Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |  [ show all ]
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: GazzBut]
    #3068238 -

GazzBut said:
Quote:
So, in other words, you would force people to live up to your standards?



No I just dont see why a minority of people should be FORCED to shoulder the burden of helping those in need in society when the responsibility for this burden is obviously shared equally between each member of society.


NO ONE IS BEING FORCED. That's the whole point. I simply have enough faith in people's generosity(based on the amount of money that people already contribute to charity) that I believe that charitable donations from such individuals would be sufficient to help those who truly need it(as opposed to those who are fully capable of working but choose instead to live off of welfare instead).


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: silversoul7]
    #3068249 -

And what would happen if it was found that you were in fact wrong and the charitable contributions received were not enough by a long way?

And by the way I would feel FORCED to pay more in this kind of situation if others werent contributing enough.

One definition of force is "A capacity for affecting the mind or behavior;" so the behaviour of others would indeed be forcing me, ok?


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: GazzBut]
    #3068270 -

GazzBut said:
And what would happen if it was found that you were in fact wrong and the charitable contributions received were not enough by a long way?


Then I will have lost faith in mankind, or maybe, just maybe, I would rethink my position on welfare. However, even if I did decide that welfare was necessary, I would rather have it funded by the Land Value Tax(sorry if I sound like a broken record with this) or other sources of government income such as fines than have it forcefully taken from someone's hard-earned income.

Quote:
And by the way I would feel FORCED to pay more in this kind of situation if others werent contributing enough.


The fact that you feel forced does not make it so. No one is twisting your arm here.

Quote:
One definition of force is "A capacity for affecting the mind or behavior;" so the behaviour of others would indeed be forcing me, ok?


No, it would be influencing you. You would be forcing yourself to give, as would I. It is better that that force come from within rather than from without.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: silversoul7]
    #3068356 -

Wow, you really believe that charity would be able to replace welfare without a huge decrease in the living standards of those dependent on it? Even if you abolish unemployment benefit, I can't see charities getting anywhere near as much as they'd need.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: deafpanda]
    #3068369 -

deafpanda said:
Wow, you really believe that charity would be able to replace welfare without a huge decrease in the living standards of those dependent on it? Even if you abolish unemployment benefit, I can't see charities getting anywhere near as much as they'd need.


I don't expect it to "replace" welfare as it exists today, since many people who are on welfare do not need it. I believe that abolishing welfare would result in a drop in the illegitimacy rate in children, particularly in the African-American community(welfare has often been blamed for the breakup of the black family, and I believe there is probably a lot of truth in that, as does my dad, who who is a staunch liberal and supporter of the welfare state). I also believe it would motivate more people to seek employment. As for the decrease in living standards, I do not believe charity should have to ensure that everyone has their own place to live in, a car in the garage, their own TV and computer, etc. I believe it should be there to keep people from starving, and provide some shelter(and perhaps alcohol/drug counseling for those who need it) while people get their lives together. I think it might be enough to provide for those who TRULY need it, but I don't think it should be comfortable enough that it is seen as a viable alternative to working.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: silversoul7]
    #3068397 -

I'm talking about those who are too old or disabled to work and single mothers who are incapable of supporting their family on their own. I agree that it would be an incentive for those who dont work to find employment, but if you exclude those who can work from welfare, do you still think charity could cater for the needs of those who really need it?

If this system was tried and it was found that there weren't enough donations, would you support welfare from taxation?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: silversoul7]
    #3068415 -

Quote:
I would rather have it funded by the Land Value Tax(sorry if I sound like a broken record with this)



dont worry I love a bit of scratching..but I fail to see why, by your definition, the land value tax isnt the same as any other tax i.e how is it enFORCED?

Quote:
No, it would be influencing you. You would be forcing yourself to give, as would I. It is better that that force come from within rather than from without.



Come back to me when you have written your own dictionary! The behaviour of others would be forcing me to act in a certain way. I appreciate that I could theoretically resist this force whereas if you dont pay taxes the consequences are unavoidable (unless you have lots of money and a good accountant!!) but by definition I am still being forced to act in a certain way.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: deafpanda]
    #3068476 -

deafpanda said:
I'm talking about those who are too old or disabled to work and single mothers who are incapable of supporting their family on their own. I agree that it would be an incentive for those who dont work to find employment, but if you exclude those who can work from welfare, do you still think charity could cater for the needs of those who really need it?


