Why is that hilarious? Plenty of liberals on this site worship Obama regardless of his Bush-like tendencies. True fans root for their favorite team no matter what.

[Edited on May 7, 2013 at 12:56 PM. Reason : -]

5/7/2013 12:54:47 PM

that's hilarious too

aaronburro is hilarious

5/7/2013 1:15:34 PM

Quote :

"Why is that hilarious?"

Isn't it obvious?

Quote :

"Plenty of liberals on this site worship Obama regardless of his Bush-like tendencies. "

Which posters worship Obama? I gotta say, I don't recall seeing a lot of worshiping on this Board.

5/7/2013 1:27:54 PM

Quote :

"I thought the same thing as well. It's quite amusing to see a "conservative" argue for more taxes."

Republicans are just as much for states rights as they are against taxes right? If that's the case, compensation for an eroding state sales tax by way of a Marketplace Fairness Act could cause all sorts of crazy cognitive dissonance. Fun stuff!

5/7/2013 1:35:09 PM

Quote :

"No, d357r0y3r,it isn't a good point. aaronburro continues to plumb the depths of obtuseness by failing to realize that people who buy from those warehouses in those state do pay the tax the same as if you bought something from Wal-Mart since they have a physical location in that state. I can't believe I am arguing a conservative point with you. But watching you people eat your own is fairly amusing. "

I wasn't serious about it being a good point. There isn't a tax in the world that I'm supportive of.

5/7/2013 1:39:00 PM

You are an anarchist then?

5/7/2013 1:41:55 PM

taxes are a necessary evil. How else would the dead weight of america live if we didn't tax the productive?

5/7/2013 1:46:44 PM

Quote :

"You are an anarchist then?"

I don't identify as one. Taxes are, by definition, coercive, so I oppose them on that grounds. I don't think there is any "greater good" that could be achieved with taxes that could not also be achieved without them.

Amazon does pay taxes. This law would just be another source of revenue for the federal government. I think the federal government is already getting plenty of revenue, they just piss it all away.

[Edited on May 7, 2013 at 2:00 PM. Reason : ]

5/7/2013 2:00:14 PM

Quote :

"I don't identify as one. Taxes are, by definition, coercive, so I oppose them on that grounds. I don't think there is any "greater good" that could be achieved with taxes that could not also be achieved without them. Amazon does, of course, pay taxes. This law would just be another source of revenue for the federal government. I think the federal government is already getting plenty of revenue, they just piss it all away."

WHAT?

First of all, "taxes" are not coercive by definition. That's just stupid and silly.

Second of all, "This law" does not raise a single penny for the federal government. Your whole post is nonsense.

5/7/2013 2:04:44 PM

Establish a VAT instead of all this nonsense...

/end thread?

5/7/2013 2:09:36 PM

Quote :

"First of all, "taxes" are not coercive by definition. That's just stupid and silly. "

Why do you pay taxes? What happens if you don't pay taxes?

Quote :

"Second of all, "This law" does not raise a single penny for the federal government. Your whole post is nonsense."

Not directly, but with the number of states and municipalities that are broke and trying to shift obligations from their own budgets to the federal government, creating additional revenue on a national scale for all state/local governments represents an effective boost to federal government money not spoken for. The problem is that consumers are still going to end up with less money at the end of the day.

Quote :

"Establish a VAT instead of all this nonsense..."

If we ever get a VAT, it'll be on top of everything we already have.

[Edited on May 7, 2013 at 2:14 PM. Reason : ]

5/7/2013 2:13:38 PM

^ You're said taxes are "coercive by definition." The fact is, they aren't coercive by definition. Neither the definition of "tax" or the definition of "coercion" support your statement.

As for the rest where you tried to explain your way out of one false statement with another one loaded with nonsense... I'm not going to waste my time responding to that.

5/7/2013 2:21:11 PM

Quote :

"I don't think there is any "greater good" that could be achieved with taxes that could not also be achieved without them."

Sorry, it's just really hard to take this position seriously, at all. I understand that government is buried in bureaucracy that wastes huge sums of taxpayers' money, but how can you think that a society, especially one like the u.s., could exist without taxes?

[Edited on May 7, 2013 at 2:23 PM. Reason : ]

5/7/2013 2:22:36 PM

^ I think you'd have to be some sort of ideological zealot

5/7/2013 2:27:46 PM

Quote :

"You're said taxes are "coercive by definition." The fact is, they aren't coercive by definition. Neither the definition of "tax" or the definition of "coercion" support your statement. "

Is there such a thing as a voluntary tax?

Quote :

"how can you think that a society, especially one like the u.s., could exist without taxes?"

I don't, but I also don't think a society like the one here in the United States (which lives at the expense of the rest of the world) should exist.

[Edited on May 7, 2013 at 2:35 PM. Reason : ]

5/7/2013 2:34:13 PM

well, that's vague.

5/7/2013 2:35:33 PM

^^Yes. Example: if I'm a Delaware resident who makes a purchase in Maryland.

You want to keep asking me stupid questions to support your false statement?

[Edited on May 7, 2013 at 2:37 PM. Reason : ]

5/7/2013 2:37:10 PM

that doesn't make the tax voluntary... nor does it address income tax.

5/7/2013 2:38:46 PM

The United States was built on slavery and now maintains its economic might through military domination. I don't think I need to elaborate too much. The U.S. would be a much different place without the taxes it has now, but the world would be much better off.

5/7/2013 2:38:54 PM

There should be no income tax, if you are gonna tax every purchase how can you justify taxing income?

5/7/2013 2:40:34 PM

Quote :

"The U.S. would be a much different place without the taxes it has now,"

No doubt it would. What do you think the differences would be? How would society operate?

5/7/2013 2:42:10 PM

Quote :

"that doesn't make the tax voluntary... nor does it address income tax."

he didn't say "income tax by definition is coercive"

Either way, what involuntary behavior does "tax" coerce other than payment of the tax?

[Edited on May 7, 2013 at 2:48 PM. Reason : Keep in mind i'm not saying there is no such thing as a coercive tax]

5/7/2013 2:42:50 PM

USA would be a better place without taxes, maybe there would be some space at the top for the poor, as of now no one that works a normal job will ever be anything better than middle class. Not with uncle sam robbing you so they can give syria guns etc etc etc.

5/7/2013 2:45:27 PM

Quote :

"Why do you pay taxes? What happens if you don't pay taxes? "

Because i recognize the benefits of a society that chooses to work together (ie democracy) and in the presence of curtailed GSEs, taxes are the next best option.

We could do like Alaska and Texas, and work more closely with private industry to generate revenue and forgo taxes.

5/7/2013 2:48:55 PM

Quote :

"USA would be a better place without taxes, maybe there would be some space at the top for the poor, as of now no one that works a normal job will ever be anything better than middle class."

This is a serious, serious leap of faith you know. For all we know, if we lived in anarchy like you seem to be proposing, we could have devolved into Somalia by now. If there were no taxes, how would the road system look? Water? Sewer? Electricity? Who would police the neighborhoods? Who'd put out the fires? I'm pretty skeptical about politicians and government in general, but i think they're a necessary evil.

Makes me think of a Dead Kennedy's lyric

"Anarchy sounds good to me, then someone asks "who will fix the sewers?" Will the rednecks just play king of the neighborhood?"

5/7/2013 2:54:55 PM