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.

 

Is using government force to take from one to give to another the moral high ground?

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 12:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Kettu

Don't know; don't care. I'm concerned about America. I try not to stick my nose into other countries' affairs.

TheRedneck




posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 12:43 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Everything you said was absolute garbage that was completely irrelevant to my point.


This especially...

And yes, it is MY MONEY.


No.
You are afforded the guarantee of compensation for services rendered, only with the safety net of government to protect that guarantee.

& in the case of self employment, again remove the government safety net from the situation and that is when the hyenas will circle.


Without those guarantees, it definitely isn’t “your money”...


I suppose you have your firearms...
But you’d have to keep a 100% success rate for that to be beneficial.


Were there warlords taking over American villages during that 140 years?


Actually it’s very statistically possible that they did in many areas of the country.

But I was referring to the presence of warlords in the absence of government...
You’re asking a question based on a society that had a government...
So it’s literally a strawman.
edit on 27-12-2017 by Hazardous1408 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 12:43 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Ok, but necessary, why?

I mean necessary could mean that even those that are getting the short end of the stick are getting a better deal than they would get otherwise.



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 12:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

Exactly. Without this "the gubmint" none of these people would even have money to be taxed.

The government does more than just take their money, it negotiates trade deals and ensures the security of the oceans upon which our trade goods flow for example.

Is the government perfect? Hell. No. Hell no it's far from perfect, but it works for US. We have a voice via our vote. We elect people who we think will represent the things we want to give us a voice.

Unless you are a majority shareholder in a corporation, you have zero voice. Corporations and companies exist to make profit, not protect and serve the citizens. They're run by people from the smallest segment of our population (the wealthiest) who are the furthest removed from the day-to-day struggles of those born into life with few opportunities.

It all comes down to balance. I think if people actually felt like their tax dollars were being used for "them" personally, instead of those they'll never see or meet -- they'd likely feel very differently.

That's the fundamental difference between people who self-identify as "conservative" versus those who identify as "progressive".

The conservative-minded person isn't necessarily stingy or greedy. In fact, studies have shown they donate to charities and religious organizations to help the poor quite a bit. The difference is (and this is important) they want to control WHO and WHERE their charity goes.

This is in contrast to the progressive-minded person who doesn't see a distinction in where their money is being used to help others. They understand that their tax dollars being used to help poor inner city minorities to read may not directly effect them, but it makes the country-at-large a better place.

It's a "big picture" vs. a "control" mentality. Conservatives want to control and see where their charity/help is going, whereas progressives tend to be OK helping those they don't know.
edit on 27-12-2017 by Kettu because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 12:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kettu
It's a "big picture" vs. a "control" mentality. Conservatives want to control and see where their charity/help is going, whereas progressives tend to be OK helping those they don't know.

Which is what this and the other thread I mentioned earlier are based upon. OP never said taxes are evil or even a necessary evil they asked about forcing them to pay for things they don't care about.

War/military is where most of your money goes, that wasn't on the list. The list was actually things that would benefit americans so what was the rant about?



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 12:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408


Everything you said was absolute garbage that was completely irrelevant to my point.


This especially...

No, it is not irrelevant. And it's far from garbage. But your response does illustrate the exact problem I tried to explain earlier in this thread.

It is my money, but you would rather it be our money... I might work for it, but it's easier for you to just decide that you want some of it. It's the same basic argument that caused Obama to proclaim "You didn't build that!" It's an entitlement mentality that refuses to acknowledge personal property of others, because at some point in time you might want that personal property.

Life don't work like that, son.

I repeat, keep your paws off what is mine.


But I was referring to the presence of warlords in the absence of government...
You’re asking a question based on a society that had a government...
So it’s literally a strawman.

Those warlords taking over villages you mentioned are a form of government. They tax their citizenry, too. So your complaint is completely invalid.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 12:59 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

People can and do stop paying their taxes.

They just shouldn't be surprised when the IRS file tax liens on them and possibly face jail time.

Living in the most powerful country in the world comes with a price.

Pay it.

Don't like what your tax dollars are buying?

Run for office. Canvas for a political candidate. Donate time to a campaign. Do "get out the vote" events. Write letters and suggest ideas to your representatives.

If you aren't willing to work to change things you don't like, then GTFO out of the country.



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 01:01 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik


Ok, but necessary, why?

I mean necessary could mean that even those that are getting the short end of the stick are getting a better deal than they would get otherwise.

I have never said taxation was not necessary. History teaches us it absolutely is necessary; the Articles of Confederation failed precisely because they did not give the Federal government the ability to tax.

