The Golden Rule applies to governments as well as people

[Warlord]

Do you know what the Golden Rule is?

The Golden Rule is the principle of treating others as you want to be treated. It is a maxim that is found in most religions and cultures.[1] It can be considered an ethic of reciprocity in some religions, although different religions treat it differently.

The maxim may appear as a positive or negative injunction governing conduct:

Treat others as you would like others to treat you (positive or directive form)

Do not treat others in ways that you would not like to be treated (negative or prohibitive form)[1]

What you wish upon others, you wish upon yourself (empathetic or responsive form)[1]

"Golden Rule Sign" that hung above the door of the employee's entrance to the Acme Sucker Rod Factory in Toledo, Ohio, 1913. The business was owned by Toledo Mayor Samuel M. Jones.

The idea dates at least to the early Confucian times (551–479 BCE), according to Rushworth Kidder, who identifies that this concept appears prominently in Buddhism, Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Taoism, Zoroastrianism, and "the rest of the world's major religions".[2] 143 leaders of the world's major faiths endorsed the Golden Rule as part of the 1993 "Declaration Toward a Global Ethic".[3][4] According to Greg M. Epstein, it is "a concept that essentially no religion misses entirely", but belief in God is not necessary to endorse it.[5] Simon Blackburn also states that the Golden Rule can be "found in some form in almost every ethical tradition".[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

No Wars.

No Tax (it is theft by force)

Sunday thread.... 

Discuss.

 

[adarmo]

 

No Wars.

No Tax (it is theft by force)

La la land

[Warlord]

 

La la land

In relation to tax  we always had a much smaller government financed by tariffs and fee's  pre-1920's and it was that way for thousands of years. 

[adarmo]

 

In relation to tax  we always had a much smaller government financed by tariffs and fee's  pre-1920's and it was that way for thousands of years. 

Ah yes the good old days with an empire, global dominance and demographic pyramid the right way around. No NHS.... that's a bit of an expense and related closely to demographics. 

No war debt to pay off or country to rebuild

Going back before 1920 I understand tax could be 100% of everything you owned if the king fancied it or you said something the establishment disagreed with. 

Not really comparable and to think we can get back to no taxation by virtue of 'treat thy neighbour as thyself;' is a little quixotic. 

[Warlord]

 

Ah yes the good old days with an empire, global dominance and demographic pyramid the right way around. No NHS.... that's a bit of an expense and related closely to demographics. 

No war debt to pay off or country to rebuild

Going back before 1920 I understand tax could be 100% of everything you owned if the king fancied it or you said something the establishment disagreed with. 

Not really comparable and to think we can get back to no taxation by virtue of 'treat thy neighbour as thyself;' is a little quixotic. 

It was much better system than having half your income stolen every month .

NO wonder parents can' t feed their children and need government support.

What a mess this country is.

@Locke @Bruce Banner

[adarmo]

 

It was much better system than having half your income stolen every month .

NO wonder parents can' t feed their children and need government support.

What a mess this country is.

@Locke @Bruce Banner

Half your income isn't stolen FFS. If you earn £100k you pay a roughly a third of it in tax and NI. The total national tax take is under 40% so even if you stack up every levy, duty and VAT it's not half (and that's consumption not income like you state). The closest you get to half is at the marginal rates between £100k and £125k which is actually over half as the tax free allowance is abated. However if you;'re on tat sort of money and can't feed your children you're a muppet.

People lower salaries will pay far less in tax. They're the ones that allegedly cannot feed their children (plenty of fat ones about in the chavvy parts of the UK so bit confused here).

W all want to pay less tax but we also want safe streets, the NHS, no potholes, clean air, good schools and universities and cutting edge R&D, not to mention a good military. I guess we all want to retire at some point too?

Comparing fiscal policy of the stone age with today is just silly. Different times and different challenges. 

The country is a mess (imho) because benefits remove any consequences of the cretinous behaviour of the fecundity of underclass.

[Warlord]

Apologies @adarmo I should say "up to" but if you're a higher rate taxpayer and pay council tax, have a car and drink/smoke then you're pretty much at half your income gone in tax one way or another.

As for NHS, schools or a litany of other services. these should not be the concern of government. Government should provide for common defence (military) and this can be funded through tariffs and fees.

Our government should not be some giant  behemoth employing millions of people.  That was never the case for nearly a millennium. 

You need to stop thinking government is the answer to all your problems.

 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Warlord

[adarmo]

 

Apologies @adarmo I should say "up to" but if you're a higher rate taxpayer and pay council tax, have a car and drink/smoke then you're pretty much at half your income gone in tax one way or another.

As for NHS, schools or a litany of other services. these should not be the concern of government. Government should provide for common defence (military) and this can be funded through tariffs and fees.

Our government should not be some giant  behemoth employing millions of people.  That was never the case for nearly a millennium. 

You need to stop thinking government is the answer to all your problems.

