The point of the VAT was to be added on, not to replace. And food/shelter will NOT be exempt, thus making purchasing real estate nearly 10%-20% more expensive to buy because the entire process of establishing a house will be taxed along the way with the VAT. In essence this tax is strictly making the consumer pay more and I honestly don't see the correlation between most Americans wanting government to take MORE of their money.
@taxbilly Yes, but the people within the beltway are kings. They will never go for that. They want to die among their riches.
They have become our masters. We are the slaves.You are all slaves. You are being led like cattle. We all are. They run our lives, our income etc. They want to run ever aspect of your life.
Just today I came out that more than 50% of Americans pay no income tax. Anyone know what Thomas Jefferson said about what will happen when this occurs?
Steal from thy neighbor..........
I think its just time for a good ole revolution & take Ameriac back!!
Why is that magically different than regulations for example? Why is it that the private sector , somehow, can't provide any fire security? There is a demand for it. What, are they going to exploit us? Why can't they be paid for a job well done, why can't they be paid by offering fire prevention products in the first place? This whole idea that government is BAD at X then becomes GOOD at Y when none of the underlying funamentals changed just blows my mind.
First how much do you think your fire insurance would go up with no fire department? Would you stand on your front lawn negotiating $ with a private fire department as your house burns? Could you require a private company to give you 24/7 coverage? Would you pay triple time to save your house on a holiday? Do you want to live in a society with no laws, no courts, no police?
Fire insurance would rise due to uncertainities, then once the water has been tested, will revert to much lower costs than in the first place. Any service side company, in a state of urgency do the job on a hourly payroll rather than contracts and that, 24/7, services are done efficiently, and that without even lives being at risk in this scenario. Triple hour pays aren't client side costs. I would like to live in a society free of dumb myths about how governments are God-like creatures.
I see you have already written up you contract which of course can not be enforced without a legal system. But with no taxes you can not have a legal system and your contract with the 24/7 or Farmers Ins. means nothing.
You underestimate the freemarket. Those questions are easilly answered on just about any free-market sources of information. I think your philosophy simply isn't quite there yet and stops half-way at libertarian principles. I think you should at least make the effort to fully understand what a government is about. Violence and deceit. Contracts enforcement shouldn't have to be done through "legal means". I'm sure you can think of something to replace it with, without government.
Market failure- police/fire/military protection is such that there is no feasible way to exclude non-payers without harming payers. Besides, giving private companies the power to use force against citizens is more dangerous than government because we cannot hold them accountable at the ballot box. Government exists to punish people who refuse to play by the rules, and in turn, government must be accountable to the citizens. Refusal to restrain the wicked is as bad as a dictatorship.
What you're stating are complete untruths. The private sector is accountable to it's constituents, and yes there are votes, money, and shares, you know this don't you? If the government does such a fine job, why must the money be extorted in a completely involuntary fashion? By the way, a ballot box is just a piece of cardboard with paper trash in it; it doesn't bind anyone. If it did, you wouldn't see such lunacy today.
Exactly, a private company is accountable to its owners and its customers; it is not accountable to those harmed by it unless someone with authority holds them accountable. If you allow private companies to have their own police and army, and to sell this power to whomever they please, who will restrain them from plundering and killing the weak, and who will punish them if they do? At least with governments, we can replace the leaders if they act unjustly. The victims of corporations can't.
What's the point of allowing a company to own guns when they can be used against you; there is no way in hell the scenarios you're describing could happen. Resorting to fear driven arguments may allow you to venture outside of logical consistency but has nothing to do with reality. Why would shareholders , ALL of them, support a gun totting company, and how would it get it's weapons in the first place when all materials are built in different facilities,there is just no way it would go unnoticed
You clearly know nothing of market failure. Each individuals share of the cost is very small compared to the whole cost, while you cannot deny people access to the commons in any feasible way for failing to contribute, at least not without harming the rest of society in the process. Tell me, if a man is murdered, what recourse should his family have? Surely, they must have recourse to justice, but they cannot be permitted to hunt down and kill the person they believe to be guilty without trial
I don't think you know what market failure means, i don't think you realize the contradiction in terms right there. A market represents actions; which are perpetuated by individuals. An individual may make a mistake, which may bankrupt it allowing other competitors to thrive and that's hardly failure. If justice is an issue, there is a demand for it, someone ought to cook something up. There are various examples of a stateless judicial system online, 500 characters are simply not enough.
