Subject:
|
Re: Finally some church/state mingling that I can really get behind!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:37:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
438 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> All right, but the point remains. Under my example, the low-wealth person
> *is* participating in the tax framework, just as readily as if you'd assigned
> some low figure as an appropriate level of taxation. I don't think it's
> material to quibble over *which* particular tax is paid; more specifically, we
> weren't discussing (or excluding) any particular tax until this point.
Thus one problem with our tax system--gas tax to pay for roads, federal income
tax to pay DC, and local to pay the county school board. If I don't pay gas tax
I'm not paying my part for the roads, am I?
And it doesn't address the central point: if one does not pay a tax, one is
likely to be unconcerned of those paying the tax and of how that tax is spent,
as long as it's not to their detriment.
> Well, you'd have to buy me dinner first, at least.
McDonald's is so tasty at this time of year!
> > since for any amount n, one can persuasively argue for n - 1 or n + 1.
>
> But not if you're conscious of it in the aggregate. n+10 is not the same as
> ((((((((((n+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)
Mathematically, it's the same thing. It's simply a straw that broke the camel's
back situation. It's a lot easier to argue
((((((((((n+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)+1)+1) than n + 10 in politics, though!
> I don't think I can accept that. If you hand me an apple expressly so that I
> can hand it back to you, then at no time do I consider it mine, nor do I
> perceive it to benefit you or me in any way--it simply exits the equation.
> Charity, on the other hand, is given to me by one agency and (possibly) taxed by
> another. If you give me an apple so that I can hand it to Hop-Frog and thereby
> pay off my apple-debt, then I am spared the pain of his apple-wrath. But at
> what point would I perceive the apple (or handed-off slice thereof) to be mine?
I've heard about Hop-Frog and his apple-wrath. Bad, that.
Ah, but if I hand you an apple today, and say that you have to give me part of
it back on April 15, it's not in human nature to think about that future date.
Want proof of this? Look at the big buildings that credit card companies build
by giving something now in return for something later!
(Part of my peeve too is the burden of tax compliance. I spend between 30 and
50 hours each year on taxes, and pay $750+ to ensure that I'm within the purview
of vague regulations. That's what everyone needs to participate in! I'm for
either abolition of the income tax and establishment of a national sales tax, or
a flat income tax, BTW. I doubt that you would be for either; I doubt either
one of us will convince the other of the superiority of our own position, so
it's probably wiser not to debate it...)
Best regards,
Carl
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
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
|
|
|
|
