WritersBeat.com
 

Go Back   WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table

The Intellectual Table Discussions on political topics, social issues, current affairs, etc.


The Answer Is More Teddy Bears

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 04-26-2017, 04:45 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,021
Thanks: 273
Thanks 656
Default


Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Maybe, maybe not. We don't really know because we're so used to everyone being taxed to fuck we can't really fathom a world without it. Remember we don't just get taxed, every business does as well. Everyone ends up paying 30 - 50% of their income. If that is reclaimed then operating as a business is a lot easier, you can bring down your margins, charge less. If you don't, someone will undercut you and you'll have to compete.

Really to answer your question... someone. Someone will build the roads, and if they need investment to do so, they'll have to make it attractive and affordable.

There's probably just as much private security on the streets as police. It'll work like insurance. You sign up... if you don't call them or get burgled etc you can have a nice no claims bonus


In the US nobody pays 30-50% of their income for taxes. I own a small business and pay about 15% of the money I make in taxes after all is said and done (and deducted). The more money one makes in business, the less taxes one ends up on the hook for here. I hear lots of bitching about our corporate tax rate, but the reality is much different.

If we cut out taxes on people there would be no roads to places many wanted to go. The rural areas and suburbs would be cut off in a very short time, forcing people into the already crowded city centers, and prices would skyrocket there for real estate and everything else.

There will always be some people who are on the dole and don't want to work for it, but giving them enough money, education, healthcare, and opportunity is probably a better answer than having a massive throng of angry, stupid, desperate people threatening at the gates perpetually.

Free market privatization of almost everything would put us back to the dark ages quickly. These people out there in the hinterlands would eventually commission a king or warlord and rally behind him to rape, pillage, and destroy the city on the hill.

Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old Today, 01:01 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,489
Thanks: 195
Thanks 659
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
In the US nobody pays 30-50% of their income for taxes. I own a small business and pay about 15% of the money I make in taxes after all is said and done (and deducted). The more money one makes in business, the less taxes one ends up on the hook for here. I hear lots of bitching about our corporate tax rate, but the reality is much different.

If we cut out taxes on people there would be no roads to places many wanted to go. The rural areas and suburbs would be cut off in a very short time, forcing people into the already crowded city centers, and prices would skyrocket there for real estate and everything else.

There will always be some people who are on the dole and don't want to work for it, but giving them enough money, education, healthcare, and opportunity is probably a better answer than having a massive throng of angry, stupid, desperate people threatening at the gates perpetually.

Free market privatization of almost everything would put us back to the dark ages quickly. These people out there in the hinterlands would eventually commission a king or warlord and rally behind him to rape, pillage, and destroy the city on the hill.

Sorry man but I really think this is just what the establishment want us to believe. I feel like I went through this throughout my early years I was taught to believe the market was the boogie man which was kept at bay and restrained by the heroic state.

But the market really is just us, getting all the shit done which needs to be done. It is every SME, and most of the big scary corporations are bolstered and propped up by the state rather than contained by it. Why, if corporations and banks are so afraid of the state, are they so wildly in favour of it? The corps and the banks were bearing down on everyone during the EU referendum urging them to vote remain. Because all their guys are in Brussels for reasons I hardly need to explain.

If we talk about optimism, for me it really betrays the most pessimistic view to suggest that we simply won't be able to handle road building without the government. Explain why there's no way we could build a road to a place 'many wanted to go' without the state.

To be fair I left out personal allowance. So there is a certain amount you can earn before you start paying tax, this amount isn't enough to live on but the government don't touch it. After this amount you'll pay 20% income Tax, plus 12% National Insurance, anything over 40k (approx think it's a bit more) it'll go up to 42% and the next band is 50% I believe.

In any event you add that up with corporate tax, inheritance tax, council tax, VAT, import duties and whatever else and you have somewhere in the region of 600 billion for the year. The tax revenue keeps going up and up... and so does the debt, somewhere around 1.5 trillion... and 'austerity' bites.

