[NumsAmenniams]

American's must labour 107 days to pay the government. Congress doesn't even work that many days annually! Why are the citizenry forced to pay (subsidize) a limitlessly powerful U.S. government, for the right (privilege) to live, breath, and survive?

Slave to live and live to slave. I can't very well say 'work', now can I as we're (all) forced employees of this limitlessly centralized U.S. government; therefore we're their property. Why do we (a free people) have to pay (subsidize) a limitlessly powerful U.S. governmental authority for the right (privilege) to live breath, and survive? I see no limits to their power, and what they say goes. Maybe I was mistaken, thought they're supposed to represent, and not dictate. I see more dictating than any form of representing emanating from our limitlessly powerful central governmental authority. If anyone here thinks otherwise, then I'm all ears..er, eyes. Also, why don't the war profiteers pay for their own wars? Unless you all think it's fair that you, your kids, their kids, and so on will be the ones absolving all this endless debt. Not to mention dieng for it; while the powers that be profit off your backs in safety.

According to the Tax foundation the average American must labor 107 days to pay taxes.

How much worse will it have to get before the American people say, "enough"?

U.S. governmental organized crime.

This site calculates it at a different rate.

That's 258% more months 'working for government' than it used to be, as shown in the chart.

The government taxes when you earn it, taxes you when you save it, taxes you when you invest it, taxes you when you spend it, and, when you die, they tax what's left over. What did they leave out?

5.1 months working for taxes is 43% of a year. In 1776 Thomas Paine argued that if a king demanded 50% in taxes, we wouldn't pay it. We are nearly there.

Who said the 'era of big government is over?'

1)Is it fair that the typical American pays more in taxes than they do on food, shelter and clothing combined! And that doesn't even include the "hidden taxes" on products caused by government regulations - compared to senior generations. Is that proper?

2)Is it fair to workers that government still launders our revenue faster than growth of the general economy, with 1995-2000 the highest tax in-take in relation to the size of the economy in peace-time history - - partly due to the largest tax increases in U.S. history in 1991 and 1993?

3)Is it fair that federal taxes increased 2.5 times faster than personal income 1995- 2000?

4) Should each citizen carry 3 times more state & local government employees on their back than before, with their higher job security and benefits?

5) Why should government extract revenues faster than the economy generates them? Shouldn't it take in lower tax ratios each year to prove federal, state and local governments are improving their own productivity and efficiency?

6) In addition to paying more taxes, Americans spend 5.4 billion hours per year complying with the federal tax code - - roughly the equivalent of 3 million people working full-time. If it were employed in productive activity, the labor now devoted to tax compliance would be worth $232 billion annually. The federal cost of hiring 93,000 IRS employees is $6 billion. If all these people weren't fooling around with the tax code, they could produce the entire annual output of the aircraft, trucking, auto, and food-processing industries combined. Source: W. Williams, Professor Economics, George Mason U, Imprimis August 2000.

7)Government mandating that employers withhold taxes from workers is wrong, as it removes power from citizens in controlling government spending.

Reagan speaks the truth here.

Paradox: in order to protect freedom that freedom should be limited.

Who would disagree?

Those who would ever limit freedom for temporary protection are the internal enemy.

The Delphi Brainwash. Apathy is a conditioned behavior.

Read it all.

[Pjayjukr]

Yeah, that's just how the Republic works. Doesn't make it right, though.

[echocassidyde]

We are obligated to pay for our government because it is our government; it is protecting our interests here and abroad and generally working towards our well-being.

If you disagree with that statement, you should be trying to fix your government, not questioning why we have to pay for it.

[finasteridonline]

We are obligated to pay for our government because it is our government; it is protecting our interests here and abroad and generally working towards our well-being.

If you disagree with that statement, you should be trying to fix your government, not questioning why we have to pay for it.

Oh, you're from crosseyes...

I'm not obligated to do a damn thing. These traitorous jingoists are thieves. There's no "fixing" this insidious plutocracy, and it needs to be destroyed. Did you see what they did to Iraq, this is only the beginning. You're a socialist statist, and I know this for a fact. I really have no need to continue on with you.