You argue for fees and tariffs but just not on your car, or drink, or ciggies? These are personal choice and are not a tax on income. 

I also fundamentally disagree with your view that education and health is not a matter for government. Almost every (if not every) developed nation recognises the importance of a healthy and educated population. 

I think the government solves society's problems and not mine, but of course if society gets sick and goes to crap then I have a lot more problems. 

Have you a list of nice countries to live, with a well educated and healthy work force, that are a democracy but with zero tax?

[Warlord]

 

 

Have you a list of nice countries to live, with a well educated and healthy work force, that are a democracy but with zero tax?

There aren't many but there are some with lower tax regimes where the population has consented through referenda (like Switzerland), Singapore is also an example of a low tax country who seems to thrive without a massive government!

[winkie]

Who decides what each job is worth? if tax taken wasn't shown on a payslip....none the wiser.

We are all worth what we take home for doing a job.........we don't work if the job is not worth doing for the net sum paid.

[doomed]

I do not sign up to the idea that the government can more efficiently or more wisely spend my money than I can. 

Taxation of labour or capital is theft and would love to hear a coherent argument why it isn't.

What little government is actually needed should be funded via sin taxes for things like pollution and land hoarding.

[dugsbody]

 

I do not sign up to the idea that the government can more efficiently or more wisely spend my money than I can. 

Taxation of labour or capital is theft and would love to hear a coherent argument why it isn't.

What little government is actually needed should be funded via sin taxes for things like pollution and land hoarding.

What sort of argument are you looking for? Theoretical or practical?

Let us start with the practical side. Which state has managed to operate under your libertarian ideals? Can you point to evidence of this ever working?

[Warlord]

 

What sort of argument are you looking for? Theoretical or practical?

Let us start with the practical side. Which state has managed to operate under your libertarian ideals? Can you point to evidence of this ever working?

As I have said there was no income tax for a millennium and we coped . The US became the richest nation known to man without an income tax .

Pre -- 1920's, the glory years I yearn for.  We will be more prosperous if we return to minimal sized government.

[Roman Roady]

Theres only one golden rule that will prevail over the next half a decade:- Those with the Gold rule.

[crash-and-burn]

Tax is stolen, squandered, used for nefarious purposes, but it also builds roads, schools, maintains hospitals etc... 
If there were no tax to pay how are these things constructed and maintained, and who pays the workers?
And without tax, if wages were larger, surely everything in life would be more expensive still, therefore whatever you gained, you would ultimately lose anyway.

If there were no wars, and no theft of assets (oil, mineral resources etc.), many first world nations would be third world nations. We live these sheltered, material orientated lives off the backs of others too, who are way less fortunate than ourselves. Sometimes you have to count your blessings.
 

[Warlord]

 

Tax is stolen, squandered, used for nefarious purposes, but it also builds roads, schools, maintains hospitals etc... 
If there were no tax to pay how are these things constructed and maintained, and who pays the workers?
And without tax, if wages were larger, surely everything in life would be more expensive still, therefore whatever you gained, you would ultimately lose anyway.

If there were no wars, and no theft of assets (oil, mineral resources etc.), many first world nations would be third world nations. We live these sheltered, material orientated lives off the backs of others too, who are way less fortunate than ourselves. Sometimes you have to count your blessings.
 

America between its independence in 1776 - 1913 became the richest country on Earth without an income tax and without waging any wars.

They didn't even have a central bank either. Imagine that.

We also did OK for a thousand years though I accept we had wars etc. which needed paying for.

 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Warlord

[crash-and-burn]

 

America between its independence in 1776 - 1913 became the richest country on Earth without an income tax and without waging any wars.

They didn't even have a central bank either. Imagine that.

We also did OK for a thousand years though I accept we had wars etc. which needed paying for.

 

I'm afraid I have to disagree. I think you'll find there's very few years in American history, where they haven't been involved in a war (or started one) somewhere across the globe. 

I think you'll also find that the British were heavily taxed too, especially over the last 1000 years, and that life was not easy (try taking a rabbit from the woods for your meal - the consequences of getting caught hunting in the wrong location weren't pleasant). Look up tally stick - they've been used over the past 1000 years for the collection of taxes and to prove what had been paid - these were used in Britain and elsewhere across the globe.

[24gray24]

 

 

Comparing fiscal policy of the stone age with today is just silly. Different times and different challenges. 

The country is a mess (imho) because benefits remove any consequences of the cretinous behaviour of the fecundity of underclass.

 

There is a good case that governments waste money and the bureaucracy and other overheads should be kept to a minimum.

The trouble with all this low tax dream isn't that it's stone age or wrong. It's that it's damn hard to accomplish. As successive goverments have found out. 

Just look at how far cummings got with reforming the bureaucracy!

 

[Biggus]

 

I'm afraid I have to disagree. I think you'll find there's very few years in American history, where they haven't been involved in a war (or started one) somewhere across the globe. 

