5 ms·

Nonono, no more of these halfbaked tax reform ideas. There's nothing in society that says we need to "compensate" new taxes by getting rid of older ones. If we

by Ckirby 3y ago

Nonono, no more of these halfbaked tax reform ideas. There's nothing in society that says we need to "compensate" new taxes by getting rid of older ones. If we as a society decide that someone's speculative actions are harmful, there is no good reason not to tax them into oblivion

mrangle 3y ago
There is no "we as a society decide". No one in their right mind would argue that the government widely acts in the favor of those who elect it, especially in terms of revenue collecting and spending. The government decides and the government mostly has its own agendas. Yet now the correct choice is supposed to be made in regard to property ownership social "harm", using taxes as the specific tool to correct it? If the government, or "we as a society", can't directly justify their goal being enforced via restrictive law then enforcing the goal via taxation isn't democratically justified (ie: an incentive provided for the tax collecting gov). >no more of these halfbaked tax reform ideas. Why would US citizens be in favor of tax reform? What a crazy idea that has zero historical precedent.
- purplerabbit 3y ago
  How should the government decide which taxes to implement, then?
- Ckirby 3y ago
  I have an even crazier idea, what if we just voted for straight up expropriation? But I don't feel like having this discussion with someone who by all likely hood wouldn't be affected by this issue since they don't own any rental properties to begin with, wouldn't be affected by this in any way, and is just making an argument from an ideological reflex Not every country is a corrupt failed state and plenty of western representative democracies have acted on behalf of their constituents best interests If you dont make a good faith argument but instead throw your hands up saying "they're all crooks anyway" then what's the point of even trying?

by Ckirby 3y ago

mrangle 3y ago

There is no "we as a society decide". No one in their right mind would argue that the government widely acts in the favor of those who elect it, especially in terms of revenue collecting and spending. The government decides and the government mostly has its own agendas. Yet now the correct choice is supposed to be made in regard to property ownership social "harm", using taxes as the specific tool to correct it? If the government, or "we as a society", can't directly justify their goal being enforced via restrictive law then enforcing the goal via taxation isn't democratically justified (ie: an incentive provided for the tax collecting gov). >no more of these halfbaked tax reform ideas. Why would US citizens be in favor of tax reform? What a crazy idea that has zero historical precedent.

purplerabbit 3y ago
How should the government decide which taxes to implement, then?
Ckirby 3y ago
I have an even crazier idea, what if we just voted for straight up expropriation? But I don't feel like having this discussion with someone who by all likely hood wouldn't be affected by this issue since they don't own any rental properties to begin with, wouldn't be affected by this in any way, and is just making an argument from an ideological reflex Not every country is a corrupt failed state and plenty of western representative democracies have acted on behalf of their constituents best interests If you dont make a good faith argument but instead throw your hands up saying "they're all crooks anyway" then what's the point of even trying?