@Here
If you collect social security today, you are collecting taken from the current group of workers. The social security you paid into previously was taken to pay those workers that were retired at that time. It is not like your money went into a 401K-type account, grew to a large enough account to pay for all the payments made in your retirement. I agree that the politicans lied to you when they told you, if you paid for the retirees at that time they'd have your back when your time came. It's always easy to promise to pay with someone else's money. With the taxation in this country I've lowered my (above board) income, and have plans of removing it all together. Again, look at the current state of Japan's economics to see how this ponzi scheme pays out in a declining economy with a declining birthrate.
The problem is that the math cares neither if you are right or I am right in what should be done. The spreadsheets simply won't support spending more than you take in for eternity. We have never in the history of this country collected more than 20% of the GDP in taxes. Even with income tax rates at 97% for those making more than $500,000 it didn't happen. People adjust their lifestyle/way of doing business to avoid taxation when it become excessive.
@csgray
I went to both public and private schools. While in private schools my parents paid taxes for infrastructure (getting double charged for schooling at that point). I would say that the education provided by my parents in how to be self sufficient in life was much more valuable than a public school indoctrination. Parents also taught me math and reading ahead of the school curriculum. Mandated school spending is a recent invention, with a federal level in the early 1900's (I believe).
I in actuality have no problem with limited taxation at a local level, and find that you can reasonably fund most "public good" projects via opt-in taxes. If you want to have roadways, then you have a fuel tax. By purchasing fuel you are opting in to pay for services you are using. If you want to utilize a public sewer system then you pay a fee associated with that service (just like with cable, telephone, power) that covers the cost of that service. I even don't have a problem with a local community deciding that it wants all citizens of that town/city to pay for schooling (or any other general service) and tax their citizens accordingly. You have the option of moving out of a city/town with minimal impact to your life, not so with taxation at a national level.
My problem with taxation is with the method and degree.
Method- Income tax and property tax being my biggest issue. You don't really "own" a property that you have to continually pay a fee (one that continues to rise) to keep and which you have to ask permission from a government to do anything with. If I hook to an outside service (power/sewer/water/cable) then I need to pay a fee, an ongoing fee if it's an ongoing service). If what I do causes physical damage to a neighboring property, then I need to pay the consequences of this damage (repair damage and if the action was other than an "act of god" then a punishment). Other than that it is irrelevant what I do on my land and I shouldn't have to pay rent for that land to government. Income tax - Unless you are born into a wealthy family which provides for you for your whole life there is no way to avoid working for an income, for at least a portion of your time. So therefore, you are being taxed for just being alive and have no alternative to provide yourself food and shelter. I consider this no different that a plantation owner taking all of the cotton from a slave at the end of the day, except in degree. Currently you only take 1/3 of my cotton, with our rate of spending I'm sure you'll vote to increase that.
quote:
If you want to live in some Randian utopia go find it,
With me being born and raised in a "free" country you would think that was possible. The truth is that your only free here if you live according to the majorities view (isn't democracy wonderful, 2 wolves voting with 1 sheep on what's for dinner). In reality what you stated here is exactly what I would like to happen. I would like for society to stop taking what is mine and just leave me alone. Your taxation is what keeps me doing this. I cannot leave the country because to make a large move like that I would need to save. Your taxation limits my saving (I spend more on taxes than I do on rent and food) and if I did save enough to move, that savings would be labeled an asset and taxed at another 33% by the IRS. So, I can't afford to buy my freedom from my owners.
quote:
but the system in this country is that we are a nation of laws with an elected representative government that prioritizes expenditures based on the idea of common public good,
BS. We are run by a two party system that works hand in hand to keep the aristocracy in power. Your "rule of law" only applies to "average" citizen. This is a national problem, but Hawaii has a long history of those "in the club" getting the system to work for them at the expense of the citizens.
quote:
constantly seeking to undermine that system because you don't want to pay for anyone's needs except your own is as futile as it is selfish.
Futile. I agree in the current system. The social democracy that FDR put in place is specifically designed to destroy independence and self sufficiency. If you are reliant on the government for your well being, then they are able to control you. This country was founded on protecting the rights of the minority against mob rule (democracy). We have eroded those safety checks (17th amendment, non-elected bureaucracy (IRS, FDA, EPA), federally mandated laws and systems) and demoted personal liberty to a much lower rung on the ladder of priorities.
quote:
I think what we have here is pure mean spirited selfishness masquerading as a political philosophy.
I realize that this is an online forum and we really don't know each other. I may disagree with your approach, and I have no problem if you wish to give all your income to the government to support what they are doing [that's the difference between statist and those that believe in liberty - I like to think more Madison/Jefferson/Paine vs Randian - her stories gave a nice black and white to some ideas but she was a nut case in her personal life and 2 fictional novels do not a philosophy make - statist want to force their philosophy on you, libertarians just want to be left alone]. I tend to take these things as a discussion of political philosophy and as such view it through a "black and white" lens realizing in reality you have to make compromises in a society to get along. If you knew me in person you would realize that I'm not a selfish person. I believe strongly in paying it forward (helping a neighbor/friend knowing that you'll probably need that assistance in the future, besides building good karma). I was also raise with a strong sense of charity and have expressed that charity on a continuous basis, but here's the catch, on a voluntary basis. I believe as a free citizen I have the ability and right to choose which organizations my charity goes towards. My compromise is that when taxed at a local level there is more ability to control that (and expose corruption) while at a federal level that is impossible (besides being inefficient), but in our current system most of the money and the attached rules come from some bureaucrat located in an office that has no understanding of what the local citizens need or want.
