Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Income Taxes and Record Keeping ( tax ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Colin Cody who wrote (1058)	4/25/1998 11:05:00 AM
From: Spots	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5810

>> The biggest thing to remember... if YOU are saving significant $$$ under their proposal, WHO, SPECIFICALLY is going to be paying more to make up the difference? This is often the tale, but I don't agree: (1) A tremendous amount of what is currently paid in taxes is either wasted (bad enough) or used destructively (execrable). What happened to consent of the governed? It is downright criminal for the governments at various levels to capture over 20% of GNP. (2) Even if it were so (which it is NOT, but for the sake of argument), this is the fixed pie argument: I can't do better unless you do worse, and vice-versa. That is just not so. An economic falsehood. In it's more destructive forms this becomes the dog-in-the-manger argument: If I can't have it (read this "I'm not willing to work for it or take a risk for it") you can't have it either. I'm all for knowledgeable discussion and debate. Let's have it. >>The bottom line as I keep hammering at is NOT the METHODS of collection (flat tax, NST, or current IRS), so much as it is the AMOUNT OF SPENDING by Congress. Such as this. Up to a point, I buy this, BUT there is still a tremendous burden on the public due to the sheer cost and complexity of the tax codes, which is in addition to the absurd proportion of GNP extracted by the various levels of government. It's "off the books" so the government doesn't have to take the heat for it, but it's a tremendous drain on national resources. Add to that the economic costs of market distortion caused by central-economic-planning-committee mentality of the congress and many states, and the result is incalculable. I don't mean cheap. I just don't buy what you say about all the work generated for CPAs, lawyers, etc by a genuine simplification of the tax codes. Of course there would be interim work generated to dismantle the useless (destructive) tax-only white elephants that have been assembled over decades. Heck, there was a lot of work generated to convert stables to garages, too. So start up a "Make a Garage from YOUR Stable" business today and see how rich you get. Of course the coach fitters became car fitters (body by Fisher). That is, they took up useful work <G>. However, <sigh> I'm afraid this is all moot. We do have to agree on one thing (I think we agree): That is, the congress will never do it. We will have to take back control of our government somehow in order to make it happen. Historically that has not been exactly easy; I'm not sure it's EVER actually happened. Maybe on the internet. An informed society, etc ... . Spots