RE: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force (fwd)

["X" <xasper8d@lobo.net>]

Sorry, everyone, for this crap coming up, but JIM CHOATE wants you all to
see it...

Jim,

You keep reposting this to the cpunx list, and I keep trying to discuss it
with you in private.

X says:
~> > If I had thought you were serious about your article, I would
~> have pointed
~> > out the huge flaws in your theory.  I gave you credit for well-thought
~> > sarcasm when apparently it was neither.
~>
And Jim's witty response was:
~> I'm waiting...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the gist of your system was a two-tiered
payment schedule where Group A could be called TaxPayers and Group B could
be called NON-Payers.  Right?

And basically, Group A would get all of the benefits that a fully paid
membership would entail, right?  Secondly, Group B would "not pay taxes" and
would NOT be entitled to any benefits save for on a pay-as-you-go type
arrangement.  Right?

What USGov't services do you include in your proposal?  Let's list a few,
(feel free to jump in with some more.)
U.S. Mail services
Common defense
Air traffic controlling
roadways and interstates
Food and Drug Administration approvals
Federally mandated minimum wage
automobile safety standards

Is your tax progressive or regressive?

If I'm right so far (which I may or may not be) then we have to talk about
your definition of "paying taxes."  Does a single woman raising five kids
and paying a small mortgage making  $14,200 per year pay taxes?  No,
unfortunately for her, she doesn't.  I guess that puts her smack into GROUP
B!  Well, that's simple enough!  We'll deny her the creature comforts of the
list above until she chips in her proportionate cost, right?  When that
libertarian bitch tries to send mail, we'll charge her more!  WHen she gets
on the freeway, we'll toll her!  When she buys a medicine for her snot-nosed
urchin, we'll give her the stuff that ain't been FDA approved, right?
RIGHT!  And, if ever we should need to attack another country (or defend
ours, as you pointed out) SHE'LL happily volunteer to serve (as I remember
your post) in order to protect her TAX-FREE STATUS.

As you said to me, she's probably just looking for someone to shoulder her
part of the load, right?

You said it would be easy to implement, right?  I don't see that it would be
easy at all.

Once again, I apologize for the OFF TOPIC nature of this, but MR. COHATE
(freudian slip, or merely coincidence?  you be the judge!) insisted on
duking this out in public.

X