Why do some think the Government owns your money

[Borillar]

We have had several threads recently and a lot in the past where different posters have declared things like " if the Government lowers taxes, shouldn't we know what the money is spent on" or "lower taxes are stealing from the Government".

Are people not aware that the Government taxes THEIR money, the Government does not possess any money it self it takes from the citizens via taxes and fees. When taxes are lowered the Government is not GIVING anyone money, they are just not taking as much as before.

The Government has the right to tax, and taxes are needed to run essential services. But where did this concept that the Government is giving you money if they lower taxes come from?

Where did the concept that if the Government takes less of your money they should be able to make you tell them what you spend your money on come from? Or the thought that any money the Government does not collect is still the Governments money that they just let you use?

The attitude in Chinese society revolved around worship of central government (emperor) and societies in which the hierarchical structure is like a pyramid with many at the base and only one at the top.

Some people want to tear up the founders' constitution and structure a pyramid government because it is easier to do what one person wants rather than share power.

Dumbing Americans down through teaching pyramid doctrine as desirable is the end means for converting our shared republic into a pyramid oligarchy with one above it all to have his whims catered to and say sweet words to eager, worshipful ears.

We had that here once. King Charles III. He decided he didn't need our input, kept putting us off as somehow not worth his time to discuss representation in his court. And just to teach us a lesson we wouldn't soon forget, levied a high tax on tea.

The subsequent tea party is still hated by pyramidicissies.

And they're getting their pink slips in November.

That was King George III. Charles III was king of Spain. I hope you're right about the tea-partiers getting the pink slip in November.

 

[freedombecki]

We have had several threads recently and a lot in the past where different posters have declared things like " if the Government lowers taxes, shouldn't we know what the money is spent on" or "lower taxes are stealing from the Government".

Are people not aware that the Government taxes THEIR money, the Government does not possess any money it self it takes from the citizens via taxes and fees. When taxes are lowered the Government is not GIVING anyone money, they are just not taking as much as before.

The Government has the right to tax, and taxes are needed to run essential services. But where did this concept that the Government is giving you money if they lower taxes come from?

Where did the concept that if the Government takes less of your money they should be able to make you tell them what you spend your money on come from? Or the thought that any money the Government does not collect is still the Governments money that they just let you use?

If there was no government, you would live in a cardboard box next to a hole in the ground where you take a dump. Me? I want sewers and electricity and roads.

You get sewers! Done!

They say one outta three isn't bad <giggle>

 

[freedombecki]

We have had several threads recently and a lot in the past where different posters have declared things like " if the Government lowers taxes, shouldn't we know what the money is spent on" or "lower taxes are stealing from the Government".

Are people not aware that the Government taxes THEIR money, the Government does not possess any money it self it takes from the citizens via taxes and fees. When taxes are lowered the Government is not GIVING anyone money, they are just not taking as much as before.

The Government has the right to tax, and taxes are needed to run essential services. But where did this concept that the Government is giving you money if they lower taxes come from?

Where did the concept that if the Government takes less of your money they should be able to make you tell them what you spend your money on come from? Or the thought that any money the Government does not collect is still the Governments money that they just let you use?

The attitude in Chinese society revolved around worship of central government (emperor) and societies in which the hierarchical structure is like a pyramid with many at the base and only one at the top.

Some people want to tear up the founders' constitution and structure a pyramid government because it is easier to do what one person wants rather than share power.

Dumbing Americans down through teaching pyramid doctrine as desirable is the end means for converting our shared republic into a pyramid oligarchy with one above it all to have his whims catered to and say sweet words to eager, worshipful ears.

We had that here once. King George (corrected) III. He decided he didn't need our input, kept putting us off as somehow not worth his time to discuss representation in his court. And just to teach us a lesson we wouldn't soon forget, levied a high tax on tea.

The subsequent tea party is still hated by pyramidicissies.

And they're getting their pink slips in November.

That was King George III. Charles III was king of Spain. I hope you're right about the tea-partiers getting the pink slip in November.

Thank you for the correction. It's my bad. I even looked it up, then must have been thinking about the present first in line to the throne and just typed in Chas.

That would be Obama getting his pink slips along with his desired pyramid government in which he rules, and his "enemies" have no say whatever.

 

[freedombecki]

Have a T shirt...

