess I misunderstood you. 

I think that you should avoid the highest amount of taxes you can without landing yourself in prison. That means that if you can get your tax rates down to 10% by donating and investing, you should.

I think it’s almost pointless to try and pay zero taxes. In fact, I take it back. It is pointless. 

Here’s why:

1. You not paying your taxes does not convince anyone else that they shouldn’t pay their taxes. Most people (idiots) think that taxes are either necessary or a ‘patriotic duty’ (whatever that bullshit means). It’s actually a very tiny percentage that think that we shouldn’t pay any taxes. This isn’t even an argument that you can convince these people of. It’s amazing but taxes is something that’s been beaten into the mentality of Americans and I think it will be the last domino standing if we ever start to strip away the state. 

2. The gov’t doesn’t actually need your tax money so it’s not like you’d be starving the beast. Most of the taxes that regular people pay, they don’t even have a say over. It’s siphoned from their paycheck before they even get paid. 

Besides this little scheme of theirs, individual income taxes only make up a third of gov’t spending. The rest they get from other means including just making it up out of thin air. 

3. Not paying taxes is the fastest way you can get yourself locked up for non-violent action. Once in prison, then what? You’re exactly where the government wants anti-government people, locked up and encased away from the rest of society. Where your ideas and theories and movement have zero impact on other taxpayers. 

The biggest problem is that the public doesn’t sympathize for tax evaders. Don’t know why, but they don’t. If they did, more people would evade them and take their chances in court, as would I. 

I think that you should pay as little taxes as you legally can but find better ways to fight taxes. Don’t circumvent them, help abolish them. Just like speeding laws are a product of the state but anarchists don’t go driving 100 mph in front of cops just to give them the finger.

You pick your battles wisely to maximize your ability to abolish as much of the state as possible. 

New Hampshire is a great example. Enough people hated paying taxes that they legally got together and abolished state income taxes. If their arguments are heard and their experiment is effective, they can spread their movement to other states. Hopefully, that movement will grow until there is no more income tax for anyone/thing. 

If all anarchists stopped paying taxes tomorrow, we’d all be locked away within a few years and the liberty/anarchy movement would be dead. And not a single taxpayer would be coming to our rescue. Go ask any of the well known anarchists, even the crazy ones and most of them will tell you that they pay taxes. 

Instead, we choose to stay free and fight the state in other ways and help fight for free speech, gun rights, habaes corpus, etc. 

I know it sounds unprincipled to you, but it’s not. As you get older you’ll realize that you can’t live life in absolutes. You will realize that there comes a point that you need to eventually compromise until you can win enough support for your ideas that you no longer have to compromise. 

The fundamental principle of freedom is the right to own property. The fundamental principle of taxation is the right to take someone else’s property. — Just let that brew in your brain for a while.

(via sugashane)

Government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advanced auction on stolen goods. —  H.L. Mencken
Full List of Obama Tax Hikes

President Barack Obama has signed into law twenty-one new or higher taxes on the American people. The full list is below:

1. A 156 percent increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco: On February 4, 2009, just sixteen days into his Administration, Obama signed into law a 156 percent increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco, a hike of 61 cents per pack. The median income of smokers is just over $36,000 per year.
2. Obamacare Individual Mandate Excise Tax (takes effect in Jan 2014): Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance – as defined by Obama-appointed HHS bureaucrats — must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following:

The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that six million American families will be liable for the tax, and as Americans for Tax Reform has pointed out, 100 percent of Americans filing a tax return (140 million filers) will be forced to submit paperwork to the IRS showing they had “qualifying” health insurance for every month of the tax year. Bill: PPACA; Page: 317-337)
3. Obamacare Employer Mandate Tax (takes effect Jan. 2014): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $2000 for all full-time employees. Applies to all employers with 50 or more employees. If any employee actually receives coverage through the exchange, the penalty on the employer for that employee rises to $3000. If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer). Bill: PPACA; Page: 345-346
Combined score of individual and employer mandate tax penalty: $65 billion/10 years
4. Obamacare Surtax on Investment Income (Tax hike of $123 billion/takes effect Jan. 2013): Creation of a new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income: Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 87-93

