ForumGarden

If you dislike taxes, does that also reflect in how you feel about social programs?

If you agree with taxes, do you feel they are invested wisely?

This is what my 15 yr old brother thinks about taxes- he sent me this yesterday!

When NASA first started sending up astronauts, they quickly discovered that ball-point pens would not work in zero gravity.

To combat this problem, NASA scientists spent a decade and $12 billion developing a pen that writes in zero gravity, upside down, underwater, on almost any surface including glass and at temperatures ranging from below freezing to over 300° C.

The Russians used a pencil.

Enjoy paying your taxes.

Sweet Tooth;580263 wrote: This is what my 15 yr old brother thinks about taxes- he sent me this yesterday!



When NASA first started sending up astronauts, they quickly discovered that ball-point pens would not work in zero gravity.

To combat this problem, NASA scientists spent a decade and $12 billion developing a pen that writes in zero gravity, upside down, underwater, on almost any surface including glass and at temperatures ranging from below freezing to over 300° C.



The Russians used a pencil.



Enjoy paying your taxes.
The first thing I thought of was Sharpies.

My theory is that I should pay taxes and tick off the boxes for the services I want to use or contribute to. Those are then the only services I'm allowed to use. I would have a tax card that must be used with ID and they swipe it to see if I'm allowed to use the library, the hospital etc.

Sweet Tooth;580263 wrote: When NASA first started sending up astronauts, they quickly discovered that ball-point pens would not work in zero gravity.

To combat this problem, NASA scientists spent a decade and $12 billion developing a pen that writes in zero gravity, upside down, underwater, on almost any surface including glass and at temperatures ranging from below freezing to over 300° C.

The Russians used a pencil.As did the Americans until they adopted the Space Pen, which had been independently developed. NASA had nothing to do with its development. The Space Pen was adopted by both NASA and the Russians and they've both used it ever since. http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp discusses the topic.

I note that the amount claimed to have been spent goes up each time I see this twaddle. NASA's entire budget in 1965 was less than a half of what's claimed above. What does pointless inaccuracy like this have to do with "Enjoy paying your taxes" or the OP? Discussing whether the US should have put so much as a cent into NASA is a legitimate question; inventing a black-hole money sink to waste taxpayer dollars on is a legitimate issue; pretending that the Space Pen was developed with tax dollars is brainless and unamusing.

man spot, you never let me be funny! Why are you so smart? I'm glad you showed me that link, I gave it to my brother!

If a taxpayer can select what programs his tax goes toward, what happens to an issue like education for example. Some people have no children and might opt out of paying toward the current universal state funding provision. Either everyone still opted-in has to increase their contribution or some children have to go without schooling or every state-educated child's quality of teaching is degraded. I expect that opt-out mechanism has the same inherent problem whatever issue is considered.

The level of taxes would remain the same and you just limit what they can use it for.

I do agree in taxes, but, they should make sure every school gets same amount. It seems here if you live in the rich sections, they get laptops ect. if you are not in that section, they just get a little money. It should be if one gets it, they all get it.

koan;580338 wrote: The level of taxes would remain the same and you just limit what they can use it for.
Everything I wrote fits that model!

The amount of wasted taxes saved would likely leave much more for the services people care about.

koan;580238 wrote: If you dislike taxes, does that also reflect in how you feel about social programs?

If you agree with taxes, do you feel they are invested wisely?


Irrespective of one's political ideology, taxes are a necesssary means of providing certain services and the infrastucture of a civilized society.

I am opposed to any taxes that dissuade one from saving, investing or pursuing entrepenurial activity. I am opposed to any taxes that encourage an indolent life style. I am opposed to taxes that are used to merely empower government. I am opposed to taxes that encourage class hatred (rich vs. poor). I support the concept of a flat tax for all with the elimination of deductions and the plethora of tax forms that are presently used. I support no tax at all for up to a certain income level for the poorest of citizens.

No, I do not feel that certain taxes are invested wisely, but are invested in a way to empower government.

I have the same position on it as you, Lon.

I'm not sure how to fix it though.