How much did it cost you folks to have the word "Democrat" removed and "Republican" put in, considering Obama's high unemployment, unsustainable Health Care without a 20% rise in taxes (8.5%x3 times DNC estimates based on DNC fuzzy math) along with Bizarroworld final 5 lines?

 

[freedombecki]

We had that here once. King Charles III. He decided he didn't need our input, kept putting us off as somehow not worth his time to discuss representation in his court. And just to teach us a lesson we wouldn't soon forget, levied a high tax on tea.

The subsequent tea party is still hated by pyramidicissies.

I am assuming that you are British and simply expressing your enthusiasm for the current Prince of Wales. There is no Charles III. Charles II is generally regarded as a pretty successful ruler and all around good egg. But then when your predecessor had had his head chopped off, you tend to be a little more careful. It's his son James II who lost the throne in the Glorious Revvolution of 1688. As he took ship for France, he expressed both his feeling toward his people and his level of intelligence by throwing the Great Seal into the Thames and exclaiming, "Now let them try to rule without me!" implying that the power of government existed not in men or institutions, but in inanimate objects.

I am not aware of a story involving James II and a tax on tea. Are you perhaps referring to George III and the unpleasantness with the American colonies? If so George's minister Lord North shares at least equal responsibiliy. And the Tea Act got a bad rap. Originally it was one of many of the "Intolerable Acts" but when most of the others were repealed to sooth relations with the colonies, George noted that the Tea tax was "one tax to keep up the right [to levy taxes]".

English history has enough colorful episodes to provide delght for aes; it just helps to keep them straight.

All the best.

P.S. Three hundred years later the Great Seal tuned up in a dredge of the Thames. Jmes II couldn't do anything right.

Thank you for the correction, oldf. My bad.

 

[Katzndogz]

Obama's mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, once wrote that the government could take 100% if your income, if they wanted.. That's the kinda guy Obama is too! All your hard earned $$ belongs to him! But whatever is accomplished with that money.. That's not your accomplishment. You didn't build that.

obama's father felt the same way. The government had the power to keep 100% of income, if it provided the services and goods that the income would provide it was fair.

 

[freedombecki]

We have had several threads recently and a lot in the past where different posters have declared things like " if the Government lowers taxes, shouldn't we know what the money is spent on" or "lower taxes are stealing from the Government".

Are people not aware that the Government taxes THEIR money, the Government does not possess any money it self it takes from the citizens via taxes and fees. When taxes are lowered the Government is not GIVING anyone money, they are just not taking as much as before.

The Government has the right to tax, and taxes are needed to run essential services. But where did this concept that the Government is giving you money if they lower taxes come from?

Where did the concept that if the Government takes less of your money they should be able to make you tell them what you spend your money on come from? Or the thought that any money the Government does not collect is still the Governments money that they just let you use?

What I find interesting is your post clearly shows that you see the Government as something separate from the People.

maybe thats the fundamental difference here.

I see the Government as something I am a part of, something that does MY bidding, not as something thats doing things TO me.

hmmmmm....

What I find interesting is your post clearly shows that you see the Government as something separate from the People.

That's because dear leader spent a couple of years referring to Republicans and conservatives as his "enemies." He separated conservatives from other Americans for punitive measures in the energy business in the Gulf of Mexico, that affected at least 3 of the 4 states in the South that did not vote for him in the election of 2008. Obama's Holder has also withheld the services of Homeland Security from the security forces of Arizona who are trying to deal with immigrants flooding over the border for free food, free medicine, free hospitalization, free education, free lodging, and even free jailing and for hardened criminals who were dumped at the border and told never to come back to Mexico again, but returned to their lives of crime over here rather than over there, overburdening the jails of Arizona.

Where do we begin telling you how it must feel for his "enemies" to be punished with dictatorial and also unilateral punishments dear leader dishes out frequently to his "enemies."

Obama tells Latinos to "PUNISH OUR ENEMIES"
​

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0YH6UQNbBo"]Obama Racism. Calls Republicans "Enemies" & says that "they can ride in the BACK" (of the Car)! - YouTube[/ame]

the Government of Obama is something separate from the People on the right. He calls us enemies before he is called on it, and if he is reelected, it won't matter, he will unleash more evil speech separating more Americans.

Get the Separator who wants to own all your money out of Office.

Vote Republican.

​

 

[Vidi]

Have a T shirt...

