Taxation is Theft: Your Take?

[swamp]

May 2, 2017 14:01:48 GMT -5 imawino said:

My take? I'm alarmed that anyone believes that the legal determination of what constitutes taxable income is made by what an idiot writes on a cocktail napkin.

But I'm sure this tax-hating diner was smiling to himself with pride as he swaggered out to his car, which undoubtedly had a "I Support our Troops" bumper sticker right next to the "Don't Tread on Me" one, because he doesn't understand irony.   

And he enjoyed a meal of non contaminated foods.    

[NastyWoman]

May 2, 2017 14:21:27 GMT -5 swamp said:

May 2, 2017 14:01:48 GMT -5 imawino said:

My take? I'm alarmed that anyone believes that the legal determination of what constitutes taxable income is made by what an idiot writes on a cocktail napkin.

But I'm sure this tax-hating diner was smiling to himself with pride as he swaggered out to his car, which undoubtedly had a "I Support our Troops" bumper sticker right next to the "Don't Tread on Me" one, because he doesn't understand irony.   

And he enjoyed a meal of non contaminated foods.    

How nitpicky of you; a few benefits here and there and you are already commenting?   I am sure Andrew Jackson would not have stood for that. He would have negotiated all income taxes away.

Oh wait, maybe he can still do that. After all he would have taken care of the civil war if they had just been smart enough to ask him

[Tennesseer]

May 2, 2017 14:10:48 GMT -5 dondub said:

And drove home on a public road.

I-95 blaring his boat horn at elderly drivers.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

May 1, 2017 15:35:46 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

May 1, 2017 13:28:39 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Fix the real problem.  Abolish tipping and have prices be both real and transparent.  Tipping is a stupid practice in general, and the "coercive" nature of the current system is beyond ridiculous.  And that does not even touch on the tax fraud possibility as deminmaine mentioned.                              

That being said, yes, this is a tip and should be reported as such.  A personal gift is not contingent on the performance of one's job. 
 

This.  When we were in Europe, no tip was expected, as the wait staff was paid fairly.

Umm, sorry, just because tips were not expected doesn't mean they were paid fairly.

I was a bartender in London one summer. I agreed to a pretty stingy wage for full time work. Imagine my surprise when full time turned out to be 12-13 hours a day, with a 1.5 to 2 break when the pub closed 3-5.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

May 1, 2017 14:21:47 GMT -5 NastyWoman said:

May 1, 2017 10:11:42 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I really like the idea, I think. Most restaurants (to my knowledge) pay less than minimum wage and expect their wait staff to make up the difference in tips. That's always seemed a bit cheesy to me. Showing my appreciation for good service through a gift is an idea I wish I'd thought of before.

This is very state specific.  I know that it is not true in either Washington state or California.  Minimum wage as of January in California is $10.50/hr. And that is the wage servers get paid. Tips, for which the expectations forever seem to creep up as a percentage of the cost of the meal, are earned on top of that.  I too would much prefer to do away with the tipping system but don't see that happen any time soon, if at all.

Are you sure about this?

When I served, the expectation was the you received 8% on food sold. This plus your less than min wage salary had to equal min wage or the restaurant had to pay the difference. Also if you didn't make min wage, despite selling enough food at 8%, you just filed a form and restaurant had to pay at least to take your wage to minimum. With more cc receipts, it would be very easy to monitor

[Rukh O'Rorke]

May 2, 2017 14:10:49 GMT -5 imawino said:

May 1, 2017 15:50:55 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

My mom had a great way for deducing whether or not something was yours, the alternative being- you stole it: Was it yours to begin with, or did someone willingly give it to you? If not, you stole it.  I do not willingly pay my taxes. I pay my taxes because if I don't, the government will seize my assets, or put me into prison- and if I resist, they will kill me.  I pay taxes for NO OTHER REASON. It is armed robbery. 