*Other unearned income includes (for surtax purposes) gross income from interest, annuities, royalties, net rents, and passive income in partnerships and Subchapter-S corporations. It does not include municipal bond interest or life insurance proceeds, since those do not add to gross income. It does not include active trade or business income, fair market value sales of ownership in pass-through entities, or distributions from retirement plans. The 3.8% surtax does not apply to non-resident aliens.
5. Obamacare Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans (Tax hike of $32 bil/takes effect Jan. 2018): Starting in 2018, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($10,200 single/$27,500 family). Higher threshold ($11,500 single/$29,450 family) for early retirees and high-risk professions. CPI +1 percentage point indexed. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,941-1,956
6. Obamacare Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax (Tax hike of $86.8 bil/takes effect Jan. 2013): Current law and changes:

Bill: PPACA, Reconciliation Act; Page: 2000-2003; 87-93
7. Obamacare Medicine Cabinet Tax (Tax hike of $5 bil/took effect Jan. 2011): Americans are no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957-1,959
8. Obamacare HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike (Tax hike of $1.4 bil/took effect Jan. 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,959
9. Obamacare Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka “Special Needs Kids Tax” (Tax hike of $13 bil/takes effect Jan. 2013): Imposes cap on FSAs of $2500 (currently unlimited). Indexed to inflation after 2013. There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,388-2,389
10. Obamacare Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers (Tax hike of $20 bil/takes effect Jan. 2013): Medical device manufacturers 409,000 people in 12,000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3 percent excise tax on total sales, even if the respective company does not earn a profit. Exempts items retailing for <$100. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,980-1,986
11. Obamacare “Haircut” for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI (Tax hike of $15.2 bil/takes effect Jan. 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI. Waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,994-1,995
12. Obamacare Tax on Indoor Tanning Services (Tax hike of $2.7 billion/took effect July 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons. Making matters worse: According to a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration report, the Obama IRS didn’t bother to issue compliance guidelines until three quarterly filing deadlines had passed: “By the time [IRS] notices were issued, tanning excise tax returns had been due for three quarters.” Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,397-2,399
13. Obamacare elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D (Tax hike of $4.5 bil/takes effect Jan. 2013) Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,994
14. Obamacare Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike (Tax hike of $0.4 bil/took effect Jan. 1 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,004
15. Obamacare Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (Min$/took effect immediately): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new “community health assessment needs,” “financial assistance,” and “billing and collection” rules set by Obama-appointed HHS bureaucrats. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,961-1,971
16. Obamacare Tax on Innovator Drug Companies (Tax hike of $22.2 bil/took effect Jan. 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,971-1,980
17. Obamacare Tax on Health Insurers (Tax hike of $60.1 bil/takes effect Jan. 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. Phases in gradually until 2018. Fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,986-1,993
18. Obamacare $500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives (Tax hike of $0.6 bil/takes effect Jan 2013). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,995-2,000
19. Obamacare Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 ($min/takes effect Jan. 2012): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957
20. Obamacare “Black liquor” tax hike (Tax hike of $23.6 billion/took effect immediately). This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 105
21. Obamacare Codification of the “economic substance doctrine” (Tax hike of $4.5 billion/took effect immediately). This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 108-113

via http://atr.org/full-list-obama-tax-hikes-a7213#ixzz27nK9X6RU

The majority of the American people only think of income taxes when they determine if a politician has increased or cut taxes. They forget that we are taxed on almost every thing that exists. 
This is a good list of 21 different ways Obama’s policies have increased taxes on Americans. For the record, I don’t think Romney would be any better on taxation. 
@Suga_Shane

Full List of Obama Tax Hikes

President Barack Obama has signed into law twenty-one new or higher taxes on the American people. The full list is below:

1. A 156 percent increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco: On February 4, 2009, just sixteen days into his Administration, Obama signed into law a 156 percent increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco, a hike of 61 cents per pack. The median income of smokers is just over $36,000 per year.