Queen hypocrite Pelosi gave VAT the nod today in an interview. She, one of the richest in Cong, is pro-union, yet hires illegals to harvest her vineyards and whose business is non-union... This is how the healthcare plan in the house will be "deficit neutral." Earners under $250 will not pay more tax, except when they buy a pair of shoes, tires, batteries, books, paper. We should all be barefoot, pregnant and illiterate, then nobody will challenge her. This is on top of your state tax, be afraid
Let's go with the Fair Tax instead. Mostly the same, but fewer collection points. Plus, the Fair Tax includes a provision to refund the tax that people pay on basic essentials. It's cruel to force people to pay for government before paying for survival.
Lol, the name of the legislature is absolutely hilarious. Fair tax, a tax is extortion which by definition mean you have no choice; which is not fair at all.
The problem with this mindset is that you're still delaying the problem and still are not ensuring any form of survival at once. Simple fact ; You need resources to survive; if you are taxed, you cannot provide the resources your payment may have been used for. Less capital, less resources, less survival in the long run.
VAT tax will NOT grow larger and larger if it goes via the route of producer->wharehouses->retailer-> consumer.
everyone in the chain, except the consumer, can deduct the VAT tax from the purchased products and claim it at the government. The end result is that the consumer pays a fixed% of the value of the end product. Producing is not making it anymore expensive. If this would be the case then certain companies would have competition advantages.
How's that ol' hope and change workin for ya? hahah....I do not look at this as a rich vs poor issue.....there is no mention of the middle class.....A lot of the poor do not pay taxes anyway...if they enact this, they need to repeal the INCOME TAX....make it worthwhile to WORK for a living....maybe the poor will have the incentive to get into the workforce and better themselves...Just think, what you gross is what you take home, no tax on interest on savings, dividends, etc.
Cant believe it, I heard about it today... Are they nutz or are they trying to cause riots. I can understand if it replaced the income tax but to simply add a federal tax of 19 % on everything we buy. I guess everyone is going to be buying things in cash uderground.
DOUBLE TAXATION HIDDEN WITHIN FRAUD OF COMPLEX DESCRIPTION.
FICA is a payroll tax. It is on the act of paying earned income opening the door for double taxation.
A VAT is a performance tax on labor + earned income
Sales tax on a service is VAT collected at the time of sale. the methods of tabulation and collection are different but the thing taxed is the same
The sales tax on services and the VAT are the same and tax the production of earned income.
Neither apply to capital gains they tax labor
lostbuffalo 1 year ago
The point of the VAT was to be added on, not to replace. And food/shelter will NOT be exempt, thus making purchasing real estate nearly 10%-20% more expensive to buy because the entire process of establishing a house will be taxed along the way with the VAT. In essence this tax is strictly making the consumer pay more and I honestly don't see the correlation between most Americans wanting government to take MORE of their money.
supitstom 1 year ago
@supitstom And how this will not screw our economy sideways.
supitstom 1 year ago
How can they do this to us? The gov. truly runs the people. We are the slaves, they are our masters.
SenorZorrozzz 1 year ago
@SenorZorrozzz
Term limits!!!
taxbilly 1 year ago
@taxbilly Yes, but the people within the beltway are kings. They will never go for that. They want to die among their riches.
They have become our masters. We are the slaves.You are all slaves. You are being led like cattle. We all are. They run our lives, our income etc. They want to run ever aspect of your life.
SenorZorrozzz 1 year ago
Just today I came out that more than 50% of Americans pay no income tax. Anyone know what Thomas Jefferson said about what will happen when this occurs?
