Subject:
|
Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 13 Nov 1999 11:29:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1072 times
|
| |
|
|
Christopher Lannan wrote in message ...
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Edward Sanburn writes:
> > John DiRienzo wrote:
> >
> > > Instead of spending our time figuring new dumb ways to tax people, I • have
> > > an idea (1)... how about not taxing people? I like it. I like it a • lot.
> > > But your idea has lots of room for loopholes. Like buying stuff on • the
> > > net. Like drugs - how does it help? Drug money is spent on more drugs, • or
> > > attorneys, or fines, anyway. Does sales tax apply to services? Then • there
> > > are even more under the table services. Taxing people... its such a • waste.
> > >
> > > (1) - void where prohibited by law.
> >
> >
> > A nice idea, true, but one that is impractical, as of right now. I would • love
> > not to be taxed, but I don't think it is practical. Our current society • needs
> to
> > pay for certain things (I.E., military, roads, etc.), but not in the way, • the
> > amount, or the scope, of government that we have today. I am all for
> > privatization of things, but in this current climate, I don't know if • anything
> > is going to change outside of a revolution, or some other drastic measure.
> >
> > Scott S.
> > _________________________________________________________
> >
> >
> There has got to be a better way. A drastic measure is not such a bad idea.
> Its too bad, I think, that our current system of govt/economy is so
> established at this point, and protects itself so jealously, that really we
> probably won't have any sort of MAJOR change until it all just fails • miserably-
> which will be a long time and when it happens will be pretty bad. Its like • we
> won't really do anything about polution and the environment until its as • bad
> as people say its going to be. Also, we probably won't really do anything
> about overpopulation until mother nature takes care of it for us. • Unfortunely,
> she's not terribly gentle when she corrects overpopulation problems • herself.
> Didn't mean to stray so much- this thread was really not about taxes • anyway,
> but I couldn't help jumping in.
>
> Yes, there are loopholes in the flat tax idea, but, I believe, FEWER • loopholes
> than in the current system. Services could be taxed, I suppose. I'm not an
> economist.
>
> Chris
Glad we agree to a point. Perhaps there would be fewer loopholes, or
perhaps it would be just the same - that would be my guess. Fixing it would
be good, while tinkering is just more wasted effort. And talking about
tinkering is therefore useless, but we are doing it anyway... I am too
idealistic to even be involved in this conversation. Bye.
--
Have fun!
John
The Legos you've been dreaming of...
http://www114.pair.com/ig88/lego
my weird Lego site:
http://www114.pair.com/ig88/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...)
|
| (...) to (...) There has got to be a better way. A drastic measure is not such a bad idea. Its too bad, I think, that our current system of govt/economy is so established at this point, and protects itself so jealously, that really we probably won't (...) (25 years ago, 12-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
178 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