LOL.  This is ridiculous.  This is like saying I don't "willingly" pay for clothes, but since the store wouldn't let me have them for free THEY STOLE MY MONEY.  Also - "armed" robbery?  really?  The level of hyperbole never ceases to amaze me.  No one is threatening to kill you for not paying taxes.  Fines?  sure.  jail?  Maybe.  Bodily harm?  Give me an f'ing break.

Hyperbole makes it true

[NastyWoman]

May 2, 2017 18:37:27 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

May 1, 2017 14:21:47 GMT -5 NastyWoman said:

This is very state specific.  I know that it is not true in either Washington state or California.  Minimum wage as of January in California is $10.50/hr. And that is the wage servers get paid. Tips, for which the expectations forever seem to creep up as a percentage of the cost of the meal, are earned on top of that.  I too would much prefer to do away with the tipping system but don't see that happen any time soon, if at all.

Are you sure about this?

When I served, the expectation was the you received 8% on food sold. This plus your less than min wage salary had to equal min wage or the restaurant had to pay the difference. Also if you didn't make min wage, despite selling enough food at 8%, you just filed a form and restaurant had to pay at least to take your wage to minimum. With more cc receipts, it would be very easy to monitor

I am sure. Not only that but currently you are almost made to feel as if you "stiffed" the server if you don't pay a tip of at least 15-20% on the entire bill, including taxes.  The places that have table side paying (like Chili's) have set the default to 18% and you have to move it down to pay the more "reasonable" 15%.  The reasoning is that everything has gotten more expensive so tips need to go up.  Well, the meals have gone up as well so a percentage based tip has automatically followed suit. But whatever...   

[Virgil Showlion]

May 2, 2017 14:01:48 GMT -5 imawino said:

My take? I'm alarmed that anyone believes that the legal determination of what constitutes taxable income is made by what an idiot writes on a cocktail napkin.

But I'm sure this tax-hating diner was smiling to himself with pride as he swaggered out to his car, which undoubtedly had a "I Support our Troops" bumper sticker right next to the "Don't Tread on Me" one, because he doesn't understand irony.   

While recording such income as a gift may be deemed cheating by the IRS, the IRS's opinion may not matter.

Suppose the server takes the advice and reports such income as a gift. I can't see any way the IRS could reasonably detect this, even with an audit. Maybe if everybody started tipping this way, they could.

[Virgil Showlion]

May 2, 2017 14:21:27 GMT -5 swamp said:

May 2, 2017 14:01:48 GMT -5 imawino said:

My take? I'm alarmed that anyone believes that the legal determination of what constitutes taxable income is made by what an idiot writes on a cocktail napkin.

But I'm sure this tax-hating diner was smiling to himself with pride as he swaggered out to his car, which undoubtedly had a "I Support our Troops" bumper sticker right next to the "Don't Tread on Me" one, because he doesn't understand irony.   

And he enjoyed a meal of non contaminated foods.   

You guys aren't giving enough credit to the libertarian argument.

They're fully aware that government administrates roads, industry regs, the army, etc., and most acknowledge the need for these things. They don't believe a high-level government should be the entity to administrate these projects. They either believe in more granular, less powerful local governments, or administration by local companies/businessmen/landowners.

They do have valid arguments. Not all of them, of course, but just as many as are comfortable with the gargantuan governments you're defending.

[Gardening Grandma]

May 2, 2017 18:32:09 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

May 1, 2017 15:35:46 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

This.  When we were in Europe, no tip was expected, as the wait staff was paid fairly.

Umm, sorry, just because tips were not expected doesn't mean they were paid fairly.

I was a bartender in London one summer. I agreed to a pretty stingy wage for full time work. Imagine my surprise when full time turned out to be 12-13 hours a day, with a 1.5 to 2 break when the pub closed 3-5.

When were were in SWeden, I was told minimum wage was $20/hr. No idea about England

[djAdvocate]

two words: social contract

[ArchietheDragon]

May 2, 2017 20:45:42 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 2, 2017 14:01:48 GMT -5 imawino said:

My take? I'm alarmed that anyone believes that the legal determination of what constitutes taxable income is made by what an idiot writes on a cocktail napkin.