Steal from thy neighbor..........
I think its just time for a good ole revolution & take Ameriac back!!
flyboymd82 1 year ago
....and lookie lookie, yesterday more talk about the value added tax they want!
FugitiveCon 1 year ago
All taxes are a bad idea.
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
How about the taxes that pay for your fire department or the Army? You need some but much less than we have.
Jugheadr2 2 years ago
Why is that magically different than regulations for example? Why is it that the private sector , somehow, can't provide any fire security? There is a demand for it. What, are they going to exploit us? Why can't they be paid for a job well done, why can't they be paid by offering fire prevention products in the first place? This whole idea that government is BAD at X then becomes GOOD at Y when none of the underlying funamentals changed just blows my mind.
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
First how much do you think your fire insurance would go up with no fire department? Would you stand on your front lawn negotiating $ with a private fire department as your house burns? Could you require a private company to give you 24/7 coverage? Would you pay triple time to save your house on a holiday? Do you want to live in a society with no laws, no courts, no police?
Jugheadr2 2 years ago
Fire insurance would rise due to uncertainities, then once the water has been tested, will revert to much lower costs than in the first place. Any service side company, in a state of urgency do the job on a hourly payroll rather than contracts and that, 24/7, services are done efficiently, and that without even lives being at risk in this scenario. Triple hour pays aren't client side costs. I would like to live in a society free of dumb myths about how governments are God-like creatures.
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
I see you have already written up you contract which of course can not be enforced without a legal system. But with no taxes you can not have a legal system and your contract with the 24/7 or Farmers Ins. means nothing.
Jugheadr2 2 years ago
You underestimate the freemarket. Those questions are easilly answered on just about any free-market sources of information. I think your philosophy simply isn't quite there yet and stops half-way at libertarian principles. I think you should at least make the effort to fully understand what a government is about. Violence and deceit. Contracts enforcement shouldn't have to be done through "legal means". I'm sure you can think of something to replace it with, without government.
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
**Contracts enforcement shouldn't have to be done through "legal means". I'm sure you can think of something to replace it with, without government.**
Yes it was done in my homeland Sicily. Mafioso.
Jugheadr2 2 years ago
As if mafias could even survive without government, lol.
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
Go bow to Ron Paul he will protect you from all the boogie men.
Jugheadr2 2 years ago
there you go all assumie-pants on me. Good job. Glad to hear more ignorance.
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
Market failure- police/fire/military protection is such that there is no feasible way to exclude non-payers without harming payers. Besides, giving private companies the power to use force against citizens is more dangerous than government because we cannot hold them accountable at the ballot box. Government exists to punish people who refuse to play by the rules, and in turn, government must be accountable to the citizens. Refusal to restrain the wicked is as bad as a dictatorship.
ajpmathwiz 2 years ago
What you're stating are complete untruths. The private sector is accountable to it's constituents, and yes there are votes, money, and shares, you know this don't you? If the government does such a fine job, why must the money be extorted in a completely involuntary fashion? By the way, a ballot box is just a piece of cardboard with paper trash in it; it doesn't bind anyone. If it did, you wouldn't see such lunacy today.
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
Exactly, a private company is accountable to its owners and its customers; it is not accountable to those harmed by it unless someone with authority holds them accountable. If you allow private companies to have their own police and army, and to sell this power to whomever they please, who will restrain them from plundering and killing the weak, and who will punish them if they do? At least with governments, we can replace the leaders if they act unjustly. The victims of corporations can't.