In the past, there have been many privately funded hospitals and hospices created by churches to help those in need. I'm sure many more could be created by charity groups if people had more disposable income. As for single mothers, adoption is always an option(I believe many regulations on adoption should be rolled back to make it easier), as is abortion(during the first trimester at least). If they opt out of both options, they will have to hope charity can provide for them and their children, or else work two or more jobs, or perhaps they will have family members they can depend on. It sucks, but they made a choice and will have to live with the consequences.

Quote:
If this system was tried and it was found that there weren't enough donations, would you support welfare from taxation?


Not from income tax. Maybe from less coercive means of taxation, but not from money forcefully taken from those who have rightfully earned it.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: GazzBut]
    #3068482 -

Have you ever met anyone who was spoiled as child? By this I mean someone who has been handed things there whole life. It doesn't mean that they had to have been very affluent, I've seen plenty of poorer people who had very spoiled children.

They can't or won't do anything themselves. Can't can be tolerated, won't will not. But by doing this to a child, or anyone for that matter, you breed incompetentcy. Many of those on welfare do so simply because it's the easier route for them.

I don't think anyone, certainly not me, is advocating those who can't work or survive should not be helped. If they suffer a genuine affliction that prevents them from doing anything, they should - and would - be provided for. But many of those who are even disabled can do something.

Before you think I'm being some heartless bastard, consider this. Even those who are confined to wheelchairs can answer phones, guide people through paperwork, or become counselors. There's plenty of work that could be done just supporting the charitable organization that provides for them. And actually doing something for what they recieve should do wonders for their mental health and ego. Anything these organizations can do to offset costs will just mean they can do that much more to help others. Without the bureaucracy of government institutions, the involvement on a personnel level between the providers and the needy will be much better suited.

Government ineffinciency should be reason enough to convince you. They'll never make the same money do what a private organization could.

Contributing to welfare or some like organization is fine. But doing this through taxation is not contributing, its forcing it upon us.


--------------------
I keep it real because I think it is important that a highly esteemed individual such as myself keep it real lest they experience the dreaded spontaneous non-existance of no longer keeping it real. - Hagbard Celine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #3068509 -

I dont think you have actually read any of my posts have you?

a)Prove the current system can provide work for all that enables them to have an acceptable standard of living.

b)What are your thoughts on the idea of equal collective responsibility. Especially if you are unable to prove a)


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Edited by GazzBut (08/30/04 11:54 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: GazzBut]
    #3068539 -

GazzBut said:
Quote:
I would rather have it funded by the Land Value Tax(sorry if I sound like a broken record with this)



dont worry I love a bit of scratching..but I fail to see why, by your definition, the land value tax isnt the same as any other tax i.e how is it enFORCED?


It is different in that it taxes unearned income, as opposed to the income created by one's labor. Land was here before us, and was not created by human effort, therefore nobody has exclusive rights to it, making it common property, along with air and water. However, since people must use land privately, they may be allowed to use it conditionally. Land has value, and today many people use this value to make money. Since they do not have exclusive right to that land, the money gained from it does not rightfully belong to them. It belongs to the community. Now, I admit that I am a bit ignorant as to how exactly property taxes work, but my understanding is that it is deducted from the sale of a property(someone correct me if I'm wrong). Of course, current property taxes tax improvements upon the land as well as the land itself, while a land value tax would only tax the land value.

Quote:
Quote:
No, it would be influencing you. You would be forcing yourself to give, as would I. It is better that that force come from within rather than from without.



Come back to me when you have written your own dictionary! The behaviour of others would be forcing me to act in a certain way. I appreciate that I could theoretically resist this force whereas if you dont pay taxes the consequences are unavoidable (unless you have lots of money and a good accountant!!) but by definition I am still being forced to act in a certain way.


From Dictionary.com:

force: To compel through pressure or necessity

The pressure is not coming from me or the government, but from your own conscience. As for necessity, it may be true that it is necessary for some to give, but not you specifically. You are free to give or not give, however you see fit. You can give as much or more than you give now, or choose not to give at all, but that is your choice.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: GazzBut]
    #3068587 -

GazzBut said:
a)Prove the current system can provide work for all that enables them to have an acceptable standard of living.