2. Obamacare Individual Mandate Excise Tax (takes effect in Jan 2014): Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance – as defined by Obama-appointed HHS bureaucrats — must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following:

The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that six million American families will be liable for the tax, and as Americans for Tax Reform has pointed out, 100 percent of Americans filing a tax return (140 million filers) will be forced to submit paperwork to the IRS showing they had “qualifying” health insurance for every month of the tax year. Bill: PPACA; Page: 317-337)

3. Obamacare Employer Mandate Tax (takes effect Jan. 2014): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $2000 for all full-time employees. Applies to all employers with 50 or more employees. If any employee actually receives coverage through the exchange, the penalty on the employer for that employee rises to $3000. If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer). Bill: PPACA; Page: 345-346

Combined score of individual and employer mandate tax penalty: $65 billion/10 years

4. Obamacare Surtax on Investment Income (Tax hike of $123 billion/takes effect Jan. 2013): Creation of a new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income: Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 87-93

*Other unearned income includes (for surtax purposes) gross income from interest, annuities, royalties, net rents, and passive income in partnerships and Subchapter-S corporations. It does not include municipal bond interest or life insurance proceeds, since those do not add to gross income. It does not include active trade or business income, fair market value sales of ownership in pass-through entities, or distributions from retirement plans. The 3.8% surtax does not apply to non-resident aliens.

5. Obamacare Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans (Tax hike of $32 bil/takes effect Jan. 2018): Starting in 2018, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($10,200 single/$27,500 family). Higher threshold ($11,500 single/$29,450 family) for early retirees and high-risk professions. CPI +1 percentage point indexed. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,941-1,956

6. Obamacare Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax (Tax hike of $86.8 bil/takes effect Jan. 2013): Current law and changes:

Bill: PPACA, Reconciliation Act; Page: 2000-2003; 87-93

7. Obamacare Medicine Cabinet Tax (Tax hike of $5 bil/took effect Jan. 2011): Americans are no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957-1,959

8. Obamacare HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike (Tax hike of $1.4 bil/took effect Jan. 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,959

9. Obamacare Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka “Special Needs Kids Tax” (Tax hike of $13 bil/takes effect Jan. 2013): Imposes cap on FSAs of $2500 (currently unlimited). Indexed to inflation after 2013. There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,388-2,389

10. Obamacare Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers (Tax hike of $20 bil/takes effect Jan. 2013): Medical device manufacturers 409,000 people in 12,000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3 percent excise tax on total sales, even if the respective company does not earn a profit. Exempts items retailing for <$100. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,980-1,986

11. Obamacare “Haircut” for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI (Tax hike of $15.2 bil/takes effect Jan. 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI. Waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,994-1,995

12. Obamacare Tax on Indoor Tanning Services (Tax hike of $2.7 billion/took effect July 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons. Making matters worse: According to a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration report, the Obama IRS didn’t bother to issue compliance guidelines until three quarterly filing deadlines had passed: “By the time [IRS] notices were issued, tanning excise tax returns had been due for three quarters.” Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,397-2,399

13. Obamacare elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D (Tax hike of $4.5 bil/takes effect Jan. 2013) Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,994

14. Obamacare Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike (Tax hike of $0.4 bil/took effect Jan. 1 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,004

15. Obamacare Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (Min$/took effect immediately): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new “community health assessment needs,” “financial assistance,” and “billing and collection” rules set by Obama-appointed HHS bureaucrats. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,961-1,971

16. Obamacare Tax on Innovator Drug Companies (Tax hike of $22.2 bil/took effect Jan. 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,971-1,980

17. Obamacare Tax on Health Insurers (Tax hike of $60.1 bil/takes effect Jan. 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. Phases in gradually until 2018. Fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,986-1,993

18. Obamacare $500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives (Tax hike of $0.6 bil/takes effect Jan 2013). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,995-2,000

19. Obamacare Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 ($min/takes effect Jan. 2012): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957

20. Obamacare “Black liquor” tax hike (Tax hike of $23.6 billion/took effect immediately). This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 105

21. Obamacare Codification of the “economic substance doctrine” (Tax hike of $4.5 billion/took effect immediately). This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 108-113

via http://atr.org/full-list-obama-tax-hikes-a7213#ixzz27nK9X6RU

The majority of the American people only think of income taxes when they determine if a politician has increased or cut taxes. They forget that we are taxed on almost every thing that exists. 

This is a good list of 21 different ways Obama’s policies have increased taxes on Americans. For the record, I don’t think Romney would be any better on taxation. 

