View Single Post
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 09-22-2006, 12:13 PM
raytri's Avatar
raytri raytri is offline
Site Moderator
Guru
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Minnesota
Age: 41
Posts: 18,579
usa us minnesota
raytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 116,119
Default dgdgdg

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cerran";p=&quot View Post
This also proves that federal direct income taxes are not needed for a country to prosper.
That's something of a nonsensical statement. No given tax is necessary for a country to prosper, but *some* level of taxation is necessary for government to function. The only question is what taxes will raise the amount needed with the most efficiency/least unwanted side effects.

We got by without direct taxes for 40 years because the federal government was tiny. Meaning, of course, that federal services were nonexistent, too. And even then, a major source of revenue was selling federal land -- not a sustainable idea. Whenever a crisis popped up, the government needed more revenue -- and the direct taxes returned.

And that's just the federal level. State and local governments continued to levy taxes throughout this period.
__________________
Man up.
Reply With Quote