Taxation and Unemployment

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  yourlordandsavior  •  one month ago  •  37 comments

By:   Peter Faden

Taxation and Unemployment
Often, when people toss the "people won't work" thing around, it's because they also think...

 Often, when people toss the people won't work thing around, it's because they also think when you pay "taxes," it's a gift, except when they want something specific, in which case it's "my tax dollars." Is this always the case? No. I know people who fit into the category of being business owners who have people not returning despite offering more than they are making on unemployment with the extra weekly dispensation. Is it predominantly the case though? Yes.

 Are there people refusing to work, for no real reason, and not simply due to a fear of contracting COVID-19, or because they are finally being given some sort of financial break, more than likely the one and only time that will ever happen for them? Of course. Some won't ever return to work. That is an extreme minority however. It's illustrative of how deeply the system really has failed all of us, that staying on unemployment might actually be a necessity, because the alternative for them is literally oppressive poverty or at the very least, literally no different financially because of how little people actually make compared to how much it actually costs to live.

 Personally, I view paying "taxes" in a free market society as making an investment, and you definitely deserve to see an actual financial return on that investment, i.e. UBI or even the extra $600/week on unemployment. I put "taxes" in quotes because "taxation" is the single most socialist thing that exists in society, so if we aren't socialist, then clearly they are actually not "taxes", but rather investments. I don't know about y'all, but I'm not into intentionally investing in losing ventures.

 You've paid into the system your entire working life. It's about time you saw a tangible return on that investment. When you really look at how much tax money is wasted because the gov't encourages companies to price gouge them, I'd prefer that money went back to the people who actually invested it to begin with.

 Now, if I'm wrong and these actually ARE taxes and not investments, then I expect our health, education, and safety to be properly provided for without placing us all in desperate financial ruin. You don't deserve to be punished for being sick or hurt. You shouldn't have to go into insane debt because you dare seek a higher education. You should feel safe on your block no matter where that block happens to be located.

 If our tax money isn't elevating our lives, then it is for all intents and purposes the grandest scale example of looting I can think of.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Pedro
1  author  Pedro    one month ago

I would also like to note another thing, and a peeve of mine. When you say, "I don't want my tax money being used for...," I get to counter with, "I do want my tax money used for..."

 
 
 
user image
1.1    replied to  Pedro @1    one month ago

Assuming you pay in more than you use. And if you fall into the "I make more on unemployment" group then I can tell you flat out, you don't

 
 
 
Pedro
1.1.1  author  Pedro  replied to  @1.1    one month ago
Assuming you pay in more than you use.

If you paid into the system, you have a say. The voice of the people is not income based. Well actually, it IS income based, but hopefully for not too much longer.

But, assuming it IS only people who have paid more in than they have taken out as you say, then my comment literally remains unchanged. If you get a say, so do I.

It's also worth noting that if you look at how much each State puts into the pie and how much they take out of it, the red states are by and large, well...in the red. Sort of a large example of how, based on your ideology, states like Kentucky should have no say (that being states that take more than they give).

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2  Perrie Halpern R.A.    one month ago
If ourtaxmoney isn't elevating our lives, then it is for all intents and purposes the grandest scale example oflootingI can think of.

I have to agree with that, but we have to decide what is, as a nation, where we want out money to go. 

You mention "health, education, and safety". I would agree 100% on education since our founding fathers wanted an educated electorate. Health is constantly being thought and rethought into a system that is sustainable, and I am not sure what you mean by safety. Please define. It seems that some want to defund our police. Would they be part of our safety? 

 
 
 
Pedro
2.1  author  Pedro  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2    one month ago

When they say defund, what they really mean is de-militarize, clear the decks and start over with proper training that constantly reminds them of their role as protectors, with proper, extensive vetting that factors in both your physical and mental state, past history, and so on. Far too often, people get into the policing business because it's the military, but you're guaranteed to be in your home city. Well, militarized gang more like, and that isn't even hyperbole. Police were literally protection racket gangs that evolved.

So, by safe, I mean we have actual protectors in place, we don't have outrageous amounts of them, and they are constantly reviewed to be certain of all this. Then, not only do we have protectors, but we also don't have to defend ourselves against them. Almost everything the police have done during these protests would result in jailtime if it was you or I, and not someone protected by the Thin Blue Line and legislation designed to allow police to break the law in the pursuit of their duties to uphold the law (lol).

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Pedro @2.1    one month ago
Almost everything the police have done during these protests would result in jailtime if it was you or I, and not someone protected by the Thin Blue Line.

I did see some ugly out there. I would agree with your concept of what the police should be. I am wondering if that is what they mean. I guess we are going to have to wait. I head that this is already in the works for Minnesota. 

 
 
 
Pedro
2.1.2  author  Pedro  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.1    one month ago

9 out of 12 council people, which means it will be irreversible. The statement they released basically said what I just said though.

