I'm guessing for taxation...If that's a logical argument against taxation, then I hope that the author lived in the jungle for some time before making that kind of argument.
Let me see if I can make a logical argument against taxation without using the "How many men argument " that I plucked off the internet. First ,How does the government cut spending? Well, according to the government if this year they spend X amount of dollars and are budgeted next year for a 10% increase and the Congress or President cut that to 8 %,They have reduced spending...to them that is a CUT.Now I ask ,If you spend 1000 dollars this year on something and next year you spend 1080 dollars on something is that a CUT or an INCREASE in spending? Today ,I would guess that a majority of Americans pay close to 40% of their total income in taxes. Federal income tax + state income tax +state and local sales taxes+ federal excise taxes+ taxes that are built in to the price of an item like gasoline+property taxes...not to mention the money confiscated for social security and medicare.{and for social security 6.8% from you and 6.8 % from your employer ,which is money he can't pay you}.Anyone here think that ten or twenty or fifty years from now it will be less than or more than it is currently.History says MORE THAN.At what point does it simply become TOO MUCH? My own belief is that this country was founded with everyone given a chance at life ,liberty and the pursuit of happiness.We have a chance to make our own way and either succeed or fail.When we fail,it is our responsibility to get up off the ground ,dust ourselves off ,and get back to it. Our government should not attempt or even be responsible for trying to guarantee happiness by playing Robin Hood. Alexander Fraser Tytler [Lord Woodhouselee] once wrote: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship."
I am astonished by those people who expect the government to do everything for its citizens and would pay whatever taxes are needed to get it. I'm equally astonished at those who expect the government to do nothing for its citizens and would pay no taxes at all. Is it not clear that the answer is a proper balance between taxes and services? And that balance point should be determined by what is reasonable to expect and what is affordable to pay. Everybody gets something and pays something to achieve a government service that is adequate and neither stingy nor indulgent.
Just a logical argument, period. I believe in, as Red constantly says, "balance". Clearly, we cannot expect the government to provide education, protection, roads, etc with no taxes.
Red,I cant believe I actually agree with you.I think you are right about a proper balance.The problem is the government will continue to get bigger and bigger ,while politicians will continue to talk about smaller government. Who believes that any government programs will actually get cut? In what year will virtually every American citizen be paying 50% of their income in taxes? 60%? When will it stop? Oh ,and just to be clear ...for me... a CUT is a decrease from the present rate of spending...NOT a decrease in the rate of growth. We are taxing our population into oblivion.What we need are massive cuts in government programs and massive across the board tax cuts.Then our government needs to function off the money it has at its disposal.
this is just politics and the problem with democracy. the only way significant changes occur in this system of government is in response to pain---economic (depressions), social (civil rights movement) or political (wars---particularly at home). the alternative to these stimuli i hope would be a major third party. i dont see it. the country is still doing quite well. happy, rich, healthy populous. very large GDP. there are signs of trouble, but i suspect there always are/have been. if anything, the bottom of society is getting worse off---i guess you can argue either side of the taxation issue with respect to this though.
Of course there has to be a balance, but the problem is not taxation, it is politicians and how they spend that money...There needs to be tax cuts, spending needs to be reduced and priorities have to be reorganized...For a civilized society to be able to exist there needs to be some sort of taxation over its citizens...I could post a long comment here but I don't feel like it so I'll just make it simple. The fact that we come to tigerforums is because of our love of LSU, if there were no taxes there would be no LSU, no LSU football, no Tiger Stadium, and no tailgating before the games...I know I couldn't live in a world without any of that.
Whenever you hear a politician advocate "tax cuts" without indicating what services or programs must be cut as well, you are listening to a snake oil salesman. This is why we post defiticts and have a huge debt. Taxes need to be rigidly tied to services and budgets need to be balanced. I'm sick of politicians just giving expensive tax rebates, creating new social programs like "No child" and new beauracracies like DHS and starting expensive wars while cutting income. It is simply irresponsible management. If taxes go down, then expenses must be cut. If expenses rise, then taxes must rise. There is no free lunch. We can't just keep borrowing money.
