Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't have kids, yet I pay for school taxes.
I don't have a car, yet I pay for highways.
I live in a tent in a KOA because I love camping, yet I pay for housing assistance.
You can take this argument to "ad infinitum" if you want.
It can be applied to another things, but not really the things you mentioned. You went to school right? So you benefited from the public school system and your support of the system can be seen as you paying back (as an adult) services that you used as a child. Furthermore, you benefit indirectly from others going to school.
Fuel is taxed and that is used for a lot of roads, highways, etc. If you don't drive you won't pay the taxes. But using federal money to say build major highways is appropriate. Everyone in the country benefits in some way from the highways regardless of whether they drive or not.
People should not have to subsidize costs for other people when they or society in general does not benefit from it.
If we do that then we need to do it i other place where those that work i dangerous jobs pay more alos. Can't limit it to just condition but real sats. If we really aloowed this to be free many young people copuld even get vehicle insurance. Things likie crime rate could double housing insurnce as well as for older car more like to injure people Its really a dark road.
Do any of you pro-tax folks have any idea how close your ideas sound to King George of England? Do any of you people realize that the United States Of America was FOUNDED by people like those who dumped tea in Boston Harbor in protest of high tea taxes? And before you even try to tell me that that was because they were not represented in British Parliament, answer this - Do you really feel like you are represented by your governement?? I sure don't!
How's this for an idea? Let's try what the British tried back in the 1700s. Let's levy a large tax on tea!! Lots of people drink tea, and when they are drinking tea, they're not contributing to society or helping to raise revenue for the government. Therefore, I suggest a sales tax on the purchase of tea, and also a use tax levied every time someone actually drinks the tea that they have purchased. If someone buys you tea, you must declare that gift as income, and pay income tax on the fair market value of the tea you are given, and then also pay the use tax when you drink it.
All of the revenue raised by these increased tea taxes will be used by the government to fund the Department Of Further Taxation, which will use it to study ways in which the government can raise tax revenue in similar ways on other products, and to combat crime related to the new black market on tea. Any surplus revenue in the Departments Budget will be flushed down official government toilets.
We do not need, nor should we want, the government deciding what is good and bad for us and doling out punishment in the form of taxes on those who make choices contrary to what big brother wants. First cigarettes and alcohol because they are unpopular, then fatty foods, than taxes on clothes that are too revealing, or on riding bicycles to prevent head injuries, or on people whose hat isn't the right color or whose underwear is too tight. It starts with the unpopular, and then it grows and grows because by allowing them to tax tobacco or booze you have given them the precedent to keep doing it until it spirals out of control. The saddest thing about it all is that no matter how much they tax us, none of the added revenue will fix or change one damn thing, and all of us know it.
Quote:
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
-H L Mencken
Last edited by treasurekidd; 07-30-2009 at 05:04 PM..
I have another great idea! Let's levy a large tax on tea!! Lots of people drink tea, and when they are drinking tea, they're not contributing to society or helping to raise revenue for the governement.
The point is not to tax unhealthy foods because "lots of people eat them", but rather because it would help charge for externalities.
Currently people do not pay the full costs of their bad eating, rather it is being subsidized by others who eat better. Using tax policy is one of way of better aligning incentives.
Using tax policy in this matter allows some free market forces to return to a market that has been removed from them. The alternative of course is allowing a free market health care system, which would undoubtedly charge more to obese folks. But I don't think a free market health care system is possible.
I get it - just like how the big tobacco lawsuits were supposed to be used to pay for the healthcare costs caused by smokers right? How did that work out? The government and the taxes it levies is NEVER the solution. Ever. If you want to reform healthcare, make it truly private. Remove the damn insurance companies from the picture and have people actually PAY for the healthcare they need. It will serve as a reason for people to choose healthy lifestyles to avoid costs and it will enter competition into the market, and that will help to set prices based on the populations reasonable ability to pay for services.
Perhaps "nationalized health care" could be a scaled down version of catastrophic care coverage only for serious life threatening illness or accident trauma care, something similar to life insurance, but everything else you pay for. Yearly doctor visits, you pay for. Want to go to the emergency room because you broke a nail or stubbed your toe, you pay for it. Now THAT'S free market, and as imperfect as it may be, the goverment will never, ever be able to come up with anything that's anywhere near as efficient. Period.
Last edited by treasurekidd; 07-30-2009 at 05:07 PM..