How much did it cost you folks to have the word "Democrat" removed and "Republican" put in, considering Obama's high unemployment, unsustainable Health Care without a 20% rise in taxes (8.5%x3 times DNC estimates based on DNC fuzzy math) along with Bizarroworld final 5 lines?

Hey, Becki,

I want you to feel super dooper free to post anything the Republicans have proposed and passed in the last 15 years that actually had the results they claimed it would, k?

Until then, Bizarroworld is currently in session in Tampa.

 

[Vidi]

We have had several threads recently and a lot in the past where different posters have declared things like " if the Government lowers taxes, shouldn't we know what the money is spent on" or "lower taxes are stealing from the Government".

Are people not aware that the Government taxes THEIR money, the Government does not possess any money it self it takes from the citizens via taxes and fees. When taxes are lowered the Government is not GIVING anyone money, they are just not taking as much as before.

The Government has the right to tax, and taxes are needed to run essential services. But where did this concept that the Government is giving you money if they lower taxes come from?

Where did the concept that if the Government takes less of your money they should be able to make you tell them what you spend your money on come from? Or the thought that any money the Government does not collect is still the Governments money that they just let you use?

What I find interesting is your post clearly shows that you see the Government as something separate from the People.

maybe thats the fundamental difference here.

I see the Government as something I am a part of, something that does MY bidding, not as something thats doing things TO me.

hmmmmm....

What I find interesting is your post clearly shows that you see the Government as something separate from the People.

That's because dear leader spent a couple of years referring to Republicans and conservatives as his "enemies." He separated conservatives from other Americans for punitive measures in the energy business in the Gulf of Mexico, that affected at least 3 of the 4 states in the South that did not vote for him in the election of 2008. Obama's Holder has also withheld the services of Homeland Security from the security forces of Arizona who are trying to deal with immigrants flooding over the border for free food, free medicine, free hospitalization, free education, free lodging, and even free jailing and for hardened criminals who were dumped at the border and told never to come back to Mexico again, but returned to their lives of crime over here rather than over there, overburdening the jails of Arizona.

Where do we begin telling you how it must feel for his "enemies" to be punished with dictatorial and also unilateral punishments dear leader dishes out frequently to his "enemies."

Obama tells Latinos to "PUNISH OUR ENEMIES"
​

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0YH6UQNbBo"]Obama Racism. Calls Republicans "Enemies" & says that "they can ride in the BACK" (of the Car)! - YouTube[/ame]

the Government of Obama is something separate from the People on the right. He calls us enemies before he is called on it, and if he is reelected, it won't matter, he will unleash more evil speech separating more Americans.

Get the Separator who wants to own all your money out of Office.

Vote Republican.

​

Rich People who inherit their fortunes call themselves "Job Creators" and vote Republican. Rich People who worked and earned their fortunes call themselves grateful and vote Democrat.

There's a reason uneducated people vote Republican, they aren't smart enough to know any better.

Obama 332
Romney 206

But fear not, right wingers, the Republicans WILL regain the White House in 2016.

 

[Meister]

What I find interesting is your post clearly shows that you see the Government as something separate from the People.

maybe thats the fundamental difference here.

I see the Government as something I am a part of, something that does MY bidding, not as something thats doing things TO me.

hmmmmm....

What I find interesting is your post clearly shows that you see the Government as something separate from the People.

That's because dear leader spent a couple of years referring to Republicans and conservatives as his "enemies." He separated conservatives from other Americans for punitive measures in the energy business in the Gulf of Mexico, that affected at least 3 of the 4 states in the South that did not vote for him in the election of 2008. Obama's Holder has also withheld the services of Homeland Security from the security forces of Arizona who are trying to deal with immigrants flooding over the border for free food, free medicine, free hospitalization, free education, free lodging, and even free jailing and for hardened criminals who were dumped at the border and told never to come back to Mexico again, but returned to their lives of crime over here rather than over there, overburdening the jails of Arizona.

Where do we begin telling you how it must feel for his "enemies" to be punished with dictatorial and also unilateral punishments dear leader dishes out frequently to his "enemies."

Obama tells Latinos to "PUNISH OUR ENEMIES"
​

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CJqD7F2pwA]Obama to Latinos, punish our enemies.mov - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0YH6UQNbBo"]Obama Racism. Calls Republicans "Enemies" & says that "they can ride in the BACK" (of the Car)! - YouTube[/ame]

the Government of Obama is something separate from the People on the right. He calls us enemies before he is called on it, and if he is reelected, it won't matter, he will unleash more evil speech separating more Americans.

