Death and Taxes

We all know Ben Franklin's old saying, but 'death' and 'taxes' have a stronger connection, historically - the origin of taxation is of course the funding of armies, and later the maintenance of standing "professional armies. Beyond standard tribute, meant to sustain the lifestyles of the nobility, in medieval times people were forced to give their silver and gold to defend the land .. land that "the people" did not own of course; then when armies were mustered, the same people would be asked to send their husbands and sons off to be maimed or killed, to settle the disputes of their masters.

The people becoming disenchanted with tax collection led to many revolts as well. The immoral nature of taxation was very succinctly laid out for us in a post this evening ..

How to explain that taxation is theft using: The Magic Threshold by @inertia

Beginning as far back as 60 A.D., these revolts occurred when taxation came to be seen as obviously excessive by a large number of people, the clear majority - history views these revolts as entirely justified, and if one were to occur today, it future generations would see it thusly. The first step of course is to see the fundamental immorality of what is clearly a form of extortion.

The Short-lived Golden Period ..

Between the end of the Civil War, in the "United" States, and World War I, there were no "income taxes" .. instead, trade tariffs and costs of corporate charters, and the like, provided the revenue for the state. But .. along came Death again, and the demand for both blood and treasure from the masses to fuel Death's feast.

But What of Today, What of the Working Poor

So yes, we can all agree, it just ain't right! The origins of the thing are based on servitude to a group of people who are unworthy of such .. this remains as true today as it ever was. But are things different .. are there not more people, a more complex civilization to maintain? Are there are not more people in need, who we now, in our more evolved state, care about .. whereas before we did not due to class-based stratification?

One example of why things remain as f***ed up as ever ..

One thing that I find to be a major logic fail in the taxation systems in North America - we have people earning relatively little, who are correctly described as "The Working Poor" - when these folks file their taxes they have all of their how ever many 100s of dollars returned to them, as they are deemed not to have earned enough to properly support themselves, and thus are not required to contribute to the state coffers.

Well, that's not at all true is it .. gas taxes, sales taxes and sin taxes, like smokes n booze aside (which are used at a disproportionately higher-rate by those with lower-incomes). But then there are the invisible costs, born by the individuals who comprise this class of people who have jobs, but can not make ends meet .. for example, they are less healthy overall, compared to higher income earners (could be based on education to a degree, but mostly it's they just don't eat and sleep as well) .. also they are more likely to have negative interactions with law enforcement and other emergency services .. they are more likely to commit crime and be incarcerated so on and so forth.

But what about the guy or gal who is simply "short" often .. who just can't make ends meet - people who are forced to go to the modern equivalents of loan sharks .. but in this case, loan sharks with business licences .. forced to pay large percentages in interest .. the max % of which is strictly regulated by our good ol'government of course .. they need to protect us, right!?

But What if We Could Keep What the Tax Man Took?

I don't know about you, but in my past I have come up short between pay cheques more times than I can remember - short by $100 - $300 dollars .. hmm, I wonder how much was being sent to the capital, taken from each of those pay cheques? Shocking! The same bloody amount! And when I filed my taxes, and it was found that I fell below the threshold, I would have most of the taxes I had paid returned to me .. just in time to do long overdue maintenance on the vehicle I absolutely needed in order to earn that "living".

One would be able to manage their affairs better, and thus be happier .. happy is healthy .. less depression, less drug and alcohol abuse, and all the social woes that stem from these things.

We should pay for what we use, not what others abuse ..

We need an army though right, as was the case waaaay back in those crazy medieval days? Well, yes we do ..we need all that stuff, military and para-military alike .. for now. But who should really be paying .. perhaps the people whose land and assets are being "defended"? Tie the costs of defense, infrastructure and transit, to the land and asset owners, and to the businesses who require customers and workers to be able to move around easily, in order to work and shop.

The solution is pretty simple, pay for what 'you use', the less 'you' need from those publicly-funded places and organizations, the less you should pay. We should be allowed to keep our hard-earned money in our own pockets, so we can solve our own problems. This is not the case for corporations, who benefit directly from the existence, stability and integrity of "OUR CIVILIZATION" .. an argument can be made that they should carry the greatest burden .. as was once the case.

courtesy Taxworld:
A History of Taxation