Question for Anti-Tariffists

[Zippyjuan]

Read the back of the can. Most states don't have a deposit.

I thought it was in more. All the states I have lived in had one. Thanks for the info.

[timosman]

I thought it was in more. All the states I have lived in had one. Thanks for the info.

Zippy is nice. Doesn't read the back of the can but thanks for the suggestion. Maybe be it should be equipped with at least one hand? Pure AI appears too disconnected from the real world.

[The Gold Standard]

If you don't like tariffs, how should a government, state, or voluntary political association be funded?

Well, how are businesses funded? How are you funded?

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[TheCount]

After 8 years of Obama our last chance to avoid default is gone.

He says while supporting a guy who makes Obama look like a fiscal conservative.

[PierzStyx]

Time to watch "The Art of the Deal" in action..

Another thing Trump has lied about doing.

Trump, facing a crowd that had gathered in the lobby of Trump Tower, on Fifth Avenue, laid out his qualifications, saying, “We need a leader that wrote ‘The Art of the Deal.’ ” If that was so, Schwartz thought, then he, not Trump, should be running. Schwartz dashed off a tweet: “Many thanks Donald Trump for suggesting I run for President, based on the fact that I wrote ‘The Art of the Deal.’ ”

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...iter-tells-all

[PierzStyx]

Well, how are businesses funded? How are you funded?

Exactly.

[PierzStyx]

A 2% tariff on everything imported would give you $44 billion to spend. (Imports last year were $1.2 trillion)

If you want tariffs to replace the income tax, they would need to be to be just over 100%.
Include your Social Security taxes and you are up to 150%.
If you want a balanced budget at current spending levels you need a 200% tariff on every single item imported.

Zip, remember we want to demolish just about everything in that pie chart. So arguing there won't be enough money for it is a pro for us, not a con.

[r3volution 3.0]

If you don't like tariffs, how should a government, state, or voluntary political association be funded?

Other, namely property tax

It's the most efficient tax, with the lowest compliance costs, smallest bureaucracy, least information reported to the state

And, needless to say, the present tariffs implemented by His Orangeness have nothing whatsoever to do with revenue.

[Raginfridus]

Another thing Trump has lied about doing.

Sun Tzu for President, because everybody else is a plagiarist.

[Anti Federalist]

Other, namely property tax

It's the most efficient tax, with the lowest compliance costs, smallest bureaucracy, least information reported to the state

Disagree.

Property tax is the very worst sort of tax, reducing "ownership" of your home or property to nothing more than permanent indentured servitude to the state and being nothing more than a squatter on the King's land.

In states that still have personal property tax and assessors, it is as intrusive and humiliating as you can get: a government worker invading your home or business and picking through every possession you own, to log it into a database and to tax you on it.

Of course, if you know your rights and stand your ground, you can refuse them entry, but then they just "adjust" you into the highest possible tax scenario and assume you have closets full of rare furs, collectible guns and stashed gold hordes.

[timosman]

Disagree.

Property tax is the very worst sort of tax, reducing "ownership" of your home or property to nothing more than permanent indentured servitude to the state and being nothing more than a squatter on the King's land.

That's the essence of life, wouldn't you agree?

[presence]

Ah, someone remembers the Harry Browne / Ron Paul platforms which called for abolishing the income tax, and funding the Federal government via excise taxes and (low, flat) tariffs, as the Constitution originally allowed.

I'd be in favor of a system that abolished all taxes and replaced with flat tarrif
I'd be in favor of a system that abolished all welfare and replaced it with UBI

I have zero intererst in UBI or tariffs without abolition of all other forms of taxation and welfare.

even if we got to the point of no other taxes and welfare and we were down to just UBI and tariffs...
I'd still consider such a system theft, feel no moral obligation to comply, and petition for redress;
including but not limited to abolition of legal tender and the FED
which at its onset would defund any of these bullshitisms

the only legitimate form of governance is a signed contract

voluntary or GTFO

[osan]

So you think Trump's plan is to replace the income tax with tariffs?

The problem is that none of it matters unless you shrink government spending and Trump is doing the opposite.

You need to learn to spell "Congress".

You're welcome.

[juleswin]

If you don't like tariffs, how should a government, state, or voluntary political association be funded?

Not that I complete against tariff when I cheer lowering of taxes(not eliminating it). In the case with Trump, it is one the way this particular tariff is written. If it was an overall set rate for every goods coming into the country and it overall lowered the total amount of payment the state received(I believe the state has enough money already and should be reduced) then I wouldn't be complaining.

In my own opinion, I think tariffs are a much better option than income taxes.