Get the Separator who wants to own all your money out of Office.

Vote Republican.

​

Rich People who inherit their fortunes call themselves "Job Creators" and vote Republican. Rich People who worked and earned their fortunes call themselves grateful and vote Democrat.

There's a reason uneducated people vote Republican, they aren't smart enough to know any better.

Obama 332
Romney 206

But fear not, right wingers, the Republicans WILL regain the White House in 2016.

Mitt donated his inheritence from his father to BYU. True Story
He earned his wealth.
Uneducated people vote republican? You really want to go there? I mean, you didn't know that Mitt donated his inheritence.
Vidi, I do expect better from you, you're usually a good poster without all name calling. It's a tight race and I'm sure it will get tighter, but stand tall when posting.

 

[freedombecki]

What I find interesting is your post clearly shows that you see the Government as something separate from the People.

maybe thats the fundamental difference here.

I see the Government as something I am a part of, something that does MY bidding, not as something thats doing things TO me.

hmmmmm....

What I find interesting is your post clearly shows that you see the Government as something separate from the People.

That's because dear leader spent a couple of years referring to Republicans and conservatives as his "enemies." He separated conservatives from other Americans for punitive measures in the energy business in the Gulf of Mexico, that affected at least 3 of the 4 states in the South that did not vote for him in the election of 2008. Obama's Holder has also withheld the services of Homeland Security from the security forces of Arizona who are trying to deal with immigrants flooding over the border for free food, free medicine, free hospitalization, free education, free lodging, and even free jailing and for hardened criminals who were dumped at the border and told never to come back to Mexico again, but returned to their lives of crime over here rather than over there, overburdening the jails of Arizona.

Where do we begin telling you how it must feel for his "enemies" to be punished with dictatorial and also unilateral punishments dear leader dishes out frequently to his "enemies."

Obama tells Latinos to "PUNISH OUR ENEMIES"
​

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CJqD7F2pwA]Obama to Latinos, punish our enemies.mov - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0YH6UQNbBo"]Obama Racism. Calls Republicans "Enemies" & says that "they can ride in the BACK" (of the Car)! - YouTube[/ame]

the Government of Obama is something separate from the People on the right. He calls us enemies before he is called on it, and if he is reelected, it won't matter, he will unleash more evil speech separating more Americans.

Get the Separator who wants to own all your money out of Office.

Vote Republican.

​

Rich People who inherit their fortunes call themselves "Job Creators" and vote Republican. Rich People who worked and earned their fortunes call themselves grateful and vote Democrat.

There's a reason uneducated people vote Republican, they aren't smart enough to know any better.

Obama 332
Romney 206

But fear not, right wingers, the Republicans WILL regain the White House in 2016.

Thank you for your narcissistic response to two videos which you obviously are too ashamed to view. They are rather horrific, considering you dropped the bomb of us feeling our government is separated from us. It actually and in fact, is, by Presidential Fiat from the Bully Pulpit. We're striking back in November.

You're just throwing bombs, pardnah.

Have a nice day in my rear view mirror.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

We have had several threads recently and a lot in the past where different posters have declared things like " if the Government lowers taxes, shouldn't we know what the money is spent on" or "lower taxes are stealing from the Government".

First, I have read the entire string before posting an answer (I promise!) and wanted to make a irect reply to your original post since the discussion doesnt seem to have advanced very far. I started out as an economist and taught Money & Banking. I ended up representing taxpayers before the IRS fo a living.

I agree with you that, "The Government has the right to tax, and taxes are needed to run essential services." I believe that the powers of government are not limited to "essential services" (who gets to decide what is essential?) but has general powers to promote the general welfare. I believe that government must be accountable for its spending (including "tax expenditures") and the public has both a right and duty to hold government accountable at the ballot box for its stewardship of our collective resources.

The beancounters in the Congressional Budget Office keep track among a lot of other things that effect the budget "tax expenditures" which are defined as any exclusion, deduction, credit, deferral, orother device in the tax code which has the effect of providing a tax advantage to one group of taxpayers but not all or nearly all taxpayers. So for example, the standard deduction and personal exemption (while not universal, there are exceptions) applies to most people and therefore is not a tax expenditure, while the deductions for mortgage intrest, charitable contributions,and casualty losses are.

