|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: No Taxation without Representation. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
AZPaul3 writes: These are regressive taxes, meaning poorer people pay a greater % of their income in such tax then richer people for the same item at the same price. Are poor people equally represented? Are there any barriers that might keep the poor or non-citizens that still must pay taxes and in fact pay a greater % of their income in taxes from having representation?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Are poor people equally represented? Of course not. Poor people cannot afford the cost of buying a congressmen let alone a senator, even on the state level. Whether you are rich or poor, whether you vote or not, as a legal citizen you are represented, if not equally, in the halls of power. If you don't vote you just let others decide who that representative will be and if you're poor you pay less for that representation than an international corporation which may have many legislators, congressmen and senators on their payroll. Illegals have no such representation officially. If you're a Democrat you kinda feel obligated to represent all in your district, even illegals, as a matter of public good. If you're a Republican then you will actively campaign against the public good when doing so favors your major donors. As far as illegals go ... by paying (unrepresented for sure) sales and school and property taxes you likewise get the use of the public benefits like roads, schools, fire, police, emergency services and like that. In this way illegals are indeed paying a share of the public services they use. And just by being here, legal or not, you are supposed to be subject to the benefits and restrictions of the US Constitution though the Trumpettes seem the think otherwise.Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Taq writes: In a normal economy, yes. Where I live 70% of the people do not pay rent or municipal taxes or anything. No form of income going into the local government, at all. What happens is that the paying 30% face paying for the rent electricity, etc. for the 70% who pay nothing at all. Coming election time, with 70% not paying for anything, we all know how that will go.
In a normal economy, the cost of those taxes are dispersed to the whole community. While a renter doesn't directly pay property taxes, it is included in their rent. Higher property taxes equals higher rent. Higher tariffs equal higher costs for products at the store, even if the consumer is not directly paying the tariff.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
ringo writes: True in a normal economy. At local level, in my country, 70% of the people don't pay any taxes for local communities. They should not vote in local elections. I would say the opposite: anybody who pays taxes, directly or indirectly, should have representation. Illegal immigrants included They do pay taxes indirect taxes on national level. They should vote nationally. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1284 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
What is the reason that 70% do not pay any taxes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Pressie writes:
That's a distinction that has a lot of room for abuse. A lot of people could be disenfranchised because they don't pay "directly" enough in a given jurisdiction. True in a normal economy. At local level, in my country, 70% of the people don't pay any taxes for local communities. They should not vote in local elections.They do pay taxes indirect taxes on national level. They should vote nationally. I'd rather give the vote to a thousand who don't "deserve" it than take it away from one who does. Edited by ringo, : No reason given.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
They don't work in the formal economy. No receipts, etc.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
heathen writes: Work in the informal sector.
What is the reason that 70% do not pay any taxes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
ringo writes: Actually, by taxing the small percentage law-abiding citizens who pay for things to breaking point only works up to a point. That point is when they run out of money to be able to give.
That's a distinction that has a lot of room for abuse. A lot of people could be disenfranchised because they don't pay "directly" enough in a given jurisdiction.I'd rather give the vote to a thousand who don't "deserve" it than take it away from one who does.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Pressie writes:
But we're not taxing only the law-abiding. We're also taxing the Al Capones. And we're also taxing the Pedros who forgot to check in at Customs when they crossed the border. The issue here is not levels of taxation; it's the fundamental democratic principle of no taxation without representation. It's one of the major principles that the US was founded on. Actually, by taxing the small percentage law-abiding citizens who pay for things to breaking point only works up to a point.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
Pressie writes: In a normal economy, yes. Where I live 70% of the people do not pay rent or municipal taxes or anything. No form of income going into the local government, at all. What happens is that the paying 30% face paying for the rent electricity, etc. for the 70% who pay nothing at all. Coming election time, with 70% not paying for anything, we all know how that will go.
This is a different situation than that faced by the American colonists. They were paying taxes and weren't allowed representation in English Parliament. I would presume you vote in elections, so you have representation. The argument was never for taking away the vote of those who didn't pay taxes. It was the exact opposite, giving the vote to people who do pay taxes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Sure, but it is the opposite of what I currently experience in my country. The small percentage of people who actually pay something (around 30%) are completely outvoted by the large percentage of people who don't pay anything or for anything (around 70%).
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Heathen Member (Idle past 1284 days) Posts: 1067 From: Brizzle Joined: |
You mean cash in hand jobs? menial jobs? zero hours contracts etc?
Surely these people should be allowed to vote for someone who may work to improve their employment situation? by creating more formal, better paid jobs? otherwise you have an eternal underclass... Edited by Heathen, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
ring writes: In my country only the law-abiding are taxed. That's the problem. The percentage deciding to say "stuff that, nothing happens when not following the law" is growing every year. And all those people vote for people who decided that neither laws nor payment for anything would be important. But we're not taxing only the law-abiding. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Pressie writes:
Al Capone should have moved there then. In my country only the law-abiding are taxed.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024