Why are people so eager to pay tax?

[Jobe7]

Government is a construct of a society seeking to organise itself to be more efficient.

basically I agree with what you wrote except for that line.

Efficiency has nothing to do with founding gov'ts.  Gov'ts are the least efficient allocators of resources known to man.

Many/most gov'ts were founded by gangs of thieves who conquered and subjected others in order to exploit them.  Some/few were founded by people to protect the people from gov'ts of the first order, but none remain of that persuasion to my knowledge.  Some have tried to dress themselves as if the people/society were a priority, but the laws, constitutions, and actions when observed in action do not support that stance.

you really have a fucked up sense of history.

@ Kokjo

How do you think governments are formed? Honestly, serious question.

the state of denmark became a democracy, to ensure the civil rights of the citizens, and to limit the kings power.

@ Kokjo

You totally avoided the question.

I'll ask you again.

How do you think governments are formed? Honestly, serious question.

[1713272728]

1713272728

[1713272728]

1713272728

[1713272728]

1713272728

[1713272728]

1713272728

[Jobe7]

Aye true, but the bastichs are the ones that got the ball rolling .. grrrr

The Rothschilds transformed the interest system already in place. They just moved it to their family's advantage by buying governments all over Europe and the US.

An excellent work on the subversion of the American government by Money and Oil (Rothschilds and Rockefellers) is "Wealth Against Commonwealth" by Henry Demarest Lloyd, late 19th century.

Apparently interest did not exist before Rothschilds, as it was against the Christian religion, the Vatican stamped on it anytime someone mentioned interest.

Not sure how this reflects in the UK/Bank of England though, seeing as they threw out the Vatican power a few century's before that.

edit: tbh, I wouldn't be surprised if the Bank of England introduced a form of interest pre-Rothschilds

[nwbitcoin]

I knew someone would eventually post something close to the truth!

Dang.  Which parts did I goof up on? 

There is no solution!

Governments exist because without them there is a void. 

The biggest gang wins!  The customer choice aspect doesn't work when force is used and the longer you have peace, the more difficult it is to remove the class in power, because they spend their time ensuring that their infrastructure can't be undone.

Eventually, the system breaks, and its only through war or some other kind of social upheaval that the balance can be brought back in line.

Sometimes ignorance is bliss!

[kokjo]

How do you think governments are formed? Honestly, serious question.

i don't understand your question... a new government is formed every 4 years, is this what you area asking about?

we vote at the election every 4 years? and the people who got our votes, then they elect who to be ministers.

its called indirect democracy.


or do you ask how the state of denmark was formed?

[Luno]

Aye true, but the bastichs are the ones that got the ball rolling .. grrrr

The Rothschilds transformed the interest system already in place. They just moved it to their family's advantage by buying governments all over Europe and the US.

An excellent work on the subversion of the American government by Money and Oil (Rothschilds and Rockefellers) is "Wealth Against Commonwealth" by Henry Demarest Lloyd, late 19th century.

Apparently interest did not exist before Rothschilds, as it was against the Christian religion, the Vatican stamped on it anytime someone mentioned interest.

Not sure how this reflects in the UK/Bank of England though, seeing as they threw out the Vatican power a few century's before that.

edit: tbh, I wouldn't be surprised if the Bank of England introduced a form of interest pre-Rothschilds

Interest is older than the Rothschilds. It was the Medicis in Florence that made lending a profitable business in the 14th century. Interest was outlawed amongst Jews, the traditional bankers at the time. So actually we should blame the Italians for all wrongs in the world!

[Jobe7]

How do you think governments are formed? Honestly, serious question.

i don't understand your question... a new government is formed every 4 years, is this what you area asking about?

we vote at the election every 4 years? and the people who got our votes, then they elect who to be ministers.

its called indirect democracy.


or do you ask how the state of denmark was formed?

Okey dokey, I'll try to be more clear. I probably should have stated the question as;

How does a ruling party become a ruling party?
Or
How does a new state of governance appear/come into existence?

Examples:

When cavemen got out of their caves and into a community, and a leader 'appeared', how do you think that leader became a leader and stayed a leader?

In ancient Greece times (city states) how do you think that they became unified? Did they all suddenly band together and decide to become 1 unified country?

In Roman times, how did Italy become 1? I'm assuming you know that Italy, like every other country, was split into numerous 'city states'. How did the Roman's unite Italy?

How did Gual (France) and the UK become unified?

How did a King become a King in the first place? Did he just magically appear all by himself and said "HAI, I'm now King of all these lands, gimme taxes!"

How were monarchies overthrown?

Did the Denmark Monarchy just roll over on its back and basically said "ahh, ye, we cba to rule anymore, here, have a government and most of our power and wealth."? You had absolutely NO revolution?

(here's some help, but I'm assuming you're Danish from your earlier comments, so clearly you should know this stuff better than I one would think? - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutions_of_1848)

How did the Vatican get to power? Did they just waltz in and say "HAI, we're the Vatican, everyone give us money and btw, God talks to us primarily, WE are the voice of god." And everyone just went, "ok" ?

How do you think the current government of Iraq was formed? Do you think it would have existed if the USA never invaded them?