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,842,447 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
It can be applied to another things, but not really the things you mentioned. You went to school right? So you benefited from the public school system and your support of the system can be seen as you paying back (as an adult) services that you used as a child. Furthermore, you benefit indirectly from others going to school.
Fuel is taxed and that is used for a lot of roads, highways, etc. If you don't drive you won't pay the taxes. But using federal money to say build major highways is appropriate. Everyone in the country benefits in some way from the highways regardless of whether they drive or not.
People should not have to subsidize costs for other people when they or society in general does not benefit from it.
How do does society/a person benefit from providing benefits for the severely mentally handicapped, then? It's a warm fuzzy. Is there a solid "We have given this and we have gotten this in return benefit?"
I'm all for it. (Full disclosure, I have a brother who has been mentally ill for most of his life.) But as you stated it's when people or society can derive a benefit from it. Which people are doing when you subsidize their medical bills. They (A person) are defintely deriving a benefit from your(one of the people) hard earned cash.
Reverse the statement. Does it still hold true.
People should have to subsidize costs for other people when they or society in general benefit from it. I don't like that statement. I want a choice on who I decide to help. Sometimes I get to make that choice, but in the USA, sometimes my elected officials get to make that choice for me. That incredibly bad, "I didn't ever want to subsidize a failing company with bad vision, bad management and a bad business strategy" choice.
Here's an issue that I see in Seattle. We have firefighters. They get government money to fight fires. They have "fundraisers" where they stand in the middle of the street holding boots and ask for Donations.
This impedes traffic and creates a dangerous situation for them and motorists. It also brings to mind, "Where has the money gone and is this for a BBQ dinner?" Should I subsidize their BBQ dinner? Is it for fire fighting equipment? Who knows?
Incidently, I give to LightHouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired | Home Page . I know they're legit. I think they're legit. Do I get anything from it? No. Nothing tangible, really. I get a lot, intangibly, though. Am I visually impaired? Absolutely, I wear a very strong prescription. Coke bottles have nothing on me. I thank God every day I'm not blind.
Well we subsidize the handicapped and disabled because it is human nature IMO. I think that is worthy of my tax dollars.
But giving people money (welfare) to have them go out and deal drugs or work in other illegal activities under the table drives me nuts. I know a guy who owns a bunch of low income housing - he sees it all the time. He benefits though because he knows his tenants can make rent with Government cheese!
Remove the damn insurance companies from the picture and have people actually PAY for the healthcare they need.
Yes, that's the solution. People should just pay out of pocket. Now what happens when you get Cancer and it costs $500k to treat? Just die because you can't afford it? How many people can save and/or pay off $500k?
Insurance is required for these sorts of things, insurance is not required for basic health care though. But if someone wants insurance for routine health care they should be able to purchase it.
Free markets don't work for health care. There is not a single free market health care system.
How do does society/a person benefit from providing benefits for the severely mentally handicapped, then? It's a warm fuzzy. Is there a solid "We have given this and we have gotten this in return benefit?"
Its something people support because they feel its "the right thing" to do. Personally, I think the legal system should allow for babies with extremely severe mental retardation to be euthanized. But, this is a much different issue.
Not sure what your point is with everything else you said.
Yes, that's the solution. People should just pay out of pocket. Now what happens when you get Cancer and it costs $500k to treat? Just die because you can't afford it? How many people can save and/or pay off $500k?
Insurance is required for these sorts of things, insurance is not required for basic health care though. But if someone wants insurance for routine health care they should be able to purchase it.
Free markets don't work for health care. There is not a single free market health care system.
Actually he is 100% right. I believe if you read the rest of his post he said what we need is catastrophic insurance. Kinda like home insurance. Mine is a $2500 deductible.
Having health insurance like our current system actually encourages mass inflation. Also keep in mind that when you buy insurance, in most cases you are paying for access to lower negotiated rates. You'd be hard pressed cost the insurance company more than you pay in a typical year.
I have a great example. Wife went to the doctor for a checkup and some tests. Retail (cash) costs for someone off the street was $1100. The insurance company paid $110 for everything. That's a 10% payout rate.
If everyone actually paid what insurance companies paid for health insurance all we'd need is catastrophic insurance. And it would give us an incentive to actually shop around, driving down prices and letting the free market work. The Government meddling and having health insurance has actually caused the mass inflation that we have going on today.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