But I'm sure this tax-hating diner was smiling to himself with pride as he swaggered out to his car, which undoubtedly had a "I Support our Troops" bumper sticker right next to the "Don't Tread on Me" one, because he doesn't understand irony.   

While recording such income as a gift may be deemed cheating by the IRS, the IRS's opinion may not matter.

Suppose the server takes the advice and reports such income as a gift. I can't see any way the IRS could reasonably detect this, even with an audit. Maybe if everybody started tipping this way, they could.

That is a different issue.  This is simply hiding cash tips from the IRS versus a difference in interpretation.   And yes, many, probably most servers hide some cash tips from the IRS.   This is why the IRS has come up with percentages they expect to see declared.   The IRS knows they can't audit every server, so they make sure they get a least a portion of the tips reported properly. 

[swamp]

May 3, 2017 2:53:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

two words: social contract

Rousseau was a commie.

[OldCoyote]

Here in AZ, We have a wonderful sales tax law, If you now register as a contractor instead of a retailer,

you pay the tax when you pickup the wholesale materials, parts or equipment, 

you can charge the customer anything you want because the tax has been paid.

For me it is great,  Let's say I have picked up a piece of equipment for free,  I buy $500 in parts wholesale, I pay the tax on the $500.

Let's also say I now sell the equipment for $6000 I include the sales tax in my price.

I paid Sales tax on the $300, which is $24.90,, instead of the tax of retail price of $6000. that would have been $498.00!!

This was the because the tax people thought that some contractors were personalty using material they had bought, not paying tax on it.

Before you start screaming that O.C. is stealing legally from the government,  Az once levied my bank account, almost $300.

Since I had no idea and did not owe anything, when I called about this, I was told that It had been closed , they would talk any more about it.

Yep, they stole $300. from me, nothing I could do about it!

[Virgil Showlion]

May 3, 2017 2:53:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

two words: social contract

Libertarians have a point that no citizen ever consented to it.

They also rightly reject the argument that declining to flee into the uninhabitable wilderness (or another demesne with an identical contract) somehow constitutes tacit consent.

And even you believe there are conditions under which the state can be found in breach of contract, rendering the obligations of the citizen null and void, correct?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 2, 2017 14:10:49 GMT -5 imawino said:

May 1, 2017 15:50:55 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

My mom had a great way for deducing whether or not something was yours, the alternative being- you stole it: Was it yours to begin with, or did someone willingly give it to you? If not, you stole it.  I do not willingly pay my taxes. I pay my taxes because if I don't, the government will seize my assets, or put me into prison- and if I resist, they will kill me.  I pay taxes for NO OTHER REASON. It is armed robbery. 

LOL.  This is ridiculous.  This is like saying I don't "willingly" pay for clothes, but since the store wouldn't let me have them for free THEY STOLE MY MONEY.  Also - "armed" robbery?  really?  The level of hyperbole never ceases to amaze me.  No one is threatening to kill you for not paying taxes.  Fines?  sure.  jail?  Maybe.  Bodily harm?  Give me an f'ing break.

I want clothes. I don't want anything government provides, and even if I did- I wouldn't choose the government as my service provider.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 3, 2017 10:56:18 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 3, 2017 2:53:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

two words: social contract

Libertarians have a point that no citizen ever consented to it.

They also rightly reject the argument that declining to flee into the uninhabitable wilderness (or another demesne with an identical contract) somehow constitutes tacit consent.

And even you believe there are conditions under which the state can be found in breach of contract, rendering the obligations of the citizen null and void, correct?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Our "social contract" is the Constitution. 90% or more of what government does is not authorized by the Constitution. The government is only empowered to do those things specifically enumerated in Article I, Section 8 "Enumerated Powers". The government therefore is in breach of contract. A fairly good argument could be made that none of us are obligated to pay anything until the government is back in compliance.