The gross amount of tax expenditures is staggering. Each time a tax or expenditure bill comes up for a vote, the CBO must score it for its effect on the budget, so we get a pretty detailed idea of the cost of each measure, both spending bills and tax bills, when they are passed and as they continue in effect

Which brings me to your question. If government were to reduce all tax rates that would reduce revenues, but not be considered a tax ependiture. If however, he government decided to double the child tax credit, it would be a tax expenditure. Some tax credits are "refundable" in the sense that they can be refunded even if you have paid nothing in; the child tax credit happens to be partially refundable. The idea for such credits comes from the flaming liberal who was Barry Goldwater's chief economic advisor in 1964, Milton Friedman. He called it the "Negative Income Tax" and today we call it the Earned Income Tax Credit. Since Barry lost in 1964, the idea didn't become law until another Republican by the name of Richard Nixon got elected president four years later and made it a signature part of his domestic policy.

But most of the tax expenditures go to very large corporations and very wealthy individuals. Those parts of the tax code are arcane and most people are only vaguely aware that they exist. Things like intangible drilling costs, percentage depletion, bonus depreciation, refund o FICA taxes on tips, and so forth. I make a pretty good living keeping up with the breaks that help small (as in less than 500 workers) businesses.

So some people and entities get checks from the government in excess of any amounts they have had withheld or paid in. These tend to be the very poor and the very rich.

I'm not sure what you are referring to when you state "Where did the concept that if the Government takes less of your money they should be able to make you tell them what you spend your money on come from?" I'm guessing you are talking about the idea that in order to get most of these tax breaks you must provide the government on the tax return with the information necessary to calculate it and show that you are eligible for it. For example, to claim the now expired New Homeowner's Credit, you would have to prove when you bought the house and how much it cost. If you had something else in mind, I am curious to hear it.

All the best, Jamie

There is currently an active thread that has as its Title a claim that the Government should know what people that get a lesser tax rate should provide to the Government a list of how they spend the money the Government supposedly just gave them. Further this has been posted before in different incarnations.

How hard is it to understand that I am talking about taxes not credits and not welfare. YOU pay taxes. If the Government decides you should pay less TAXES, th idea is you should tell the Government what you will spend the money on to qualify for the tax break.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Have a T shirt...

How much did it cost you folks to have the word "Democrat" removed and "Republican" put in, considering Obama's high unemployment, unsustainable Health Care without a 20% rise in taxes (8.5%x3 times DNC estimates based on DNC fuzzy math) along with Bizarroworld final 5 lines?

Hey, Becki,

I want you to feel super dooper free to post anything the Republicans have proposed and passed in the last 15 years that actually had the results they claimed it would, k?

Until then, Bizarroworld is currently in session in Tampa.

The post you quote is nothing but a partisan attack and does not belong in this thread, as do 2 more of your posts with partisan attacks. Again this is the clean debate forum, act accordingly, if you want to sling partisan bull around go to politics.

 

[Borillar]

We have had several threads recently and a lot in the past where different posters have declared things like " if the Government lowers taxes, shouldn't we know what the money is spent on" or "lower taxes are stealing from the Government".

Are people not aware that the Government taxes THEIR money, the Government does not possess any money it self it takes from the citizens via taxes and fees. When taxes are lowered the Government is not GIVING anyone money, they are just not taking as much as before.

The Government has the right to tax, and taxes are needed to run essential services. But where did this concept that the Government is giving you money if they lower taxes come from?

Where did the concept that if the Government takes less of your money they should be able to make you tell them what you spend your money on come from? Or the thought that any money the Government does not collect is still the Governments money that they just let you use?

What I find interesting is your post clearly shows that you see the Government as something separate from the People.

maybe thats the fundamental difference here.

I see the Government as something I am a part of, something that does MY bidding, not as something thats doing things TO me.

hmmmmm....

What I find interesting is your post clearly shows that you see the Government as something separate from the People.

That's because dear leader spent a couple of years referring to Republicans and conservatives as his "enemies." He separated conservatives from other Americans for punitive measures in the energy business in the Gulf of Mexico, that affected at least 3 of the 4 states in the South that did not vote for him in the election of 2008. Obama's Holder has also withheld the services of Homeland Security from the security forces of Arizona who are trying to deal with immigrants flooding over the border for free food, free medicine, free hospitalization, free education, free lodging, and even free jailing and for hardened criminals who were dumped at the border and told never to come back to Mexico again, but returned to their lives of crime over here rather than over there, overburdening the jails of Arizona.