The "current system" includes welfare, minimum wage, and many business regulations which inhibit businesses from hiring more people, as well as inhibiting potential entrepeurs from making it on their own. So I can't really say that the "current system" would be able to provide work for all. Would Laissez-Faire capitalism provide sufficient employment and wages? I can't say for sure, but I believe charity could provide for many if not most of those left behind. I also support having access birth control and abortions readily available for the poor, so as to prevent them from having children for whom they cannot provide, as well as making adoption a more viable option for those who missed their chance to use either such options.

Quote:
b)What are your thoughts on the idea of equal collective responsibility. Especially if you are unable to prove a)


People are responsible for one thing and only one thing: The consequences of their actions(note that this includes any children they have). Any other responsibility they choose to take on is their choice to make, and naturally they are responsible for any consequences of that choice.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: silversoul7]
    #3068621 -

Quote:
People are responsible for one thing and only one thing: The consequences of their actions



You say it like its an objective fact! But herein lies the main difference in our ideologies. You always begin from the point of view of the well being of the individual and assume the welfare of the group will follow whereas I start from the point of view of the group and assume that the welfare of the individual will follow.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: silversoul7]
    #3068653 -

Quote:
Not from income tax. Maybe from less coercive means of taxation, but not from money forcefully taken from those who have rightfully earned it.



What do you think about inheritance tax?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: silversoul7]
    #3068672 -

This land tax thing - if I own a patch of land and you own a patch of land do we both pay the same land tax on it regardless of how we use our respective pieces of land and what income we generate from using it?


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: deafpanda]
    #3068687 -

deafpanda said:
Quote:
Not from income tax. Maybe from less coercive means of taxation, but not from money forcefully taken from those who have rightfully earned it.



What do you think about inheritance tax?


I am against it, and let me explain why. As I said, a land value tax is a tax on income which no person earned, since the land belongs to society. Now, in the case of inheritance, the person who earned the money chooses voluntarily to give it to his or her next of kin. Since they earned the money, they are free to do with it what they wish, and that includes handing it down to their next of kin. The government has no business taxing such voluntary transactions when the money has been rightfully earned.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: GazzBut]
    #3068702 -

GazzBut said:
This land tax thing - if I own a patch of land and you own a patch of land do we both pay the same land tax on it regardless of how we use our respective pieces of land and what income we generate from using it?


If you make improvements upon the land, such as housing and whatnot, then those are exempt from taxation. You are taxed the same percentage of the land value, regardless of what that value is.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: silversoul7]
    #3068729 -

In a way though, all taxes are taxes on income, even land tax, as that's where all your money originates from. You're still taking someone's money that has been earned.

What about taxes on "de-merit goods" such as cigarettes and alcohol, goods whose consumption costs society as a whole?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: silversoul7]
    #3068733 -

So if you owned any land you would effectively be forced into trying to make some money on it to cover the costs of this tax?


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Heard it all before!! [Re: silversoul7]
    #3068850 -

Quote:
force: To compel through pressure or necessity



You are being rather simplistic because the behaviour of others, in this situation, obviously exerts as much force on the way I behave as my conscience does.

Btw, I quoted from dictionary.com also which just goes to show words have many nuances of meaning.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |  [ show all ]

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Henry George and the Land Value Tax
( 1 2 3 all )		 Silversoul 5,822 56 09/20/05 01:19 AM
by Silversoul
* If libertarians/conservatives believe govt welfare leads to dependency
( 1 2 3 all )		 Tao 4,433 52 12/09/04 10:56 PM
by nycomyco
* Welfare and why it bugs me
( 1 2 3 all )		 Yarry 3,142 48 01/20/04 02:13 PM
by Malachi
* Whining about taxes
( 1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 all )		 silversoul7 9,978 187 06/16/03 06:10 PM
by Azmodeus
* W.House: Tax Cuts to Create 800,000 Jobs
( 1 2 3 all )		 Ellis Dee 5,907 40 03/03/02 11:53 PM
by sparafucile
* State-Run Welfare and Libertarianism retread 705 4 10/22/04 07:27 PM
by Ancalagon
* A few "welfare" myths
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all )		 Xlea321 12,864 177 07/30/03 07:19 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* General Welfare
( 1 2 3 all )		 luvdemshrooms 2,606 45 12/14/03 05:37 PM
by luvdemshrooms

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
5,911 topic views. 2 members, 54 guests and 22 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 18 queries.