Traktion Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 If you mean paye, it's implicit in your contract of employment. Nobody forces you to work. If you mean VAT, nobody forces you to buy stuff. This is a load of rubbish, tbh. At best, such a contract would be fraudulent, as there would be no meeting of minds. At worst, there is no contract at all - just threats of being violated and locked up. If I don't trade, it makes my existence impossible. If you mean inheritance tax, nobody forces you to hoard surpluses beyond your personal requirements. The default position of having collected things is to retain them. To take them from away is theft. All of these things you can change at the ballot box. Unless your imagination has dreamed up a world in which your madcap ideas obtain, which apparently it hasn't. Nope. I am forced to do whatever the majority want to do. It's mob rule. Just let people opt out of state rule, on reasonable terms. It's not much to ask. Can you explain who stole all your stuff and on what basis all you stuff was stolen? I'm guessing you made it up. (let's set aside the issue of how you amassed all the stuff that was allegedly stolen from you, and how you came by the resources nec. to amass these humungous surpluses) Most of my stuff is stolen by the state. Better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traktion Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 there is no need for citizens to sign up to the laws of a country. you are free to disagree, after all freedom of speech is one of the advantages of most democracies. you are however not free to disobey the laws or not to pay the taxes, however stupid or unfair you may think they are. Or do you prefer anarchy? The state breaks its own laws, by abusing property rights regularly. Would I prefer anarchy? As an anarchist, I would prefer citizenship to the state to be optional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concerned_money Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 Really, you're only taxed once? What's your secret? Me..i'm taxed when i earn it, then taxed when i spend it, then taxed when i fly or drive, taxed by my council, taxed on my savings.... the list is endless Taxes are on transactions. Earning money and bequeathing it are two different transactions so legitimate for being taxed on each. If "Money" was only taxed once then within a year the tax take would fall to 0 and society would collapse. "Double taxation" is taxing the same transaction twice, mainly when two countries are both trying to tax your income. Most countries agree it's a bad thing and have agreements with each other to stop it. I don't have an objection to Inheritance tax but i do think a better way to do it would be to tax the recipients for their windfall as income (maybe capital gains). Want to reduce the tax take? Spread it around or give it to your poorer relatives.... All tax is theft & wrong FULL STOP Have voluntary insurance, have charity, have cooperative, but don't force me at gun point or prison. Families should be able to pass a modest home to children w/o punitive tax. Want more kids, work & build a bigger house. And yes planning needs a shake up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicestersq Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 All tax is theft & wrong FULL STOP Have voluntary insurance, have charity, have cooperative, but don't force me at gun point or prison. Families should be able to pass a modest home to children w/o punitive tax. Want more kids, work & build a bigger house. And yes planning needs a shake up How will there be any planning if there is no tax to pay for it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concerned_money Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 How will there be any planning if there is no tax to pay for it? The only planning seems to be how to take every bit of humanity you were born with. It starts will school........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagabond Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 A person with any consistent sense of morality would reject theft, no matter how much loot had been promised to them. Well, unless you're a thief, obviously. Personally, if I had some surplus cash to dispose of I probably wouldn't give it to the state as I don't altogether agree with most of its spending choices This. Perfect. IHT to be entirely fair, should be either 0% or 100% with no exceptions. As it stands its just another way to seperate the ignorant from their cash. At least its the last one though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.