Subject:
|
Re: Finally some church/state mingling that I can really get behind!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:10:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
405 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
<snip>
> If $10 per anum was considered a satisfactory level of payment, then surely a
> greater tax (sales tax, etc.) is at least as satisfactory?
I concur--I just wanted the clarity.
> Indeed, I believe the
> proposal suggested that welfare (gleaned from taxes) be provided to the poor so
> that they can pay their taxes!
> The degree of "Squatterhood" is determined not simply by how little one pays
> to enjoy basic niceties of life in our society; it's based on how little one
> pays relative to how much one benefits from living in this society.
The idea of 'pay what you owe' is ingrained into my nature by my parents. Those
folks who 'take the system for granted' without putting into the aforementioned
system, either via monetary compense or with labour, are 'freeriders' and should
summarily be 'taught to change their ways' or given the boot out of the country.
This is why people who steal truly irk me--it's not that they're breaking a law
on the books somewhere, it's that they are getting 'something for nothing' (I
don't consider the planning and labour of thievery as Just effort for the gains
received). Not only that, but the person who legally purchased items paid the
taxes on those items and deserves the use of said items. To have those items
stolen defeats the system.
> The
> wealthy, who absolutely receive the greatest benefit of living in this country,
> should absolutely be required to pay the greatest portion of taxes, to a level
> commensurate with the benefit that they receive. That's why, for example,
> corporations (the primary beneficiaries of society) should never be allowed to
> dodge their tax duty by basing themselves offshore.
I find myself understanding your tirade against the corps. That said, whether
the corps make their product 'in country' or 'across the seas', the product is
still purchased, and, as such, the taxes gleaned from said product end up where
the product is purchased. I understand that you would like the corps to pay
their 'fair share' as well--I agree. But tax money is still generated, whether
the company is in the country or not.
Taken to extremes, however, if all corps are taken 'off shore', then all labour
will be 'off shore'--the products made and shipped to the country will be
irrelevant for the citizens of the country will not have jobs to purchase the
products. So corps are just 'shooting themselves in the foot' by being based
outside the country.
It's the capitalistic way. If we were to trust in that magical hand of
Capitalism, this is the way it's suppose to be. People somewhere must be paid a
meager wage in order for us in the 'first world' to purchase inespensive
products.
>
> Dave!
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
47 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