 
 
 
Pedro
2.1.3  author  Pedro  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.1    one month ago

The thing I am also mindful of is that we live in a police state that caters to a minute demographic of Americans. If you aren't one of them, then it's been police state-lite for a while, but it is 100% fact that we were also in the 25th hour and police state would have been the result if protesters had gone home, and especially if Mattis and several generals/admirals had not also tacitly ordered the military to stand down. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.4  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Pedro @2.1.2    one month ago

Wow... so this is a done deal. We will all be watching to see how this goes. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.5  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Pedro @2.1.3    one month ago
The thing I am mindful of is that we live in a police state that caters to a minute demographic of Americans. If you aren't one of them, then it's been police state-lite for a while

So you are still a libertarian, right?

but it is 100% fact that we were also in the 25th hour and police state would have been the result if protesters had gone home, and especially if Mattis and several generals/admirals had not also tacitly ordered the military to stand down.

Why are you so sure? The protests are still going on, just more peacefully 

I think the issue was that it took a video to actually bring charges on the 1st guy. That is a sad state of affairs. 

Similar story in Baltimore. The kids on the college campuses (there are a lot of colleges/universities there) were all complaining about "rough riding". My own daughters told me of a friend that came back pretty messed up from one over a drinking incident. That happened 2 years before the death of Freddie Gray. It was malicious and unprofessional to do that to anyone. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.6  JohnRussell  replied to  Pedro @2.1.3    one month ago

It sounds like the police are to be replaced with another layer of social workers. I dont mind a fresh approach, but in confronting criminal activity, particularly violent criminal activity, we need those who intercede on society's behalf to also have the will and the means to prevent or respond to criminal activity with force. Mister Rogers may be a good counselor, but maybe not so good as a law enforcer. 

The devil will be in the details. 

 
 
 
user image
2.1.7    replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.6    one month ago

I can't wait till one of these "social workers" gets called to a domestic dispute with a drugged up violent guy who doesn't have a thing to lose and is endangering people's lives.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.1.8  Trout Giggles  replied to  Pedro @2.1    one month ago

When you say demilitarize, do you mean taking away their tanks, fortified humvees, and large weapons?

 
 
 
Pedro
2.1.9  author  Pedro  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.8    one month ago

For all intents and purposes, yes. The police around the country have been the beneficiaries of our military's surplus of just about everything for more than a decade now, and they've taken advantage of that by stocking up. 

 
 
 
Pedro
2.1.10  author  Pedro  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.5    one month ago

So you are still a libertarian, right?

It's been a very long time since I've really been Libertarian. My view of Libertarianism is it's a me first ideology. Kind of to politics what Satanism is to religion (not that I'm religious lol). I have no time to waste on them, nor any respect for the selfish and self absorbed ideology that rules that party ATM.

Why are you so sure? The protests are still going on, just more peacefully

Why am I so sure the military has stood down? Because the message was clear, Esper's reversal is a demonstration of this, and in general, you can see the attitude of the military on this is one of quiet defiance. Nobody wants to be deployed to potentially kill people they grew up with and legitimately enlisted to protect.

I think the issue was that it took a video to actually bring charges on the 1st guy. That is a sad state of affairs.

I think the issue is it is the first time most people have actually watched somebody die, much less under the circumstances which George Floyd was murdered. Murder has never been so real, so visceral, so much a thing that can't be ignored. I'm sure there are plenty of people around the world that are justifiably haunted by what they saw and heard. More white ears are open now than at any moment in our nation's history, to the real plight of black Americans and the very real abuses of power that allow this to happen.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
2.1.11  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Pedro @2.1.10    one month ago
you can see the attitude of the military on this is one of quiet defiance. Nobody wants to be deployed to potentially kill people they grew up with and legitimately enlisted to protect.

Very true statement.....

From boot camp on, military personnel are constantly reminded about their obligation to disobey illegal orders.  If you read the oath of enlistment, the statement of defense of the US Constitution comes before, following the orders of the commander in chief.  It is in that order for a reason.

 
 
 
zuksam
2.1.12  zuksam  replied to  Pedro @2.1    one month ago
When they say defund, what they really mean is de-militarize

I hate seeing Cops wearing military style gear or driving their blacked out cruisers. The cruisers look like Secret Police vehicles and the gear makes them look like Gestapo. It's not just how they look to the public it's how it makes the cops feel and act. I'd like to see cops go back to highly visible black and white cruisers and traditional uniforms for normal duty on the streets. I don't care how SWAT dresses because that's rarely used and only for very specific duty but even the riot gear should be made to resemble normal uniforms as best as it can. Then there's the other end of the spectrum where you see cops wearing a polo shirt and cargo shorts with their badge on a necklace and they think they're dressed for duty. I think not, you're dressed for a Jimmy Buffet Concert not official police duty so go enjoy the music or dress properly for the job.

 
 
 
pat wilson
3  pat wilson    one month ago

I agree with most if not all of your content. Personally I think taxes are predominately for physical infrastructure. Also for a governing body to provide structure for the sustainability our society. This isn't just investing it's entirely necessary.