ajpmathwiz 2 years ago
What's the point of allowing a company to own guns when they can be used against you; there is no way in hell the scenarios you're describing could happen. Resorting to fear driven arguments may allow you to venture outside of logical consistency but has nothing to do with reality. Why would shareholders , ALL of them, support a gun totting company, and how would it get it's weapons in the first place when all materials are built in different facilities,there is just no way it would go unnoticed
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
You clearly know nothing of market failure. Each individuals share of the cost is very small compared to the whole cost, while you cannot deny people access to the commons in any feasible way for failing to contribute, at least not without harming the rest of society in the process. Tell me, if a man is murdered, what recourse should his family have? Surely, they must have recourse to justice, but they cannot be permitted to hunt down and kill the person they believe to be guilty without trial
ajpmathwiz 2 years ago
I don't think you know what market failure means, i don't think you realize the contradiction in terms right there. A market represents actions; which are perpetuated by individuals. An individual may make a mistake, which may bankrupt it allowing other competitors to thrive and that's hardly failure. If justice is an issue, there is a demand for it, someone ought to cook something up. There are various examples of a stateless judicial system online, 500 characters are simply not enough.
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
Queen hypocrite Pelosi gave VAT the nod today in an interview. She, one of the richest in Cong, is pro-union, yet hires illegals to harvest her vineyards and whose business is non-union... This is how the healthcare plan in the house will be "deficit neutral." Earners under $250 will not pay more tax, except when they buy a pair of shoes, tires, batteries, books, paper. We should all be barefoot, pregnant and illiterate, then nobody will challenge her. This is on top of your state tax, be afraid
landluvver 2 years ago
I could go for the VAT if they would first eliminate the income tax.
Jugheadr2 2 years ago
i concur, this could be the best cure for the infermed.
landluvver 2 years ago
Let's go with the Fair Tax instead. Mostly the same, but fewer collection points. Plus, the Fair Tax includes a provision to refund the tax that people pay on basic essentials. It's cruel to force people to pay for government before paying for survival.
ajpmathwiz 2 years ago
Lol, the name of the legislature is absolutely hilarious. Fair tax, a tax is extortion which by definition mean you have no choice; which is not fair at all.
The problem with this mindset is that you're still delaying the problem and still are not ensuring any form of survival at once. Simple fact ; You need resources to survive; if you are taxed, you cannot provide the resources your payment may have been used for. Less capital, less resources, less survival in the long run.
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
lol, i'm sorry but you don't get it.
VAT tax will NOT grow larger and larger if it goes via the route of producer->wharehouses->retailer-> consumer.
everyone in the chain, except the consumer, can deduct the VAT tax from the purchased products and claim it at the government. The end result is that the consumer pays a fixed% of the value of the end product. Producing is not making it anymore expensive. If this would be the case then certain companies would have competition advantages.
apogist 2 years ago
What t do you mean Fairtax wouldnt be a bad system?
Fairtax pretends to get about half its revenue from a tax on people.
But then in fine print -- they have a massive tax on cities, counties, states. HUGE hidden tax they hope you don't notice.
And the guy in the video - -didn't notice.
Read their own book, page 148 "The federal government ITSELF will become a MAJOR taxpayer"
Its not a serious plan.
Google Fairtax absurdity - my web site comes up first. Learn something.
12FlyMe 2 years ago
How's that ol' hope and change workin for ya? hahah....I do not look at this as a rich vs poor issue.....there is no mention of the middle class.....A lot of the poor do not pay taxes anyway...if they enact this, they need to repeal the INCOME TAX....make it worthwhile to WORK for a living....maybe the poor will have the incentive to get into the workforce and better themselves...Just think, what you gross is what you take home, no tax on interest on savings, dividends, etc.
canadien37 2 years ago
this would be a windfall for the politicians to spend and spend.... hell they spend anyway.
4ancientarts 2 years ago
Cant believe it, I heard about it today... Are they nutz or are they trying to cause riots. I can understand if it replaced the income tax but to simply add a federal tax of 19 % on everything we buy. I guess everyone is going to be buying things in cash uderground.
NYredwhiteandblue 2 years ago
Comment removed
NYredwhiteandblue 2 years ago
Isn't Obama great!!! Always finding a way to fuck the people.
theanswersofnwo3 2 years ago 9
LMFAO!!! Yep. I predicted this shit. We have to pay for the non-producers.
3RDIDGUY 2 years ago 5
Would you expect any less?
Txman1996 2 years ago