Many social programmes are a waste of time. Society should be about helping the best, not the worst. Just think how efficient we could operate as a nation if we invested time and money into elevating our finest instead of wasting time on the no hopers. I believe that is what is holding us back. I want my taxes put to proper use.

spot;580313 wrote: If a taxpayer can select what programs his tax goes toward, what happens to an issue like education for example. Some people have no children and might opt out of paying toward the current universal state funding provision. Either everyone still opted-in has to increase their contribution or some children have to go without schooling or every state-educated child's quality of teaching is degraded. I expect that opt-out mechanism has the same inherent problem whatever issue is considered.


Every time a politician runs for office he says that any taxes raised would go to 'the children's education'. PPFFTTTT! By now they should all be sitting on golden desks with gold computers and teachers with PHD's. As more and more people are taking their children out of the public education system and sending them to private schools that they are paying for, why aren't my taxes going down?

I'm sick of the 'for the children' campaigns.

I want my tax money back as the education taxation is not working. They are not any smarter, less and less are going to college, they are not being taught life skills and they are having to open more 'rehab schools' for the bullys and the unteachables.

I don't have children in school and I don't see where I should have to pay for it any more!!! :-5

If you want children, learn to pay more than your fair share. It's a choice not a requirement.

Just my honest opinion.

911;662883 wrote: Every time a politician runs for office he says that any taxes raised would go to 'the children's education'. PPFFTTTT! By now they should all be sitting on golden desks with gold computers and teachers with PHD's. As more and more people are taking their children out of the public education system and sending them to private schools that they are paying for, why aren't my taxes going down?

I'm sick of the 'for the children' campaigns.

I want my tax money back as the education taxation is not working. They are not any smarter, less and less are going to college, they are not being taught life skills and they are having to open more 'rehab schools' for the bullys and the unteachables.

I don't have children in school and I don't see where I should have to pay for it any more!!! :-5

If you want children, learn to pay more than your fair share. It's a choice not a requirement.

Just my honest opinion.


The education of children is not a matter for parents, it's an investment by the country in its future - without a literate and educated workforce a country will not be competitive in the world market and their economy will suffer.

It's a long term necessity for the whole population from which the whole population benefits so everybody should contribute.

You're right to complain about the inefficiency of the process though - for that the government is culpable.

Bryn Mawr;662899 wrote: The education of children is not a matter for parents, it's an investment by the country in its future - without a literate and educated workforce a country will not be competitive in the world market and their economy will suffer.

It's a long term necessity for the whole population from which the whole population benefits so everybody should contribute.

You're right to complain about the inefficiency of the process though - for that the government is culpable.


Oh, I disagree. Why should the parents depend on someone else for their own childs welfare? I think they should help their children in every way possible. If they are having trouble in school and they are unable to help them with their homework (and let's be frank, they learn so much faster than we did and few parents can keep up or remember how to diagram a sentence!) then they are responsible for seeing that they get the help they need.

It doesn't take a village to raise a child, it only takes the parents to raise them responsibly.

911;662905 wrote: Oh, I disagree. Why should the parents depend on someone else for their own childs welfare? I think they should help their children in every way possible. If they are having trouble in school and they are unable to help them with their homework (and let's be frank, they learn so much faster than we did and few parents can keep up or remember how to diagram a sentence!) then they are responsible for seeing that they get the help they need.

It doesn't take a village to raise a child, it only takes the parents to raise them responsibly.


I agree totally with the above - parents should help their children in every way possible and are responsible for their upbringing.

That does not change the long term imperative for the country to make sure that its children are educated. We were discussing the funding of schools, not the day to day mechanics.

If the cost of education was put onto the shoulders of individual parents then the overall level of education would fall and the long term prospects of the country would be harmed.

It would also raise social injustice as the poor would be unable to compete in the market. This would tend to destabalise the society.

This is why most governments set up and run the school system and fund it out of national taxes.

911;662883 wrote: If you want children, learn to pay more than your fair share. It's a choice not a requirement.Why stop short of the obvious solution? Execute the bottom ten percent of wage-earners in the country every five years and strangle their destitute bloody children at the same time. Maybe that'll provide enough incentive to learn and earn.