[osan]

I'd be in favor of a system that abolished all taxes and replaced with flat tarrif
I'd be in favor of a system that abolished all welfare and replaced it with UBI

I have zero intererst in UBI or tariffs without abolition of all other forms of taxation and welfare.

even if we got to the point of no other taxes and welfare and we were down to just UBI and tariffs...
I'd still consider such a system theft, feel no moral obligation to comply, and petition for redress;
including but not limited to abolition of legal tender and the FED
which at its onset would defund any of these bullshitisms

the only legitimate form of governance is a signed contract

voluntary or GTFO

This is reasonable.

For one thing, practically speaking if we were to abolish all taxation this afternoon the nation would be in a lot of trouble. We are like the world's largest heroin addict. When you stop your $500/day habit from one moment to the next, bad things happen. Just ask Jerry Garcia.

A piecemeal path to lesser servitude is what is needed. How about we take the first steps first, acclimate, assess, and then move on?

I fully agree that it is all theft, but one must consider the practicalities of global politics. America does not operate in a vacuum. The world is full of predators, we being perhaps the worst of the lot. Assuming we got righteous on foreign policy, there would still be nations seeking to do us harm. Some will dismiss this, but that is foolery.

Imagine if you will that we go full-Constitution - forget the ideals of anarchy. We dissolve our standing armies, establish peaceable relations with our global neighbors, and unleash the brute power of the free market and the sheer creative juggernaut of the American spirit. The result, as we all know, would be an economy that would leave the rest of the world in the dust, to the point of global embarrassment, which would be the key issue in result of our prosperity. Theye, of course, who are the globalists would still have the rest of the world by its balls. Firstly, could they afford to allow the example of American thermonuclear success stand before the rest of the repressed world as an example counter to their collectivist-authoriratian tenets? Not a chance. The world would see and would inevitably begin to resist Themme.

Secondly, so ripe a fruit as a high-flying America would be impossible for Themme to resist as a mere matter of avarice and their inability to control themselves. History is logged with examples of this. For thousands of years tyrants have been raiding their more prosperous and freer neighbors. The statistics are moutainously heaped against any possibility of Themme keeping their hands to themselves.

This being the almost certain case, would America be able to defend itself against the predations of other nations bent on looting? Maybe, maybe not. Given we have more weapons than the rest of the world combined, there is maybe even odds that we could. But why would we want to risk being attacked? Just as the mere presence of a gun is most often sufficient to deter an attack, the presence of some military force serves the same purpose on the national scale. This does not mean that military must perforce be federally funded and managed, but there are definite advantages to it over every county in the nation mustering its own defense force. Superorganization is a distinct advantage over fragmented varieties. People have erroneously held Vietnam as an example of how small, determined forces can defeat a superpower. This is an ignorant lie. We "lost" in Vietnam because we had no objective of winning, period. Additionally, the VC as well as the NVA were heavily subsidized by the Soviets. They were no civilian-funded militia.

Therefore, the risks assumed when America disbands its military in favor of local militia are huge, the assumption being highly unsound. Once again I acknowledge that it is a very $#@!ty reality into which we have been born, but it has been this way since time immemorial for the large human civilizations. Gathered into large enough groups, humans take on a very different character from that of the individual. Barring the good old "reset event", this is not going to change, ever. Therefore, it seems to me that we as a people are behooved to take certain practical measures that best ensure reasonable safety from extra-national predation while minimally impacting liberty.

We can go full anarchist - nothing would please me more - but I do not think the global context would allow it to stand for very long for the reasons cited, above.

But once again, first things first. Take the first steps toward liberty and continue in piecemeal fashion until such time as we either achieve the autodiathist ideal or we run into a wall of practicality that, were we to pass it, would result in catastrophe. This gives us time to acclimate and assess, which are of paramount importance on any journey toward freedom in a world that is so far from it.

[Zippyjuan]

Not that I complete against tariff when I cheer lowering of taxes(not eliminating it). In the case with Trump, it is one the way this particular tariff is written. If it was an overall set rate for every goods coming into the country and it overall lowered the total amount of payment the state received(I believe the state has enough money already and should be reduced) then I wouldn't be complaining.

In my own opinion, I think tariffs are a much better option than income taxes.

If you can convince Congress that a new form of taxation is better you can be sure that if they adopt it, it will be in ADDITION to existing taxes- not instead of them.

[Madison320]

You need to learn to spell "Congress".

You're welcome.

True, but it's a group effort. Trump wants bigger government also. Don't forget he signed it.

[Ender]

You forgot Muslim. They all said they're Muslim right here in this thread.

LOL!

[Ender]

Disagree.

Property tax is the very worst sort of tax, reducing "ownership" of your home or property to nothing more than permanent indentured servitude to the state and being nothing more than a squatter on the King's land.