Where do we begin telling you how it must feel for his "enemies" to be punished with dictatorial and also unilateral punishments dear leader dishes out frequently to his "enemies."

Obama tells Latinos to "PUNISH OUR ENEMIES"
​

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CJqD7F2pwA]Obama to Latinos, punish our enemies.mov - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0YH6UQNbBo"]Obama Racism. Calls Republicans "Enemies" & says that "they can ride in the BACK" (of the Car)! - YouTube[/ame]

the Government of Obama is something separate from the People on the right. He calls us enemies before he is called on it, and if he is reelected, it won't matter, he will unleash more evil speech separating more Americans.

Get the Separator who wants to own all your money out of Office.

Vote Republican.

​

Considering the bile directed towards him and his family, the unprecedented number of filibusters to his proposals, McChinless coming out and saying that his only job would be to make sure Obama is a one term president, the birther movement, the tea party movement, rampant racism, etc, I would say that Obama was perfectly correct in calling them enemies. With "loyal opposition" like the Republicans, who needs enemies? "Enemy" is a pretty mild term compared to the vitriol directed at him.

 

[oldfart]

If you had something else in mind, I am curious to hear it.

All the best, Jamie

There is currently an active thread that has as its Title a claim that the Government should know what people that get a lesser tax rate should provide to the Government a list of how they spend the money the Government supposedly just gave them. Further this has been posted before in different incarnations.

How hard is it to understand that I am talking about taxes not credits and not welfare. YOU pay taxes. If the Government decides you should pay less TAXES, th idea is you should tell the Government what you will spend the money on to qualify for the tax break.

I'm sorry someone pooped in your Fruit Loops. Obviously I have no idea what you were asking about. I still don't. I thought you were talking about taxes, but I am obviously wrong. I'll decline the offer to engage in a wild goose chase for an unreference string that has an incomprehensible title. Good luck on your attempt to make sense of someone else's incoherent claim. Let me know if you ever want to talk about anything that in the Internal Revenue Code.

Jamie

 

[Rozman]

I can only assume that we didn't earn it ourselves.

I can only assume that we didn't earn it ourselves.

Not only did we as Americans not build the Businesses.
We as Americans didn't earn the money we earned.
It's governments money first.We are "allowed" under the government's benevolence
to keep some of it.

 

[Desperado]

Interesting

The same people who claim to defend the Constitution despise the very government that it establishes

The same people who claim to defend the Constitution despise the very government that it ignores it now....

Fixed it for you

 

[MeadHallPirate]

We have had several threads recently and a lot in the past where different posters have declared things like " if the Government lowers taxes, shouldn't we know what the money is spent on" or "lower taxes are stealing from the Government".

Are people not aware that the Government taxes THEIR money, the Government does not possess any money it self it takes from the citizens via taxes and fees. When taxes are lowered the Government is not GIVING anyone money, they are just not taking as much as before.

The Government has the right to tax, and taxes are needed to run essential services. But where did this concept that the Government is giving you money if they lower taxes come from?

Where did the concept that if the Government takes less of your money they should be able to make you tell them what you spend your money on come from? Or the thought that any money the Government does not collect is still the Governments money that they just let you use?

ahoy RetiredGySgt,

i don't know if the Government "owns" our monies, matey. what i do think be this; the people request services from the Federal Government, aye?

things like medicare and social security and medicaid.

things like tricare fer our veterans.

stuff like really clean air and pristine waters.

things like a huge, huge, immense military.

other trifles, like Federal firefightin' assistance in Colorado, or drought relief fer all them big, red, rectangular states.

the thing is, all these services costs an armada 'o treasure, so taxes must be raised to pay fer them.

now, if we don't want them things, then we don't have to be taxed fer'm, aye? but we do want them things, so they have to paid fer. 'tis really that simple.

*salutes*

- MeadHallPirate

 

[Polk]

I feel like the OP is a strawman. I've never encountered anyone who thinks all income belongs to the state.

 

[MeadHallPirate]

I feel like the OP is a strawman. I've never encountered anyone who thinks all income belongs to the state.

ahoy Polk,

them who equate taxes with outright theft would think so.

- MeadHallPirate