Pinky;662940 wrote: I agree with this wholeheartedly. Every person should have the opportunity to make something of him/herself. I know children who's parents think that education is a waste of time because they didn't get much of it themselves and if left to them, wouldn't bother much with their children's education. However, some of those kids really excel and become motivated.

Loads has been invested in recent years to expand education a bit further in all directions, from vocational programmes which involve things like attaining a GNVQ in chosen subjects through a tailored college programme to specialist gifted and talented programmes to fast-track kids who excel at a certain subject. In my view, this is money well spent because it's taking every child's future into account which will ultimately impact on society as whole on a larger scale in later years.


What do you make of "five minute lessons"?

Pinky;662947 wrote: Five minute lessons?

I haven't heard of them tbh! By the time ours got themselves sat down and got a pen out it'd be over!!:wah:


The latest "initiative" announced by the government to combat pupils' short attention span - sounds like a nightmare.

Lon;580471 wrote: Irrespective of one's political ideology, taxes are a necesssary means of providing certain services and the infrastucture of a civilized society.

I am opposed to any taxes that dissuade one from saving, investing or pursuing entrepenurial activity. I am opposed to any taxes that encourage an indolent life style. I am opposed to taxes that are used to merely empower government. I am opposed to taxes that encourage class hatred (rich vs. poor). I support the concept of a flat tax for all with the elimination of deductions and the plethora of tax forms that are presently used. I support no tax at all for up to a certain income level for the poorest of citizens.

No, I do not feel that certain taxes are invested wisely, but are invested in a way to empower government.
Nuthin' I can add to that. :yh_clap





As for education, it is the most important investment we can make in our society. I don't have a clue how to keep the politicians from wasting the money, though.

The only taxes that I can see being applied fairly and equally are product taxes. The more a person consumes the more tax they pay. No tax on essential items like food and children's clothing. Essentially, anyone who can only afford the necessities pays no tax, the more luxurious a person wants to live the more tax they pay.

No one can hide their income that way.

koan;663074 wrote: The only taxes that I can see being applied fairly and equally are product taxes. The more a person consumes the more tax they pay. No tax on essential items like food and children's clothing. Essentially, anyone who can only afford the necessities pays no tax, the more luxurious a person wants to live the more tax they pay.

No one can hide their income that way.


Like a tax on expensive jewelery, vehicles, boats, luxury homes, etc.?

all sales tax as it exists today.

no income tax

I don’t mind paying taxes when you can see what you are getting for your money. Look at the Nordic countries, some of the highest personal tax rates that are out there, but wow, what beautiful countries and fabulous services provided to them by their governments. It is evident what they are getting back for their money paid.

In Ireland, you pay taxes and see nothing. Medical Care is in crisis, and yet we still pay medical insurance on top of being taxed. Road taxes are among the highest in Europe, yet every new road has toll booths that are not cheep. Billions is being spent on public transport, and they have delivered practically nothing in 10 years. Here you do not see what your taxes are going towards other than to pay all our government minister to travel all over the world with their families to attend St. Patrick Day parades.

mikeinie;663114 wrote: I don’t mind paying taxes when you can see what you are getting for your money. Look at the Nordic countries, some of the highest personal tax rates that are out there, but wow, what beautiful countries and fabulous services provided to them by their governments. It is evident what they are getting back for their money paid.

In Ireland, you pay taxes and see nothing. Medical Care is in crisis, and yet we still pay medical insurance on top of being taxed. Road taxes are among the highest in Europe, yet every new road has toll booths that are not cheep. Billions is being spent on public transport, and they have delivered practically nothing in 10 years. Here you do not see what your taxes are going towards other than to pay all our government minister to travel all over the world with their families to attend St. Patrick Day parades.


I'm not sure that's fair - driving round for a couple of weeks we saw a lot of road improvements taking place but only saw one toll road (M1 Toll just north of Dublin) and kept well clear of that.

I realise that two weeks does not make me an expert on Irish roads but fifteen hundred miles is a reasonable sample of the network and we both commented on the number of road improvement project we drove through / round / over.