In states that still have personal property tax and assessors, it is as intrusive and humiliating as you can get: a government worker invading your home or business and picking through every possession you own, to log it into a database and to tax you on it.

Of course, if you know your rights and stand your ground, you can refuse them entry, but then they just "adjust" you into the highest possible tax scenario and assume you have closets full of rare furs, collectible guns and stashed gold hordes.

In absolute agreement.

Property "tax" means that you have no property; stop paying & the real owners will show up, arrest you & take said property.

[The Rebel Poet]

Disagree.

Property tax is the very worst sort of tax, reducing "ownership" of your home or property to nothing more than permanent indentured servitude to the state and being nothing more than a squatter on the King's land.

In states that still have personal property tax and assessors, it is as intrusive and humiliating as you can get: a government worker invading your home or business and picking through every possession you own, to log it into a database and to tax you on it.

Of course, if you know your rights and stand your ground, you can refuse them entry, but then they just "adjust" you into the highest possible tax scenario and assume you have closets full of rare furs, collectible guns and stashed gold hordes.

This has always been my point of view. I like to think of property taxes as the existence tax; It's the only one you don't even have to do anything to get charged.

[The Rebel Poet]

Other, namely property tax

It's the most efficient tax, with the lowest compliance costs, smallest bureaucracy, least information reported to the state

And, needless to say, the present tariffs implemented by His Orangeness have nothing whatsoever to do with revenue.

What should a person do who inherited some land, and now owes money on it, but doesn't have funds to pay rent to the king? What if my crops all failed and rent is due tomorrow?

[Madison320]

This has always been my point of view. I like to think of property taxes as the existence tax; It's the only one you don't even have to do anything to get charged.

Another vote for property taxes being the worst.

It's hard to describe but with most other forms of taxation at least you're still "in the black" after the tax. You're just getting less than you would have without the tax. But with property tax you can go negative. You can owe money even though you're dead broke.

[Zippyjuan]

Another vote for property taxes being the worst.

It's hard to describe but with most other forms of taxation at least you're still "in the black" after the tax. You're just getting less than you would have without the tax. But with property tax you can go negative. You can owe money even though you're dead broke.

Governments like the property tax because its revenues are a lot more consistent making budgeting easier. Sales or income taxes move up and down with the economy much more- revenues from them go down during tough times just when those same tough times are causing you to spend more money. (not saying I favor property taxes myself). Also note that renters don't avoid paying property taxes- the taxes are included in the rent you are paying.

[osan]

True, but it's a group effort. Trump wants bigger government also. Don't forget he signed it.

It would pass anyway. I'm not defending Trump, but I'm not yet condemning him either. We don't know what goes on behind closed doors. We don't know Trump's broader objectives. He may be just about one of Theire stooges. That has yet to be proved. He's done some good things, said some really stupid things. At this point I see no basis for reaching a conclusion. This is a tangled web we traverse; who knows what other factors are at play, what other unintuitive tactics pursuant to a greater strategy. Or he is just another stooge and we are in worse shape than before. At this point another marginal step toward the end of all that is good doesn't really make much difference. The time to $#@! or get off the pot will come sooner or later. Accounts will be settled at that time, either by positive or negative choosing. I'm old-ish. I don't give that much of a $#@! what happens because I intend on escaping this prison sooner than later.

[Swordsmyth]

Governments like the property tax because its revenues are a lot more consistent making budgeting easier. Sales or income taxes move up and down with the economy much more- revenues from them go down during tough times just when those same tough times are causing you to spend more money. (not saying I favor property taxes myself). Also note that renters don't avoid paying property taxes- the taxes are included in the rent you are paying.

Maybe governments should actually store money in the treasury for a rainy day the way it used to be in ancient times.

[Zippyjuan]

Maybe governments should actually store money in the treasury for a rainy day the way it used to be in ancient times.

So they should tax people even more to build up a cushion.

[Swordsmyth]

So they should tax people even more to build up a cushion.

They should spend less to build up a cushion, when the cushion is large enough they can reduce taxes further.

[r3volution 3.0]

What should a person do who inherited some land, and now owes money on it, but doesn't have funds to pay rent to the king? What if my crops all failed and rent is due tomorrow?

What if you can't live on your income less income tax?

What if you can't live on your income less sales tax?

Taxation sucks.

The question is which form sucks least and, from an economic point of view, property tax sucks least.

It has the lowest compliance costs for the taxpayer, requires the smallest government agency, etc.

[Swordsmyth]

What if you can't live on your income less income tax?

What if you can't live on your income less sales tax?

Taxation sucks.

The question is which form sucks least and, from an economic point of view, property tax sucks least.

It has the lowest compliance costs for the taxpayer, requires the smallest government agency, etc.

Property tax is the only tax that will take you backwards without you even moving.