Discussion in 'Civil Liberties' started by Taxcutter, Dec 19, 2011.
...a civil right?
Nope! Keeping your OWN money is the right you should have.
It certainly is. If coupled with those that chose to keep it have no access to the Police, Fire Services, Ambulance, Hospitals, Garbage collection, Parks, Schools, Colleges and Universities.
As most transport is subsidised, they should have no access to that either so they can walk to work because otherwise they would be required to pay tax on the gas and they obviously don't want to do that. Wait a minute! That new car had a taxation demand on the original purchase, so only second hand cars would suffice.
Time for lunch. Any of those items taxable? Yes? Then starve.
They deserve to.
Idiot. I'm not saying we shouldnt pay taxes, I'm saying that right now we pay far too much, and have too much government control. The fact that I cant do any of those things without government taxes proves that much.
Indeed, I am an idiot. For responding civilly to you.
It won't happen again.
Good, because I am not going to respect some Obama worshipping fool that thinks I should respect him after he basically implies I should starve. Sorry, but I do not respect people's opinion if they do not respect mine. Sorry, life isnt fair.
You thought that was civil?
The question is rather broad, but yes. We've voted ourselves a number of civil rights that include access to the money collected from taxpayers. Unemployment insurance seems like an easy example.
Indeed. I didn't direct it personally.
With that type of attitude when talking to other people you will never convince anyone. However you might feel on the matter it's pointless to post in such a disrespectful manner, it does nothing more than make people angry and less likely to respect your viewpoint or listen to what you have to say.
Just as they aren't entitled to a house, shoes, clothes, or a car.
... What? The problem is not with the taxed object, it's about the tax itself. Look at it from the anti-tax perspective. A group known as the government forcefully confiscates money from you and others. It then proceeds to perform a number of 'public' activities which it then provides to you. Why would you abstain from using what you were forced to pay for, or not buy something that is still worthwhile to you even though it is taxed?
You have no problem with the object, you have a problem with the tax. You have no problem with buying and selling you have a problem with theft (I'm not saying that it is theft as such, but simply from the anti-tax perspective it is). If the Mafia came and forced a store to pay protection money are you going to abstain from buying things at that store because you oppose the Mafia?
Time for dinner. Any of those items not taxed? Then starve. It's a nonsensical argument, and in your case it even seems to be coming from a might makes right perspective
They deserve to what?
I was responding to 'Keeping your own money is a right you should have' and I stick by my remarks whether they are nonsensical or not.
Keeping your own money is an indication that one is opposed to taxation. I understand the concept of 'I'm all right, Jack'. I just don't subscribe to it.
May I ask why?
I never thought you didnt.
I am only opposed to excessive taxation, which I consider the level we are at to be a little excessive. Especially in certain areas.
Is unemployment or welfare for an unlimited period of time a civil right?
I've said so before and I'll say it again. I believe paying taxes is a privilege. It's an equaliser between those who have and those who do not. I don't subscribe to the American notion that if one doesn't pay taxes, he or she is a scrounger.
O.K. I will grant there are many who abuse the system and take what they do not deserve to have. But that happens on both sides of the fence and the Wall Street embezzlers have done as much, if not more, damage to the US economy than those (liberals as they are called) who took what they were or were not entitled to take.
In between is the law abiding citizen who does his days work for a days pay, pays his taxes and doesn't grumble about it because he realises that most of it but not all of it, is put to good use and without paying it would see his country go to hell in a hand-basket.
Not currently. Hope it never will be.
it is a civil right depending on the interpretation, alot of people are denied equal rights due to lack of resources or money
A civil right? I would say yes. If people expect to have a roof over their heads and food in their bellies, and if that requires taxpayer money they are more than entitled to it.
According to that logic there can never be equal rights in the first place.
Separate names with a comma.