Bryn Mawr;663118 wrote: we both commented on the number of road improvement project we drove through / round / over.Some dog is still pushing a new motorway through the valley below Tara despite being asked not to. I do hope he sees sense and stops.

koan;663077 wrote: all sales tax as it exists today.

no income tax
That would do so much to help individuals and families. It would encourage saving and budgeting. Personal net worth would rise. More people would likely feel less need to be dependent on government subsistance.



Of course, it scares the hell out of big business. Most modern economies are built on people overextending themselves - spending more than they have, borrowing to spend more, fitting interest payments into the budget alongside the water bill and groceries, paying for insurance to pay for things they don't have enough money left over to save for (because insurance and interest rates are so high).



Encouraging saving means less spending, which means less corporate income, which lowers profits.... well, we can't have that can we?



I s'pose it's human nature to be short-sighted.

i love them

911;662905 wrote: Oh, I disagree. Why should the parents depend on someone else for their own childs welfare? I think they should help their children in every way possible. If they are having trouble in school and they are unable to help them with their homework (and let's be frank, they learn so much faster than we did and few parents can keep up or remember how to diagram a sentence!) then they are responsible for seeing that they get the help they need.

It doesn't take a village to raise a child, it only takes the parents to raise them responsibly.


I disagree, children should be allowed equal opportunities for education despite the parents.

el guapo;663341 wrote: i love them


That's great. Would you mind paying my 2007 tax bill? That would be real love.

minks;663356 wrote: I disagree, children should be allowed equal opportunities for education despite the parents.


Both dispite the parents disinterest and dispite their economic circumstances as well.

Couldn't agree more.

Lon;663382 wrote: That's great. Would you mind paying my 2007 tax bill? That would be real love.


i was thinking that i love them,,,,,,,, when others pay not me

Bryn Mawr;663118 wrote: I'm not sure that's fair - driving round for a couple of weeks we saw a lot of road improvements taking place but only saw one toll road (M1 Toll just north of Dublin) and kept well clear of that.

I realise that two weeks does not make me an expert on Irish roads but fifteen hundred miles is a reasonable sample of the network and we both commented on the number of road improvement project we drove through / round / over.


You are correct, the M1 north of Dublin, built with EU funding and tolled anyway, the M50, build with EU funding and tolled, the M4 towards Mullingar (€2.50 not sure about EU funding but more than likely), the Port Tunnel (built with EU funding and tolled something like €6.00).

I am not development, but the roads are being built with EU funding, being tolled, and our road taxes are still high.

Bryn Mawr;662899 wrote: The education of children is not a matter for parents, it's an investment by the country in its future - without a literate and educated workforce a country will not be competitive in the world market and their economy will suffer.



It's a long term necessity for the whole population from which the whole population benefits so everybody should contribute.



You're right to complain about the inefficiency of the process though - for that the government is culpable.


So if what you say is true?



"without a literate and educated workforce a country will not be competitive in the world market and their economy will suffer."



If the goverment is failing to produce literate students I think we should hold them ACCOUNTABLE, NOT culpable..



Definitions of ACCOUNTABLE on the Web:




liable to account for one's actions; "governments must be accountable to someone beside themselves"; "fully accountable for what they did"; "the court held the parents answerable for their minor child's acts of vandalism"; "he was answerable to no one""culpable"..?



Definitions of culpable on the Web:




blameworthy: deserving blame or censure as being wrong or evil or injurious; "blameworthy if not criminal behavior"; "censurable misconduct"; "culpable negligence"

BTS;664572 wrote: So if what you say is true?



"without a literate and educated workforce a country will not be competitive in the world market and their economy will suffer."



If the goverment is failing to produce literate students I think we should hold them ACCOUNTABLE, NOT culpable..



Definitions of ACCOUNTABLE on the Web:


liable to account for one's actions; "governments must be accountable to someone beside themselves"; "fully accountable for what they did"; "the court held the parents answerable for their minor child's acts of vandalism"; "he was answerable to no one""culpable"..?



Definitions of culpable on the Web:


blameworthy: deserving blame or censure as being wrong or evil or injurious; "blameworthy if not criminal behavior"; "censurable misconduct"; "culpable negligence"


Whilst you hold them to account I'll continue to blame them for their short sighted policies