 
 
 
Pedro
3.1  author  Pedro  replied to  pat wilson @3    one month ago

True. That's why I mentioned the price gouging. After paying for infrastructure, look at how much is wasted because the gov't allows a toilet manufacturer to charge twice or more of what actual retail would be. How much is wasted on weaponry because we've privatized the industry? Why are senators and legislators allowed to hold their seats while campaigning? We pay for that. I can rattle off literally hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of examples of the gov't willfully overpaying for goods and services for no real reason at all...and while I'm on that topic, we legislated a scenario where for some reason, the U.S. gov't is not allowed to negotiate drug prices, which leads to a significantly greater financial burden not only on the individual, but also our nation as people unable to afford medication are forced to rely on gov't programs.

Our gov't definitely does not responsibly handle the money we keep gifting them.

 
 
 
Ender
3.1.1  Ender  replied to  Pedro @3.1    one month ago

I never got the, we must spend all of our budget or it will be cut.

It is almost like being punished for having a balanced budget.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
3.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Ender @3.1.1    one month ago

I believe most states have to balance their budgets every year, but the federal gov't doesn't' have to.

As for the "we have to spend this money!" that always blew my mind, too. But when I asked for new noise dosimeters, or a new air sampling monitor or a velocimeter I was told, no, we can't spend the money on that. We could spend it on paper, pens, folders, shit like that. I don't even think we could buy a computer with it.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
3.1.3  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Pedro @3.1    one month ago

More evidence of what you say.... Go read as to why the VA was not allowed to be included in the Medicare part D.  It speaks directly to your point of not being allowed to negotiate prices.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
3.1.4  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Ender @3.1.1    one month ago

1980s, NAS Sigonella, Sicily.  The command had a budget surplus they needed to spend or lose.  They bought 400 flight suits for the dozen pilots assigned at that command.

Don't get me started on the $104.00 IC chip in the Navy supply system that I could get from Radio Shack for under a buck.

 
 
 
Dulay
3.1.5  Dulay  replied to  Pedro @3.1    one month ago
Our gov't definitely does not responsibly handle the money we keep gifting them.

What I found infuriating is the fact that even after finding companies have overcharged the government, they are still allowed to have government contracts. KBR/Halliburton is a perfect example. 

 
 
 
Pedro
3.1.6  author  Pedro  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @3.1.3    one month ago

I will check that out. Thanks.

 
 
 
Pedro
3.1.7  author  Pedro  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @3.1.4    one month ago

Exactly.

 
 
 
Pedro
3.1.8  author  Pedro  replied to  Dulay @3.1.5    one month ago

Yeah. It's messed up.

 
 
 
MUVA
4  MUVA    one month ago

About 45 percent of people could careless where tax money goes because they don't pay income tax or very little.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
4.1  Dean Moriarty  replied to  MUVA @4    one month ago

Yes and I can't say that I'd be interested in keeping anyone on the payroll that isn't putting the customer first and doing everything he can to meet delivery dates and make a profit. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.2  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  MUVA @4    one month ago

That is true, so they would have nothing to say about this, but the rest of us taxpayers do care. 

 
 
 
badfish
4.2.1  badfish  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.2    one month ago

I want to thank you for not sending me a 1099 on what I'm paid here. 

Sincerely,

The Actor that plays the People's fish.

 
 
 
badfish
5  badfish    one month ago

The Government takes away parts of our income and private property by force by declaring it a tax. For this reason by definition taxation is in fact theft. 

Don't believe me? Try to hide it or not pay and let me know what happens.

BTW I am not an asshole I just don't want to be financially culpable for the bricks, Peter claims are being dropped off by the CIA. I'm a nonviolent man.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1  JohnRussell  replied to  badfish @5    one month ago

The Supreme Court has always ruled that income tax and other federal taxes ARE constitutional. Don't you believe in the Constitution ? 

 
 
 
Ender
6  Ender    one month ago
that staying on unemployment might actually be a necessity

The only thing I really disagree with is this. I don't buy the staying on unemployment in perpetuity.

In my state one can only be on unemployment for so long before it is cut off.

 

 
 
 
Pedro
6.1  author  Pedro  replied to  Ender @6    one month ago

Yeah. I really meant until their benefits are exhausted. People who would need to stay on unemployment after that would probably seek out welfare, EBT and housing assistance, programs like that.

 
 
 
Ender
6.1.1  Ender  replied to  Pedro @6.1    one month ago

I understand. The sad thing is a lot of people in a situation like that are kind of trapped. Years ago I worked for a rent to own company, I dealt with all kinds of people.

What I saw concerning some folk was sort of a catch 22. People living in low income housing and no job, usually with kids. If they got a job it would most likely be minimum wage. Then they would be on the hook for maybe losing the low income housing yet still not be able to afford the rent on an apartment or house, much less all the bills that would come with it. Not to mention then having to find someone to watch the children.

 
 
 
Pedro
6.1.2  author  Pedro  replied to  Ender @6.1.1    one month ago

Exactly.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

PJ
Krishna
Vic Eldred
Kathleen
JaneDoe
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Sean Treacy
KatPen
GregTx
1776  Traditional American




Gordy327


32 visitors