Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
> But that happens all the time. People who don't drive still pay taxes
> for roads.
And they also never take public transportation on those roads, pay for
transportation across those roads, never have emergency medical services
travel to them and transport them to the hospital on those roads, never buy
any product which was transported across those roads... ok, that one's a setup
since every product in a store was delivered by a truck unless the store is in
some remote location only accessible by mule train. Driving on roads is not
the only benefit those roads offer.
> People who don't have children pay taxes for schools.
And public schools are doing such a fine job of educating, too! You are
aware that there are people who believe public schooling was, and is, a bad
idea and this would be best removed?
> People who have no interest in nature pay taxes to preserve national
> parks.
Same here.
> I agree that social security is all sorts of screwed up, but not
> because it involves collecting money and spending it in ways that
> might not directly benefit the person paying.
It is a large part of it because it's pretty much a fact that the people
would have been better off with the money to invest and save on their own.
Yes, people can come up with specific cases of individuals who represent the
exception. But we're talking the by-and-large masses here, not the "a friend
of a friend's aunt's grandma..."
> Not unless you're
> against taxes of all forms, which is possibly an entirely different
> argument.
Income taxes, hell yes. Consumption taxes levied equally upon all? No.
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream?
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | And dream I do...
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature