[quote]Professor X wrote:
orion wrote:
No one said it was a new idea.
No, but you did make a statement as if we are at risk of people quitting their jobs just so they can avoid taxes even though this has never happened before to any degree worth worrying about in recent history.
Well working for someone else obviously was meant differently, I meant that you get to keep the fruits of your work.
When the fuck did you not pay taxes?
As far as I know the US started out on tariffs, not taxes.
The income tax is pretty new, as is the fed with its fiat currency.
New as in, less than 300 years old? Uh, yeah, that’s like a newborne baby’s ass.
However the real question is what kind of taxes and for what purpose and when the answer is progressive income taxes for the purpose of wealth re-distribution that is just pure evil.
LOL. So, our economy has been evil for centuries?
Why the uproar now?
The underlying assumptions of such a scheme are the same that allowed for servitude and slavery and, even though those are relatively old concepts, they are morally wrong.
Then you should be against taxes on ALL levels, which means I am assuming you have raised the exact same concern when it comes to McCain and Bush and Clinton and Bush and Reagan, correct?[/quote]
The whole idea of an income tax and a Fed is less than 100 years old. Yup, that is relatively new and will very likely fail as a system.
Again, what taxes, for what purpose. Direct taxes, especially a progressive income tax is evil, no matter who does it, Bush, Clinton, I do not care.
Even though some people would disagree, I´d say that indirect taxes in order to finance the core functions of the state are justifiable.
How has the economy been evil for centuries? Consensual trade always leaves both sides better off, so it creates wealth instead of re-distributing.