A (WWR) World Wide Revolution is all that will do.

Burn it to the fucking ground.

[Haibundadam]

Your enthusiasm has been recognized.

Your distrust and strong misunderstanding about how the US government operates is simply astonishing to say the least. Like Korimyr the Rat states, "It is OUR government..", the proof is in the Declaration of Independance, Constitution, and all that the forefathers wrote to create, arguably, one of the best countries in the world.

It IS your right to disprove and state your feelings, BUT it is ALSO your responsibility to take action when you want to see a change. Afterall, this is YOUR government too.

Your regurgitating tactics of spewing junk is not welcome by the people who DO BELIEVE in this country. I can assure you of that. Please take your elitist attitude to a country that which you may like. While there, you can figure out who is going to pay you while you're unemployed.

[NikkitaZ]

Your distrust and strong misunderstanding about how the US government operates is simply astonishing to say the least. Like Korimyr the Rat states, "It is OUR government..", the proof is in the Declaration of Independance, Constitution, and all that the forefathers wrote to create, arguably, one of the best countries in the world.

My love for my country aside, I do not think this is unique to the United States. Government, everywhere it exists, can only survive with the support of the governed; democratic governments, such as our own, merely leave the reins of power closer to the citizens. They make it easier for the citizens to make their wishes known, and they bind the government closer to both the will and the well-being of the people.

[boffincash]

We are obligated to pay for our government because it is our government; it is protecting our interests here and abroad and generally working towards our well-being.

If you disagree with that statement, you should be trying to fix your government, not questioning why we have to pay for it.

The only way to fix it may be to starve it to death and begin anew.

[sestomosi]

Your enthusiasm has been recognized.

Your distrust and strong misunderstanding about how the US government operates is simply astonishing to say the least. Like Korimyr the Rat states, "It is OUR government..", the proof is in the Declaration of Independance, Constitution, and all that the forefathers wrote to create, arguably, one of the best countries in the world.

That doesn't strike me as very convincing proof. The Constitution was the work of a group of elitists who were primarily concerned with the problem of how to tax the people who had fought a war for the ostensible purpose of eliminating unjustified taxation, and in that respect it's worked beautifully.

Quite a difference between thinking that it's our gov't and having one that actually is.

[joeyCanada]

Wholesale destruction and starting again is often offered as an option for dealing with a broken government... however, you'd be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

How long would it be before everything is fixed and running again, and how many would die before it was done? What happens if there's a hurricane halfway through the revolution, and some city gets flooded, and the central government isn't there to help? Oh... hmmm... um... bad example...

But seriously... burning it all down and starting again might seem tempting, but gradual change involves less suffering - however, it probably requires more work. Would you prefer a bloodbath every 100 years, or maintaining constant vigilance against the encroaching plutocrat?

[fereupfer]

"It is OUR government..", the proof is in the Declaration of Independance, Constitution, and all that the forefathers wrote to create, arguably, one of the best countries in the world. Yes, our government of the people, by the politicians, for the politicians. The establishment is quick to point out that we wrote the Declaration of Independence in response to taxation without representation, and neglect the fact that our overall tax burden is now at least twice what was then considered tyrannical. And our Consitution, whose Bill of Rights has been gutted to the point where only 1 of 10 is still in effect. And all the other writings about liberty and personal responsibility, which most citizens don't even know exist, and that many elitists dismiss as outdated because they show too much insight into their power-grabs.

It's fortunate for us that we have enough natural resources and societal inertia that we're still the best in the world, but one cannot maintain a lead indefinitely by mere coasting.

Quite a difference between thinking that it's our gov't and having one that actually is. Exactly, as evidenced by multiple discussions here of late regarding gerrymandering, ballot access, election fraud, and voting paradigms.

Wholesale destruction and starting again is often offered as an option for dealing with a broken government... however, you'd be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. While it's much more likely that any revolution would result in a dictatorship of some sort, all that's Really needed is a wholesale change of personnel. If we had people who both understood and followed the Constitution, pretty much all other necessary changes would follow..