I simply state that taxation in itself is a necessary evil, akin to legalized robbery, so even if we must endure it, we should not celebrate it and try to increase it. Taxation should be at the minimum realistic level.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 01:13 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

That is why I asked " necessary, why?", because you said they were necessary.

I just pointed out why they could be seen that way even by those who are getting the short end of the stick. They are not celebrating it, they might just be accepting a better deal.



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 01:26 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Those who accept taxation I have no argument with. As long as the taxation is used for the efficient benefit of the majority, a case for necessity can be made. However, there are quite a few in our present society who do celebrate taxation and continually cry that it is actually a good thing that should be increased as much as possible. Witness the posters above who I have responded to. "Not your money" and "You didn't build that" are code for "We want your money, because we are better than you." That is evil incarnate and is completely against every principle that made our country what it is.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 01:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
However, there are quite a few in our present society who do celebrate taxation and continually cry that it is actually a good thing that should be increased as much as possible.

I've never met anyone like that. Not saying they don't exist but they must be a very small minority. I doubt they can effect any type of change.



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 08:25 AM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Every time you hear someone use the argument "it's not your money," you just met someone like that.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: ketsuko

I understand the argument. The thing is that the thread is about how the money is spent.

ETA: Making it seem like the gov spending it one way is bad and you are here saying it is all bad even though the constitution provides for taxation for buying stuff. Just saying.


This is just wrapping up the legality argument in a with a new bow. Again, making something legal does not make it moral. Also, if you really do look at the text, it does not just say the government can tax to pay for stuff as if it's really that simple. "Hey, I want a new lamborghini, so Congress can tax your money to pay for my car ..." No, not at all. There are only a very narrow range of things Congress is empowered to tax on and the those taxes and duties are supposed to be very narrowly defined.

The actual tax system we have now took an amendment.


Also, I don't agree with the word evil. If you pay taxes and get a good ROI then is that evil?


Yes, because you did not get that return with your own earned money but did it by stealing someone else's without knowing if they were willing to have their money invested. What if they don't consider the ROI to be good or in their best interests? Some might consider the US military a good ROI while others do not, and some might consider the social safety net a good ROI while others do not.

So in this instance ROI is highly subjective.


If you buy from a private company and their product is not as good as another brand do you consider them evil?



No because you are comparing apples to oranges now.

No company can force you to buy their product. If you buy the Magnovox and later discover it's not as good as the Sony, it's not like Magnavox took your money by force even though you would have preferred to use it on a Sony. Instead, you did not do your due diligence as a consumer during your buying phase and missed the research that would have shown you that Magnavoxes aren't as good as Sonys; that one is on you, and you made that choice when you went to buy.



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko


No company can force you to buy their product.

Insurance companies from Obamacare until the other day. Just sayin'.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

I disagree. The people who I hear use that argument are talking about the money taken and what is being done with it and not that the gov should take everything you have earned.



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I actually don't really care. It is all just your opinion. You are free to continue to gnash your teeth at the evilness of it all if you want.



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: toysforadults

You lost me at "cultural Marxist".

If you want to be taken seriously, avoid nonsensical meme phrases like that



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

I believe you are being naive. Listen to people talking about it sometime. It's not "money taken from others," it is "our money." That is taking possession, and typically those same people are all to quick to suggest taking more.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

I believe you are seeing what you want. Money taxed is the collective's money. That doesn't include the money not levied.

Some people do talk about taking more from a certain group (the rich) I doubt that includes you so they are not talking about "your" money. Now, they have their arguments and whether they are valid or not is not my point.



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 12:14 PM
link   
I'm happy to pay in, as a citizen of America. Via the federal tax system, when I was young and didn't earn much, I got large refunds and tax credits, making my contribution nothing more than a temporary loan repaid with massive interest at the end of the year.

Now, I earn plenty (in my opinion) and I pay in, getting no refund, to ensure emergency services, military, hospitals, roads, bridges, and most importantly, those less fortunate are taken care of however they need it.

how much do I think is my fair share? I don't know. Whatever it ends up being, I guess. I have no idea what I paid last year, and I have no idea how much I've paid in this year. I have not once this entire year even looked at a pay stub. It's just money, and I am neither motivated by it, or care that much about it. Greed is a disease, and I'm thankfully free of it.

Could I ever successfully run a publicly traded corporation? Nope. Why? I'd screw over the shareholders in favor of the employees at every single turn, and get fired. Money is a drug. And arguing that taxes are "immoral" just because you like to cry about not wanting to pay into the system everyone else does, while benefiting from said system every day, is just plain sad. Or sorry. Probably both.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join