It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Romans only had 1 percent tax. This is what I agree with.

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:00 PM
link   
I used to be a Democrat and pro big government. I switched to Libertarian and advocate freedom. The federal government should really only be responsible for collective defense. Things like education and healthcare should be left to the states. The 10th amendment says whatever states can do should be left to the states. Over time, in the US, the federal government had became too large and too overreaching, setting up EPA and department of education and department of health and department of energy and so on and so forth. The federal government is not efficient at providing these services. These services should be done by the states, leaving the federal government to focus on defense and foreign policies.


In the early days of the Roman Republic, public taxes consisted of modest assessments on owned wealth and property. The tax rate under normal circumstances was 1% and sometimes would climb as high as 3% in situations such as war.



By 167 B.C. the Republic had enriched itself greatly through a series of conquests. Gains such as the silver and gold mines in Spain created an excellent source of revenue for the state, and a much larger tax base through its provincial residents. By this time, Rome no longer needed to levy a tax against its citizens in Italy and looked only to the provinces for collections.


www.unrv.com...
edit on 23-7-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

It's nice when people can agree - even though I'm a Conservative - I agree with your opinion straight up.

Flat tax - it's time!

peace



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: silo13

Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, these all have flat tax. These are much better than the graduated tax used by western Europeans.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:07 PM
link   
1% tax rate.. Ok but then you must have to accept your armies reverting back to armour and sword's like the romans..



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Misterlondon

Technology keeps with the times. Back then there were catapults. Now we have tanks. Because technology changed. Tax can still be 1%.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
I used to be a Democrat and pro big government. I switched to Libertarian and advocate freedom. The federal government should really only be responsible for collective defense. Things like education and healthcare should be left to the states. The 10th amendment says whatever states can do should be left to the states. Over time, in the US, the federal government had became too large and too overreaching, setting up EPA and department of education and department of health and department of energy and so on and so forth. The federal government is not efficient at providing these services. These services should be done by the states, leaving the federal government to focus on defense and foreign policies.


In the early days of the Roman Republic, public taxes consisted of modest assessments on owned wealth and property. The tax rate under normal circumstances was 1% and sometimes would climb as high as 3% in situations such as war.



By 167 B.C. the Republic had enriched itself greatly through a series of conquests. Gains such as the silver and gold mines in Spain created an excellent source of revenue for the state, and a much larger tax base through its provincial residents. By this time, Rome no longer needed to levy a tax against its citizens in Italy and looked only to the provinces for collections.


www.unrv.com...


States' rights? Seriously? And you want to get rid of the EPA? Can I ask why?



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

A 1% flat tax should be just about right. Then the 60% who paid no income taxes in this country will probably fess up and pay their fair share.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Each state can have its own EPA and its own environmental laws. It should not be done by the federal government.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

YES! A simple tax of 1-3% on those few lucky enough to own wealth or property supported by robbing other nations blind and keeping vast quantities of slaves to do all the work and much of the dying.

Tbf it's only changed a little, but still, think it through will ya?



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: skalla

Before Romans started conquest, they had 1% tax. After conquest, they had 0% tax. If you read the link I posted, you would have seen that.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Misterlondon
1% tax rate.. Ok but then you must have to accept your armies reverting back to armour and sword's like the romans..


I didn't even think of that wonderful benefit. Maybe pillows and sticks for overseas deployments and we can save the real armament for defending our shores, as was intended from the beginning.

This 1% is looking better and better.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: ClovenSky

If you think about it. A sword back then is equivalent to a rifle today. A catapult back then is equivalent to a tank today. A trireme back then is equivalent to a destroyer or a sub today. Now we also have aircraft, but overall a 1% flat tax is still enough to support a national army.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

That was how it was done before and it didn't work out.

It is cheaper to pay-off state officials than federals.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Swords were for the rich most had pikes or clubs.
1% good luck with that never going to happen.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye


Yes and no.

In the eyes of Rome the provinces were to carry the heavy weight of administering the Empire. Judea was in the province of Syria and every man was to pay 1% of his annual income for income tax. But that was not all, there were also import and export taxes, crop taxes (1/10 of grain crop and 1/5 of wine, fruit, and olive oil), sales tax, property tax, emergency tax, and on and on. It was actually a Roman official (censor) who was ultimately responsible to Rome for collecting the revenue of the province, but he sold the rights to extort tax to the highest bidders.
www.bible-history.com...



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: testingtesting

We have too many people not paying taxes and some people paying too much taxes. If everyone, EVERYONE, pays 1% tax, we would be just as well off.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
I used to be a Democrat and pro big government. I switched to Libertarian and advocate freedom.



Funny how a person can't be pro freedom and pro big government at the same time.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: testingtesting

We have too many people not paying taxes and some people paying too much taxes. If everyone, EVERYONE, pays 1% tax, we would be just as well off.


Show your working.



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Do you even try to do the math before posting?



posted on Jul, 23 2017 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

I'm assuming you mean only federal tax being 1% and then state tax being determined locally?

I'm not against a good working model of that.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join