@Suga_Shane

I love the idea of Ending the Fed, shutting down the IRS, ruling federal income taxes to be unconstitutional, again! (Hello, Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan and Trust Co, circa 1894!). 
But if we&#8217;re going to champion a cause, let&#8217;s not dress as liars to better sell the message. Before 1913, no one paid FEDERAL Income Tax, but the statement &#8220;Americans kept 100% of their earnings&#8221; is misleading. It makes it sound as if we paid ZERO income tax across the board, both state and federal. 
Although there was a rapid increase in state taxation in 1913 after the passage of the 16th amendment, states have had a long history of imposing income and income-like taxes on citizens since the creation of this republic. 
Also, in order to pay off some of our war debt, we had short periods of imposed income tax, although it was low and only imposed on the rich (relatively rich), it still happened a few times in our history before 1913, but it was overturned a few times. Still, some of those tax dollars helped pay off war debt that we incurred while fighting and winning some of these wars. I don&#8217;t agree that taxation was the best way around this war debt and neither did Lincoln, who tried to issue Greenbacks instead of levying a tax. [insert conspiracy theory here].
I&#8217;m all for abolishing income taxes, at least on a federal level, and controlling the spending and debt that Congress incurs due to having access to so much money, but let&#8217;s be honest about the history on which we rely on to win the debate. 
@Suga_Shane

I love the idea of Ending the Fed, shutting down the IRS, ruling federal income taxes to be unconstitutional, again! (Hello, Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan and Trust Co, circa 1894!). 

But if we’re going to champion a cause, let’s not dress as liars to better sell the message. Before 1913, no one paid FEDERAL Income Tax, but the statement “Americans kept 100% of their earnings” is misleading. It makes it sound as if we paid ZERO income tax across the board, both state and federal. 

Although there was a rapid increase in state taxation in 1913 after the passage of the 16th amendment, states have had a long history of imposing income and income-like taxes on citizens since the creation of this republic. 

Also, in order to pay off some of our war debt, we had short periods of imposed income tax, although it was low and only imposed on the rich (relatively rich), it still happened a few times in our history before 1913, but it was overturned a few times. Still, some of those tax dollars helped pay off war debt that we incurred while fighting and winning some of these wars. I don’t agree that taxation was the best way around this war debt and neither did Lincoln, who tried to issue Greenbacks instead of levying a tax. [insert conspiracy theory here].

I’m all for abolishing income taxes, at least on a federal level, and controlling the spending and debt that Congress incurs due to having access to so much money, but let’s be honest about the history on which we rely on to win the debate. 

@Suga_Shane

(via moralanarchism)

The fundamental principle of freedom is the right to own property. The fundamental principle of taxation is the right to take someone else’s property. — Just let that brew in your brain for a while. 
antigovernmentextremist:

»Implying that Mitt Romney’s money isn’t his to begin with.

Tax is when gov&#8217;t takes YOUR OWN MONEY so that they can spend it. 
Tax Refund is when the gov&#8217;t give you back YOUR OWN MONEY that they took too much of and kept. 
Tax credit is when they let you keep more of YOUR OWN MONEY. 
I don&#8217;t like Mitt Romney, but I hate idiots. 

antigovernmentextremist:

»Implying that Mitt Romney’s money isn’t his to begin with.

Tax is when gov’t takes YOUR OWN MONEY so that they can spend it. 

Tax Refund is when the gov’t give you back YOUR OWN MONEY that they took too much of and kept. 

Tax credit is when they let you keep more of YOUR OWN MONEY. 

I don’t like Mitt Romney, but I hate idiots. 

We pay more in taxes than we spend on food, clothing and housing combined. 

We pay more in taxes than we spend on food, clothing and housing combined. 

(via antigovernmentextremist)

theheritagefoundation:

You can see the post we included this graphic in here. The facts are in about these numbers: $67 trillion is how much the President’s budget would add to the national debt and $47 billion is the amount in raised taxes from the Buffett Rule over the next 10 years.
itsnotaconspiracy:

theheritagefoundation:

Perspective.

Sources or none of this is true. You can’t just say things without having a reliable source, it makes you look kinda stupid.