I think you'll also find that the British were heavily taxed too, especially over the last 1000 years, and that life was not easy (try taking a rabbit from the woods for your meal - the consequences of getting caught hunting in the wrong location weren't pleasant). Look up tally stick - they've been used over the past 1000 years for the collection of taxes and to prove what had been paid - these were used in Britain and elsewhere across the globe.

"Until August 1914 a sensible, law-abiding Englishman could pass through life and hardly notice the existence of the state, beyond the post office and the policeman.

He could live where he liked and as he liked. He had no official number or identity card. He could travel abroad or leave his country for ever without a passport or any sort of official permission. He could exchange his money for any other currency without restriction or limit. He could buy goods from any country in the world on the same terms as he bought goods at home. For that matter, a foreigner could spend his life in this country without permit and without informing the police. Unlike the countries of the European continent, the state did not require its citizens to perform military service. An Englishman could enlist, if he chose, in the regular army, the navy, or the territorials. He could also ignore, if he chose, the demands of national defence. Substantial householders were occasionally called on for jury service. Otherwise, only those helped the state who wished to do so. The Englishman paid taxes on a modest scale: nearly £200 million in 1913-14, or rather less than 8 percent of the national income… roadly speaking, the state acted only to help those who could not help themselves. It left the adult citizen alone.

All this was changed by the impact of the Great War. The mass of the people became, for the first time, active citizens. Their lives were shaped by orders from above; they were required to serve the state instead of pursuing exclusively their own affairs. Five million men entered the armed forces, many of them (though a minority) under compulsion. The Englishman’s food was limited, and its quality changed, by government order. His freedom of movement was restricted; his conditions of work prescribed. Some industries were reduced or closed, others artificially fostered. The publication of news was fettered. Street lights were dimmed. The sacred freedom of drinking was tampered with: licensed hours were cut down, and the beer watered by order. The very time on the clocks was changed. From 1916 onwards, every Englishman got up an hour earlier in summer than he would otherwise have done, thanks to an act of parliament. The state established a hold over it citizens which, though relaxed in peacetime, was never to be removed and which the second World war was again to increase.”

from https://www.amazon.co.uk/English-History-1914-1945-Oxford-England-ebook/dp/B00A7LNRKC

 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Biggus

[24gray24]

Not forgetting socialism wanting to nationalise all industries and keep raising tax rates higher and higher to pay for their attempts to make all men equal (however lazy and stupid). 

[HowMuch!]

 

Half your income isn't stolen FFS. If you earn £100k you pay a roughly a third of it in tax and NI. The total national tax take is under 40% so even if you stack up every levy, duty and VAT it's not half (and that's consumption not income like you state). The closest you get to half is at the marginal rates between £100k and £125k which is actually over half as the tax free allowance is abated. However if you;'re on tat sort of money and can't feed your children you're a muppet.

People lower salaries will pay far less in tax. They're the ones that allegedly cannot feed their children (plenty of fat ones about in the chavvy parts of the UK so bit confused here).

W all want to pay less tax but we also want safe streets, the NHS, no potholes, clean air, good schools and universities and cutting edge R&D, not to mention a good military. I guess we all want to retire at some point too?

Comparing fiscal policy of the stone age with today is just silly. Different times and different challenges. 

The country is a mess (imho) because benefits remove any consequences of the cretinous behaviour of the fecundity of underclass.

Add in employers NI and its half alright. 

[ucnvpe0]

 

I do not sign up to the idea that the government can more efficiently or more wisely spend my money than I can. 

Taxation of labour or capital is theft and would love to hear a coherent argument why it isn't.

What little government is actually needed should be funded via sin taxes for things like pollution and land hoarding.

Why isn't a sin tax on pollution or land hoarding theft too?

[scottbeard]

 

In relation to tax  we always had a much smaller government financed by tariffs and fee's  pre-1920's and it was that way for thousands of years. 

Yes, a period of many centuries in which the rich could hand down entire counties of land from one generation to the next untaxed, whilst the poor died of disease in poverty, with no healthcare, no pensions, no support for the sick and disabled etc.

You might just as well say "having slaves worked well for thousands of years, why did we ever change it".  The answer is - because we now treat a larger number of people with more respect, even if it costs money to do so.

[Bugger BTL]

 

As I have said there was no income tax for a millennium and we coped . The US became the richest nation known to man without an income tax .

Having chattel slavery for several centuries helped with that. 

[Warlord]

 

Yes, a period of many centuries in which the rich could hand down entire counties of land from one generation to the next untaxed, whilst the poor died of disease in poverty, with no healthcare, no pensions, no support for the sick and disabled etc.

You might just as well say "having slaves worked well for thousands of years, why did we ever change it".  The answer is - because we now treat a larger number of people with more respect, even if it costs money to do so.

I'm not saying it was perfect but it was a much superior system than we have now.

Our government was never meant to be so large and it doesn't need to be.