SavageEagle
Grandmaster
- Apr 27, 2008
- 19,568
- 38
I understand what you're saying, but as soon as there is one exception the entire system breaks down. Everything we eat is processed, if for no otehr reason it needed to be removed from its home, transported to its place of commerce, placed upon a shelf, selected, taken home, and eaten by the consumer. There are several touch points that without government intervention food would not hit our plate. That's why I have no problems with paying taxes for everything I consume.
As far as property, you should pay a tax when you purchase property, just like any other item you take title to, or consume. Once you've paid your fine, your property is yours.
I would also mandate a budget process where the government can borrowq for capital expenses, but not operational expenses, unless in a time of war or state of emergency. It's too easy for government to kick the piggy bank out of the way on the way to the printing press.
This would force government at all levels to compete for people to live and do busines there. Safer streets, arts, parks, etc - whatever gravitates you to live in a certain area would be what they would do.
You got a point. At least kept the exempt food, exempt. And the highlighted part. Yea, that would be better.
& thus why my first answer is "Hum... NO!" becuase as you have pointed out and others have as well as soon as we compromise the system breaks down. So tax it all @ a flat rate and be done with it.
So what flat rate do you all think would be good?