But don't worry about what they're doing all over the world with this money... they do build our roads after all

Edit: they often don't build our roads, and pay some private company crazy amounts to do it instead. They call it public private partnerships... which is just crowd funding (do it ourselves), with some retard -- who has probably been paid off -- doing the negotiations for you.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.

Last edited by JohnConstantine; Today at 02:06 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old Today, 06:43 AM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,021
Thanks: 273
Thanks 656
Default

Yes. The government doesn't build roads. It pays companies to do it.

I didn't say that people couldn't build their own roads, I said they wouldn't build them to places it was not profitable for them to go. But... people still live in places that are unprofitable to go.

Anyway, road building is just a stand in for all the other things government does.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old Today, 06:46 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Word Wizard
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 692
Thanks: 122
Thanks 149
Default

And maybe not a particularly good stand in.

Aging infrastructure issues aside, it seems to be one of the few things government manages to do fairly well.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old Today, 07:27 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,489
Thanks: 195
Thanks 659
Default

It's actually the most common stand in for these debates, followed by the fabled dystopia, mad max scenario. But we can pick anything really. The government may do it well. But that simply doesn't justify the existence of literally the most violent entity in all of history by far.

Correct me if I'm interpreting this wrong. If it's unprofitable for people to go to the suburbs, then why does anyone live there now? How do they make their money? Doesn't business necessitate connections between the city and the suburbs to ferry goods (from farms, factories) and people back and forth? -- hence natural profitable reasons to build roads.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old Today, 07:45 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Word Wizard
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 692
Thanks: 122
Thanks 149
Default

I know it's a common stand it. But comparability, it's not anywhere near as complex as healthcare, or education etc. -- so using it as a stand in isn't of much value.

And practically speaking, it will never be an either/or proposition -- at least in the U.S. and in my lifetime -- and barring some cataclysmic event.

It will continue to be an endless game of political football -- trying to hit the right balance between the size of government and the role of private enterprise -- with liberals and conservatives pushing their particularly agendas and ideologies -- with everyone most concerned about what's in it for them.

Oh well.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old Today, 08:04 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,489
Thanks: 195
Thanks 659
Default

It's not that complicated. Tax is just crowd funding. The only difference is you are not convinced to voluntarily subscribe, you're signed up by default.

So things like education and healthcare are simply provided by actors within the market. They convince you to subscribe to their programme, and you sign up because it's in your best interest... or, don't sign up, if you think they're full of shit.

Think of gym membership. Used to be exclusive, now most people can afford it. You can attend some pretty nice gyms for say 30 per month which house everything you need to get fit.

Sure paying 100, 200, 3000, per month might get you better facilities but without the natural physique and hard work who cares?

And for those who can't even afford budget healthcare/schools, what do we do?

Well there are two things which come into my mind. If we're really concerned about the health of the less fortunate, we put our money where our mouth is and give to a charity which will subsidise or fully fund education for those who can prove that they do not have the income.

Or, we only sign up to schools and health care organisations who use a percentage of their profits to educate and care for those who can't afford it.

Just takes a bit of creativity, and these are just my dumb thoughts -- people will come up with all sorts. We're nothing if not creative.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old Today, 04:18 PM
moonpunter's Avatar
moonpunter (Online)
Intellectually Fertile
Official Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Midway, Iowa
Posts: 160
Thanks: 10
Thanks 37
Default

Sorry but your anarchist utopia is pretty asinine. Instead of paying taxes to the government, I've got to pay someone to build a road to my house (and maintain it) and for police, fire, trash collection, healthcare, education, and everything else? And if you think corporations are corrupt now, what about when there's absolutely no one holding them in check?

They did a Family Guy episode about this years ago. Peter and his pals join the Tea Party and get the government shut down and then find out that hey, government actually does stuff. So then they "crowdsource" the problem--effectively reinstating the government.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Teddy Attack. (Short story) Asferthecat Fiction 11 07-14-2012 08:37 AM
The Bears lost! Get over it! Unknown_Hero Free Writing 39 01-29-2011 06:27 PM
Members' Choice Nominations - February/March Mridula Members' Choice 8 04-20-2008 03:52 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:33 PM.

vBulletin, Copyright 2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.