EAT THE RICH! 
The ridiculousness of the idea that the road to prosperity is built with trucks of taxation angers me to no end. 
We have a country filled with drones of buffoons that have been conned by government, by all government, left, right and moderate, that we need taxation and that the &#8216;have-nots&#8217; should use mob rule to force the &#8216;haves&#8217; into paying higher taxes all in the name of &#8220;fairness.&#8221; 
If you want fair, why not demand that everyone, you and I included, pay a LOWER tax rate. Demand that the 72,000+ pages of our tax code be cut without prejudiced so you and I can both make a living knowing that we will get the same tax benefits as anyone and everyone. We can earn a living and contribute to the economy without the uneasy feeling that the rich have figured out loopholes in the regulations and that more regulation only creates more opportunities for loopholes but also increase the cost of finding those loopholes, thus limiting them to the wealthy and ultra wealthy. 
Not only do endless regulations create loopholes, they also create an environment where pay-offs, campaign contributions, and &#8220;knowing the right people&#8221; can win you a tax exemption. Once again, screwing the average person over and shifting the advantage to the wealthy and ultra-wealthy. 
But Big Government doesn&#8217;t want to tell you this deep dark little secret. They&#8217;ve cloaked the idea of taxation with a blanket of fairness. They&#8217;ve somehow convinced the American people that fairness is taking more from anyone that isn&#8217;t &#8216;you&#8217;. If we ask them to tax the 1% more, where will it stop? Soon we&#8217;ll be taxing the top 49.9% more because the bottom 50.1% think it&#8217;s &#8220;fair&#8221;. And then, one day, the top will want to tax the bottom, too, in the name of &#8220;fairness&#8221; of course. That day will come and the Government will follow through. Why not? The people are handing a very limited number of people endless money and power in the name of &#8220;fairness&#8221;. The only &#8220;fair&#8221; thing to do would be to accept. One day, if things continue down this &#8220;fair&#8221; path that they are on. We will all pay close to everything in taxes and the Government will provide us with a home, food and propaganda entertainment. We will all be living the same &#8220;fair&#8221; lives, equal in all ways. Bland, ordinary, with limited choices. because choices lead to inequality of results and that just wouldn&#8217;t be fair now, would it? 
That&#8217;s the road that increased taxation leads to. But by all means, keep telling me about what&#8217;s &#8220;fair&#8221;. 
@Suga_Shane

theheritagefoundation:

You can see the post we included this graphic in here. The facts are in about these numbers: $67 trillion is how much the President’s budget would add to the national debt and $47 billion is the amount in raised taxes from the Buffett Rule over the next 10 years.

itsnotaconspiracy:

theheritagefoundation:

Perspective.

Sources or none of this is true. You can’t just say things without having a reliable source, it makes you look kinda stupid.

EAT THE RICH! 

The ridiculousness of the idea that the road to prosperity is built with trucks of taxation angers me to no end. 

We have a country filled with drones of buffoons that have been conned by government, by all government, left, right and moderate, that we need taxation and that the ‘have-nots’ should use mob rule to force the ‘haves’ into paying higher taxes all in the name of “fairness.” 

If you want fair, why not demand that everyone, you and I included, pay a LOWER tax rate. Demand that the 72,000+ pages of our tax code be cut without prejudiced so you and I can both make a living knowing that we will get the same tax benefits as anyone and everyone. We can earn a living and contribute to the economy without the uneasy feeling that the rich have figured out loopholes in the regulations and that more regulation only creates more opportunities for loopholes but also increase the cost of finding those loopholes, thus limiting them to the wealthy and ultra wealthy. 

Not only do endless regulations create loopholes, they also create an environment where pay-offs, campaign contributions, and “knowing the right people” can win you a tax exemption. Once again, screwing the average person over and shifting the advantage to the wealthy and ultra-wealthy. 

But Big Government doesn’t want to tell you this deep dark little secret. They’ve cloaked the idea of taxation with a blanket of fairness. They’ve somehow convinced the American people that fairness is taking more from anyone that isn’t ‘you’. If we ask them to tax the 1% more, where will it stop? Soon we’ll be taxing the top 49.9% more because the bottom 50.1% think it’s “fair”. And then, one day, the top will want to tax the bottom, too, in the name of “fairness” of course. That day will come and the Government will follow through. Why not? The people are handing a very limited number of people endless money and power in the name of “fairness”. The only “fair” thing to do would be to accept. One day, if things continue down this “fair” path that they are on. We will all pay close to everything in taxes and the Government will provide us with a home, food and propaganda entertainment. We will all be living the same “fair” lives, equal in all ways. Bland, ordinary, with limited choices. because choices lead to inequality of results and that just wouldn’t be fair now, would it? 

That’s the road that increased taxation leads to. But by all means, keep telling me about what’s “fair”. 

@Suga_Shane

Don&#8217;t forget to file your taxes! 

Don’t forget to file your taxes!