What happens if there's a hurricane halfway through the revolution, and some city gets flooded, and the central government isn't there to help? For the most part, what Should happen. Those who have the sense to leave do so. Those who had the sense to buy insurance are more or less intact financially. Those who were ignorant or selfish enough to live in an obvious danger zone without taking appropriate precautions suffer accordingly. Private aid societies like the Red Cross help where they can. If necessary, citizens who recognized their right and responsibility to the 2nd Amendment become a de facto militia enforcing ad hoc martial law. The extent of any death toll and any unnecessary disruption will largely be a function of the character of the local populace, which may not be fair to given individuals, but is appropriate to the residents as a group.

Would you prefer a bloodbath every 100 years, or maintaining constant vigilance against the encroaching plutocrat? The latter is obviously preferable, but we've already lost that battle, so it's just a question of when we have the former. "I see the day coming when we will have to take up arms to overthrow and reinstate the government. Fortunately that day is not today. How's next Thursday look for you?"

[CevepBiageCefm]

Somehow we've got to come to a consensus about what is absolutely necessary collectively to attain our collective goal.

When you think about how much you're paying in taxes and get frustrated, look at places like India where the government doesn't even bother attempting a tax on most things and where they do get their digs in, they really don't provide much.

Or Mexico where there doesn't seem to be a collective goal...roads in disrepair, pollution, a population in poverty

Or about a million African countries which, when they did manage to raid the populace coffers, spent it on themselves and left the country in shambles.

There are a few things I am willing to allow the government to do and don't mind paying for it: maintaining public roads and infrastructure, defense, and in this day and age, public education and public health - both of which serve the entire populace.

[mikelangr]

it is our government

That is naiive. The representation system here is so screwed up that this government can hardly be called "ours." It is effectively under the ownership of whoever draws the disctricts.

[neirty]

to attain our collective goal.

What's that?

When you think about how much you're paying in taxes and get frustrated, look at places like India where the government doesn't even bother attempting a tax on most things and where they do get their digs in, they really don't provide much. Uh, India is a socialist country with an 80% income tax.

[Xiciljed]

That is naiive. The representation system here is so screwed up that this government can hardly be called "ours." It is effectively under the ownership of whoever draws the disctricts.

Unfortunately Much too true.

[sonsayx]

American's must labour 107 days to pay the government. Congress doesn't even work that many days annually! Why are the citizenry forced to pay (subsidize) a limitlessly powerful U.S. government, for the right (privilege) to live, breath, and survive?

Slave to live and live to slave. I can't very well say 'work', now can I as we're (all) forced employees of this limitlessly centralized U.S. government; therefore we're their property. Why do we (a free people) have to pay (subsidize) a limitlessly powerful U.S. governmental authority for the right (privilege) to live breath, and survive? I see no limits to their power, and what they say goes. Maybe I was mistaken, thought they're supposed to represent, and not dictate. I see more dictating than any form of representing emanating from our limitlessly powerful central governmental authority. If anyone here thinks otherwise, then I'm all ears..er, eyes. Also, why don't the war profiteers pay for their own wars? Unless you all think it's fair that you, your kids, their kids, and so on will be the ones absolving all this endless debt. Not to mention dieng for it; while the powers that be profit off your backs in safety.






Those who would ever limit freedom for temporary protection are the internal enemy.

The Delphi Brainwash. Apathy is a conditioned behavior.

Read it all.

http://www.uspoliticsonline.com/foru...t=25119&page=2

[EmpaccalGah]

That is naiive. The representation system here is so screwed up that this government can hardly be called "ours." It is effectively under the ownership of whoever draws the disctricts.

The problem is you have 50% of the voting population actually voting in national elections, and that is on a close race. One quarter vote in state elections or in a mid-term year and you have even less in local elections. We have a 94% incumbancy rate which voters tend to forgive all to often their leaders of their political idealogy while giving no quarter to the opposite political idealogy, in most cases. We have allowed this because of us and no one else is to blame.