I could go on and on, but hopefully you get the general idea .. So, ye.

How do YOU think Governments (ruling party) are formed?

Not - how do you think Governments are ELECTED (which is what you're answering) - but FORMED.

But ye, substitute 'government' for 'ruling party'.

[Jobe7]

Interest is older than the Rothschilds. It was the Medicis in Florence that made lending a profitable business in the 14th century. Interest was outlawed amongst Jews, the traditional bankers at the time. So actually we should blame the Italians for all wrongs in the world!

You're quite right, and I stand corrected. Interest has existed in various forms throughout history. I meant to say that the Rothschilds brought interest into 'Banking'. Though again, as mentioned above, I counter what I say in that interest in banking very likely existed in the UK beforehand, Rothschilds just brought it to the rest of Europe, then took over the Bank of England.

[nwbitcoin]

Aye true, but the bastichs are the ones that got the ball rolling .. grrrr

The Rothschilds transformed the interest system already in place. They just moved it to their family's advantage by buying governments all over Europe and the US.

An excellent work on the subversion of the American government by Money and Oil (Rothschilds and Rockefellers) is "Wealth Against Commonwealth" by Henry Demarest Lloyd, late 19th century.

Apparently interest did not exist before Rothschilds, as it was against the Christian religion, the Vatican stamped on it anytime someone mentioned interest.

Not sure how this reflects in the UK/Bank of England though, seeing as they threw out the Vatican power a few century's before that.

edit: tbh, I wouldn't be surprised if the Bank of England introduced a form of interest pre-Rothschilds

Interest was called Usuary and was against the rules of both Christian and Muslim teachings but there were laws preventing the lending of money for interest going back to Greece and old China!

The modern day acceptance of interest is blamed on Henry Viii who legalized it in 1545.

That was a good 30 years before the birth of the first Rothschild!

[axus]

If you are using Bitcoin for currency speculation to earn dollars/euros, you should pay taxes in dollars/euros on the profit.  If you are using Bitcoin to pay for goods and services, or save for retirement, you should not pay taxes.  The way I see it, tax the speculators, and don't tax the people bringing a good alternative to big credit card companies and banks.

[Luno]

about Denmark: civil rights was introduced gradually from 1788 to 1800 for the farmer population, the non land owners. From the age of 4 until the age of 40 you was obliged to live and work in the shire they were born in as the property of the local count!

The end of monarchy as the only political power happend in 1841 as the king, Frederik the 7'th, didn't care much about politics and the elitist citizen group demanded that he stepped down. A rally was organized and when they reached the royal castle (the current parliament), Frederik the 7'th responded by the famous words: "I'm happy to announce that your current demands have already been met and the royal ministry have already been dissolved".

I guess he was scared by what was happening around Europe. Denmark had the whimpist "revolution" by far. following this, power was divided between the 152 members of the first constitutional assembly. The division in social classes was apparent in selecting the domains of governmental institutions.

The current ruling party today "Socialdemokraterne" originated in 1871 as a socialist union movement fighting police in the streets. However today, Denmark living on the mercy of strict monetary policies, together with the rest of Europe and the fact that budgets are always agreed upon with the opposition, means that the notion of Denmark as a "socialist country" is nothing but a sour insult to the lefties around here!

Because of that, Socialdemokraterne today have a historical low public support, only around 15% as of yesterday. The same as in 1898.

[kokjo]

about Denmark: civil rights was introduced gradually from 1788 to 1800 for the farmer population, the non land owners. From the age of 4 until the age of 40 you was obliged to live and work in the shire they were born in as the property of the local count!

The end of monarchy as the only political power happend in 1841 as the king, Frederik the 7'th, didn't care much about politics and the elitist citizen group demanded that he stepped down. A rally was organized and when they reached the royal castle (the current parliament), Frederik the 7'th responded by the famous words: "I'm happy to announce that your current demands have already been met and the royal ministry have already been dissolved".

I guess he was scared by what was happening around Europe. Denmark had the whimpist "revolution" by far. following this, power was divided between the 152 members of the first constitutional assembly. The division in social classes was apparent in selecting the domains of governmental institutions.

The current ruling party today "Socialdemokraterne" originated in 1871 as a socialist union movement fighting police in the streets. However today, Denmark living on the mercy of strict monetary policies, together with the rest of Europe and the fact that budgets are always agreed upon with the opposition, means that the notion of Denmark as a "socialist country" is nothing but a sour insult to the lefties around here!

Because of that, Socialdemokraterne today have a historical low public support, only around 15% as of yesterday. The same as in 1898.

yeah, the socialdemokraterne are not very popular right now, as they does not do as promised and they are having what is considered by some to be right-wing policy.

[RodeoX]

All you heroes who want to avoid taxes are not making any friends with those of us who must make up for your greed. Do you think all the services you use are free?

[Severian]

All you heroes who want to avoid taxes are not making any friends with those of us who must make up for your greed. Do you think all the services you use are free?

