What should be the MOST % of your income that goes to taxes?

[ QUOTE ]
Again, I have no numbers. But, that might not be the case as long as the percentage paid in is significantly lowered, while funds paid out is unchanged. Of course, some people are going to pay more than they get, but it's an echelon of income that is the most likely to not need it. Is that fair? I don't know. Is SS raided to pay for other stuff? Yes. Should it be different than any other tax structure where the more you have, the more you give? I don't see why not.

[/ QUOTE ]

SS is not a tax structure and it is not a welfare program. People pay into it expecting to get out what they put into it, sometimes more. To have someone only get out 40% of what they put into it is immoral.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
How do taxes qualify as "stealing"?

And, on another note, does a question mark go inside or outside quotation marks?

[/ QUOTE ]

Outside for that use.

As for taxes = stealing I thought the same. Both are legal terms with pretty strict definitions.

[FishHooks]

If you think people are getting back what they paid for SS your really living in a dream world.

Some people were. Maybe not currently, but as recently as 10 years ago people on the lower end of the income scale were receiving way more from SS than they paid in.

[andyfox]

Yes, a great mind, but not a seer. His prescritioins for taxation cannot be considered as relevant today as they were then.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, a great mind, but not a seer. His prescritioins for taxation cannot be considered as relevant today as they were then.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, perhaps. Let's see, he suggested a tenth part of one's time was too much to pay the government. If that tenth is of the total hours in a week, that would be 16.8 hours per week. If on the other hand it is one-tenth of waking hours, then it might be consiberably less.

16.8 hours per week is roughly 1/3 of a 40-hour workweek. Not too far off from what we are taxed today, is it? But still less, all taxes considered.

Granted, needs are greater and more complex today, too. Infrastructure requires more service. However, we also have much greater technology to do the servicing with.

I'll bet that if all the lard were trimmed out of federal and state budgets, that even today we might be able to make do with a figure that would satisfy Franklin.

But that's only a bet.

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
How do taxes qualify as "stealing"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Technically, it's more like blackmail or extortion. If you don't pay, the government throws you in jail. Semantics, I guess. It's my money, the government takes it against my will. Sure sounds like a crime to me.

[ QUOTE ]
And, on another note, does a question mark go inside or outside quotation marks?

[/ QUOTE ]

Periods and commas are traditionally (in the US) placed inside quotes even when they are not part of the quoted material. i.e. if a guy says

"Thou shall not steal."

and I write:

He started his sentence with "Thou shall."

I put the period inside the quote even though the material I'm quoting did not include a period at that point.

NB in most of English-speaking world outside of the US, it would look like this:

He started his sentence with "Thou shall".

This traditional rule does not hold for question marks, exclamation marks, or other punctuation. The reason periods and commas are moved inside the quotes has to do with old lead movable type printing. Periods and commas, since they are so small, tend to break easily, and leaving them outside quotes with space on the other side exposes them more. Putting them inside the quotes means they are usually next to a large letter that will shelter them from damage.

[FishHooks]

Very very low on the income level, but most aren't receiving nearly enough, also you have to take into account inflation thats a big part.

[FishHooks]

yea I would agree with statement as well.

[HDPM]

[ QUOTE ]
How do taxes qualify as "stealing"?

And, on another note, does a question mark go inside or outside quotation marks?

[/ QUOTE ]

Taxes qualify as stealing a couple of different ways. if a tax is truly necessary for a proper function of the government it isn't stealing. Welfare is stealing because the government has no business spending on welfare. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]


The idea that people have too much and therefore somebody can take excess is pure theft. It is taking just because somebody else wants you not to have your stuff. Worse than regular old theft where the thief wants the property because the idea is to simply deny you your property. About the same thing as forcing you to give up a kidney because you have two and only really need one. The idea of knocking rich people down just because they "have more than they need" is really monstrous.