[djAdvocate]

May 3, 2017 8:32:34 GMT -5 swamp said:

May 3, 2017 2:53:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

two words: social contract

Rousseau was a commie.

there is a really good documentary about the failings of societies called "The Four Horsemen".  one of the recommendations of that film is that we get back to our roots, and stop cherry picking our "founding fathers" for political value, and go back to studying them.

i know.  ridiculous right? 

[djAdvocate]

May 3, 2017 10:56:18 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 3, 2017 2:53:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

two words: social contract

Libertarians have a point that no citizen ever consented to it.

They also rightly reject the argument that declining to flee into the uninhabitable wilderness (or another demesne with an identical contract) somehow constitutes tacit consent.

And even you believe there are conditions under which the state can be found in breach of contract, rendering the obligations of the citizen null and void, correct?

all institutions should be challenged for authority, and if they are found wanting, they should be dismantled.

that is all anyone ever needs to say on this topic.

[djAdvocate]

May 3, 2017 14:54:45 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Our "social contract" is the Constitution. 90% or more of what government does is not authorized by the Constitution. The government is only empowered to do those things specifically enumerated in Article I, Section 8 "Enumerated Powers". The government therefore is in breach of contract. A fairly good argument could be made that none of us are obligated to pay anything until the government is back in compliance.

congress has the authority to levy taxes, right?

because, you know, that is the only item under discussion, here.

[djAdvocate]

May 3, 2017 15:05:28 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

May 3, 2017 14:54:45 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Our "social contract" is the Constitution. 90% or more of what government does is not authorized by the Constitution. The government is only empowered to do those things specifically enumerated in Article I, Section 8 "Enumerated Powers". The government therefore is in breach of contract. A fairly good argument could be made that none of us are obligated to pay anything until the government is back in compliance.

How do you feel about your President's stated wish to trash the "outdated" Constitution?

sounds like Bush, only...you know....worser.

[billisonboard]

May 1, 2017 15:50:55 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

... I do not willingly pay my taxes. I pay my taxes because if I don't, the government will seize my assets, or put me into prison- and if I resist, they will kill me.  I pay taxes for NO OTHER REASON. It is armed robbery. 

May 3, 2017 14:54:45 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Our "social contract" is the Constitution. 90% or more of what government does is not authorized by the Constitution. The government is only empowered to do those things specifically enumerated in Article I, Section 8 "Enumerated Powers". The government therefore is in breach of contract. A fairly good argument could be made that none of us are obligated to pay anything until the government is back in compliance.

So is it that if an individual willingly agrees that they are a party to the constitutional social contract and willingly agrees that the conditions of that contract are being properly met, then they are obligated to pay taxes? Do they have to willingly agree to the exact dollar and cents that they pay through obligation?  Or are they only obligated to pay what they individually agree to pay willingly?  Do they get to willingly agree to pay some forms of tax by obligation yet have no obligation to pay others if they don't willingly agree?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 3, 2017 15:05:28 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

May 3, 2017 14:54:45 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Our "social contract" is the Constitution. 90% or more of what government does is not authorized by the Constitution. The government is only empowered to do those things specifically enumerated in Article I, Section 8 "Enumerated Powers". The government therefore is in breach of contract. A fairly good argument could be made that none of us are obligated to pay anything until the government is back in compliance.

How do you feel about your President's stated wish to trash the "outdated" Constitution?

Obama isn't the president anymore.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

This guy is a little out there- but it's hard to argue the logic. 

[djAdvocate]

May 3, 2017 19:00:34 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

This guy is a little out there- but it's hard to argue the logic. 

actually, it is really easy, and i have done so every time you posted it.

until this time.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 3, 2017 15:01:07 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

May 3, 2017 14:54:45 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Our "social contract" is the Constitution. 90% or more of what government does is not authorized by the Constitution. The government is only empowered to do those things specifically enumerated in Article I, Section 8 "Enumerated Powers". The government therefore is in breach of contract. A fairly good argument could be made that none of us are obligated to pay anything until the government is back in compliance.

congress has the authority to levy taxes, right?

because, you know, that is the only item under discussion, here.