[Grorointeri]

American's must labour 107 days to pay the government. Congress doesn't even work that many days annually! Why are the citizenry forced to pay (subsidize) a limitlessly powerful U.S. government, for the right (privilege) to live, breath, and survive?

Slave to live and live to slave. I can't very well say 'work', now can I as we're (all) forced employees of this limitlessly centralized U.S. government; therefore we're their property. Why do we (a free people) have to pay (subsidize) a limitlessly powerful U.S. governmental authority for the right (privilege) to live breath, and survive? I see no limits to their power, and what they say goes. Maybe I was mistaken, thought they're supposed to represent, and not dictate. I see more dictating than any form of representing emanating from our limitlessly powerful central governmental authority. If anyone here thinks otherwise, then I'm all ears..er, eyes. Also, why don't the war profiteers pay for their own wars? Unless you all think it's fair that you, your kids, their kids, and so on will be the ones absolving all this endless debt. Not to mention dieng for it; while the powers that be profit off your backs in safety.






Those who would ever limit freedom for temporary protection are the internal enemy.

The Delphi Brainwash. Apathy is a conditioned behavior.

Read it all.

I am not sure if this is a post protesting the war in Iraq/Afganistan, or just spewting anti-government and antitax theology. The government makes decisions which most of us have little to no information. This is especially true if your sole source is either internet blogs or newspapers. As for taxes, they are obligations which everyone must follow, but you have choice, a free will, to either follow or not. If you choose not to follow, prepare for the consequences, if you man enough. And that is the $64 million question isn't it? You want not to follow and pay taxes yet you want the same liberties and values like everyone else. You cannot have it both ways. It is your choice, so which is it going to be?

PS This is not about choosing to live here or not, it is about choices and consequences.

[Ruiceara]

The only way to fix it may be to starve it to death and begin anew.

If that's true, then the people advocating starving it should also be willing to advocate taking it behind the barn and shooting it.

For the most part, they don't object to what the government is doing, they are merely objecting that they are expected to pay for it. They expect to get something for nothing.

That is naiive. The representation system here is so screwed up that this government can hardly be called "ours." It is effectively under the ownership of whoever draws the disctricts.

And if they suspended elections tomorrow, it would still be our government. Government can only operate with the consent-- or at least, the acquiescence-- of the people. If our people are leaning more towards the latter than the former, you can hardly blame the government for that.

[Jasonstawnosaa]

What's that?



Uh, India is a socialist country with an 80% income tax.

80% income tax on who? They don't even bother with most folks. Thus my comment about "when they get their digs in..." so India and Mexico are my analogous attempts of servitude - the systems do not work for various reasons.

Point being, taxes are not necessarily a bad thing if you can make a collective decision about what is important (i.e., democracy), and prevent corruption (checks and balances).

I think you jump too soon or perhaps my mind was running faster than my typing skills.

Oh, and the "collective goal" is decided by elections and votes and laws, etc...
Do we have problems? Hell yes.

[spoddersedpn]

80% income tax on who? They don't even bother with most folks. Thus my comment about "when they get their digs in..." so India and Mexico are my analogous attempts of servitude - the systems do not work for various reasons.

Point being, taxes are not necessarily a bad thing if you can make a collective decision about what is important (i.e., democracy), and prevent corruption (checks and balances).

I think you jump too soon or perhaps my mind was running faster than my typing skills.

Oh, and the "collective goal" is decided by elections and votes and laws, etc...
Do we have problems? Hell yes.

I think he was complaining generally about progressive income tax systems. However, he was grossly incorrect on the marginal rates for both India and Mexico. A Comparison of international tax systems shows that India has a top marignal income tax rate of 30% for individuals and a top marginal tax rate of 40% for businesses. It has no VAT system. For Mexico, it has a top marginal income tax rate of 29% for individuals and a flat 30% for business. It also has a VAT tax rate of 15%. Thus, his comparision is grossly off.