You should direct your complaints to these 16 entities instead of grabbing at your fellow crabs trying to crawl out of the boiling water:

http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/16-giant-corporations-have-basically-stopped-paying-taxes

[RodeoX]

All you heroes who want to avoid taxes are not making any friends with those of us who must make up for your greed. Do you think all the services you use are free?

You should direct your complaints to these 16 entities instead of grabbing at your fellow crabs trying to crawl out of the boiling water:

http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/16-giant-corporations-have-basically-stopped-paying-taxes

That puts a bee in my bonnet also.  Going after businesses who work around the tax code should be a high priority.  And don't get me wrong, I do not like how my tax dollars are used these days. We should be more vocal in expressing our displeasure. But when your solution is to not pay, you only hurt other taxpayers and not the government.
They will simply raise everyones taxes.

[nwbitcoin]

All you heroes who want to avoid taxes are not making any friends with those of us who must make up for your greed. Do you think all the services you use are free?

You should direct your complaints to these 16 entities instead of grabbing at your fellow crabs trying to crawl out of the boiling water:

http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/16-giant-corporations-have-basically-stopped-paying-taxes

That puts a bee in my bonnet also.  Going after businesses who work around the tax code should be a high priority.  And don't get me wrong, I do not like how my tax dollars are used these days. We should be more vocal in expressing our displeasure. But when your solution is to not pay, you only hurt other taxpayers and not the government.
They will simply raise everyones taxes.

I really don't understand this logic.

The tax laws are created by government.
Companies use specialists to ensure they only pay the correct amount of tax for their circumstances.
Loud socialists then protest that these companies are not paying as much as these protesters would like.
Protesters then complain that tax will be raised for everyone else because these companies are acting lawfully!

Rant starts:
Tax is simply a protection racket that has been normalised through custom and education. I pay tax for services I don't use - I pay extra tax on goods I use a lot but don't get any benefits for this extra tax.
Tax to me just seems like a way to fund people who don't or can't fund themselves.  I don't seem to be getting good value for money out of it!

[Severian]

They will simply raise everyones taxes.

It sounds like you'll pay them so why shouldn't they?

[RodeoX]

All you heroes who want to avoid taxes are not making any friends with those of us who must make up for your greed. Do you think all the services you use are free?

You should direct your complaints to these 16 entities instead of grabbing at your fellow crabs trying to crawl out of the boiling water:

http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/16-giant-corporations-have-basically-stopped-paying-taxes

That puts a bee in my bonnet also.  Going after businesses who work around the tax code should be a high priority.  And don't get me wrong, I do not like how my tax dollars are used these days. We should be more vocal in expressing our displeasure. But when your solution is to not pay, you only hurt other taxpayers and not the government.
They will simply raise everyones taxes.

I really don't understand this logic.

The tax laws are created by government.
Companies use specialists to ensure they only pay the correct amount of tax for their circumstances.
Loud socialists then protest that these companies are not paying as much as these protesters would like.
Protesters then complain that tax will be raised for everyone else because these companies are acting lawfully!

Rant starts:
Tax is simply a protection racket that has been normalised through custom and education. I pay tax for services I don't use - I pay extra tax on goods I use a lot but don't get any benefits for this extra tax.
Tax to me just seems like a way to fund people who don't or can't fund themselves.  I don't seem to be getting good value for money out of it!

The problem is that the experts hired by companies are not trying always trying to determine the correct tax rate, they are trying to cheat. It may or may not be illegal, but it should be stopped as it is costing YOU money.
Here is an example. A very wealthy *friend of mine owns tons of property. He develops them into shopping centers and the like. Last year he had a vacant lot that he was going to build on this year. He loves to find ways to pass his tax burden onto you, so here is what he did.
In the early fall he spread about $50 worth of pumpkin seeds around the lot. Although he did not care for them, many grew into pumpkin plants. Why? This was so he could call himself a pumpkin farmer and receive receive a farming subsidy. Of course he just let the pumpkins rot in the field and took your tax money as a reward.

[(A)social]

Funny and distressing thread at the same time.
Definitely statism supporters are at the same mental level than the "usual" religious fanatics, maybe worse. For sure more dangerous.


P.S. a good read for those with a bit o brain left  http://www.polyarchy.org/manifesto/english/introduction.html

[Luno]

Clever guy, but an asshole too. Government subsidiaries are often exploited by farmers but entrepreneurs? he really deserves a prize!

If you own a store in Denmark a certain percent of your stock, is considered consumed by you during the year. So if you are a grocer you are taxed something like $800 per year regardless of you buying all your vegetables in the nearby mart.

[RodeoX]

Funny and distressing thread at the same time.
Definitely statism supporters are at the same mental level than the "usual" religious fanatics, maybe worse. For sure more dangerous.


P.S. a good read for those with a bit o brain left  http://www.polyarchy.org/manifesto/english/introduction.html

I assume you mean me? Can I ask you where you got your education to write that? How did you get to work today? via private roads I assume. Without taxation there would be no state, without the state your life would be a struggle to survive.

Have you traveled much? I have. Much of it to places you would not go on vacation. I assure you that where there is no government, there is nothing but horror. Not that all governments are just, far from it. But until you have lived in an ungoverned place you really don't know what you have.