The government actually has no legitimate claim to anything. It literally has no authority at all. It's a construct. Government exists purely in our imaginations. That's why the next revolution in human liberty (which is at the door) is not a great civil war, or military struggle- but simply the collective awakening / realization that government doesn't actually exist. Once we finally wake up and see that it's all a fiction, it will literally evaporate.

[billisonboard]

May 4, 2017 15:01:28 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

... it will literally evaporate.

Perhaps wither away?

[Virgil Showlion]

May 4, 2017 15:01:28 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

May 3, 2017 15:01:07 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

congress has the authority to levy taxes, right?

because, you know, that is the only item under discussion, here.

The government actually has no legitimate claim to anything. It literally has no authority at all. It's a construct. Government exists purely in our imaginations. That's why the next revolution in human liberty (which is at the door) is not a great civil war, or military struggle- but simply the collective awakening / realization that government doesn't actually exist. Once we finally wake up and see that it's all a fiction, it will literally evaporate.

OK, I'll bite.

"Government doesn't actually exist."

This is like saying money doesn't actually exist or family doesn't really exist. Yes it's true that government in its most abstract form isn't a tangible thing. It's a structure. It's a collection of laws, ordinances, protocols, systems of authority that grant order and structure to human society. But it's also the difference between a useless heap of gears, axles, and pistons, and a working car. Government and structure are utterly indispensable to prosperity. They're the only reason we live in skyscrapers eating juicy cheeseburgers instead of scrapping over rats in caves.

Family is a form of government. Do you understand that?

Most religions, including Christianity, are about government. Not necessarily governments of man, but templates showing what government should and will ultimately be like.

Businesses are a form of government. Housing co-ops are a form of government. Militias and armed rebellions are a form of government and cannot exist without it.

So when you're talking about "government" disappearing here, what specific form(s) of government are you talking about? National government? State? City? Family? Are you predicting we'll devolve into complete anarchy and wind up like the apes?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 4, 2017 17:53:52 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

May 4, 2017 15:01:28 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

The government actually has no legitimate claim to anything. It literally has no authority at all. It's a construct. Government exists purely in our imaginations. That's why the next revolution in human liberty (which is at the door) is not a great civil war, or military struggle- but simply the collective awakening / realization that government doesn't actually exist. Once we finally wake up and see that it's all a fiction, it will literally evaporate.

OK, I'll bite.

"Government doesn't actually exist."

This is like saying money doesn't actually exist or family doesn't really exist. Yes it's true that government in its most abstract form isn't a tangible thing. It's a structure. It's a collection of laws, ordinances, protocols, systems of authority that grant order and structure to human society. But it's also the difference between a useless heap of gears, axles, and pistons, and a working car. Government and structure are utterly indispensable to prosperity. They're the only reason we live in skyscrapers eating juicy cheeseburgers instead of scrapping over rats in caves.

Family is a form of government. Do you understand that?

Most religions, including Christianity, are about government. Not necessarily governments of man, but templates showing what government should and will ultimately be like.

Businesses are a form of government. Housing co-ops are a form of government. Militias and armed rebellions are a form of government and cannot exist without it.

So when you're talking about "government" disappearing here, what specific form(s) of government are you talking about? National government? State? City? Family? Are you predicting we'll devolve into complete anarchy and wind up like the apes?

I did that on purpose, and your response was wonderful. Excellent lead in, thank you.

Government is a gun to the head. Simple as that- which means, the answer to your question is: Yes. Taxation is theft.  

You can leave your family, your church, your neighborhood, or any other organization because these constructs, these structures- with their 'laws, ordinances, protocols, systems of authority' are all VOLUNTARY. We can discuss the morality and ethics of abandoning your family, or the benefits of remaining part of your church, or community-- but government is, at it's core, simply force.

And the belief that government is essential is simply this: That just the right amount of violence used by just the right people in just the right way can perfect society.