Net Tax Payers vs. Net Tax Consumers

[TruthSeeker1234]

The Austrian school of economics teaches us to view people as generally belonging to either the group of net tax payers, or the group of net tax consumers. There can not be any such thing as a "fair" tax, because any kind of tax, be it income tax, social security tax, sales tax, inheritance, etc, will always create two classes of citizens: those who, on net, pay more than they recieve in benefits, and those who recieve more benefits than they pay.

Net tax consumers would be anyone who gets a paycheck directly from the government, or from a government contractor. There can be gray areas, like a person who works for a company that does some government contracting and some private sector, but in most cases it is pretty clear.

I think it would be very interesting to learn which category JREF members are in. I am certainly a net tax payer. R.Mackey is certainly a net tax consumer, working for NASA. Anybody else care to categorize themselves, Austrian-style?

 

[Pardalis]

Nothing to do with conspiracy theories.

 

[Gravy]

TS, please ask the mods to move this to an appropriate subforum.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

The point is that net tax consumers have a financial incentive to support the conspiracy.

 

[Pardalis]

Maybe "Austrian-libertarians" radicals are more proned to believe in government conspiracies than others.

 

[Gravy]

Since you haven't identified a conspiracy, this is a non-starter. Are you going to ask the mods that this be moved, or shall I?

 

[Anti-sophist]

He's trying to demonstrate that JREFers are government shills. That's funny.

Do you actually have a job, truthseeker?

 

[twinstead]

I think troothydude will believe just about anything, as long as it shows a government, and specifically the US government, in a bad light.

Perhaps anything he posts, even if it doesn't name any conspiracy, should be in the conspiracy sub-forum because to him, everything IS a conspiracy.

 

[R.Mackey]

I think it would be very interesting to learn which category JREF members are in. I am certainly a net tax payer. R.Mackey is certainly a net tax consumer, working for NASA. Anybody else care to categorize themselves, Austrian-style?

I'll overlook your thinly veiled, entirely rude attack to simply correct you, since -- yet again -- you don't have the foggiest notion of what you're talking about.

For starters, while I do work for NASA, I am a civilian contractor, not a Government employee. So are about half of those at NASA centers, and nearly all of them at my center.

Second, I work under full-cost accounting and I raise my own research money. That's research, and the real kind, not the Google-searching while under the influence of recreational substances practiced by many Troothers.

Third, very little of my funding comes from NASA. Historically about half has come from private industry, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman. They don't fund me out of charity, Ace.

Fourth, my research leads to tangible -- and marketable -- products. I am lead inventor of technology protected under two U.S. Patents, and many other copyrighted works besides. These generate revenue directly.

In summary, your assertion that I am a "net tax consumer" is baseless.

I expect a prompt apology, Ace. Not only are you even more clueless than normal, but you have reduced this to a personal level. Shame on you.

 

[Elizabeth I]

I before E except after C,
Or when sounded like A,
As in "neighbor" and "weigh".

Neither financier seized either species of weird leisure (exceptions.)

 

[maccy]

The point is that net tax consumers have a financial incentive to support the conspiracy.

Do you really believe that if there was a conspiracy and it was revealed that all the people who worked for the government would lose their jobs?

 

[R.Mackey]

The point is that net tax consumers have a financial incentive to support the conspiracy.

Ah, now I see what you're getting at. You're accusing me of complicity in your dreamed-of Sept. 11th conspiracy.

Get to apologizing at once, Ace.

 

[stateofgrace]

Apologise TS, do it, it is the right thing to do.

Stop being so bloody nasty to all that disagree with you.

Be a man and apologise.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

The point is that net tax consumers have a financial incentive to support the conspiracy.

and for many people financial incentive falls lower in priority than morals and ethics

why is it CTers assume everyone has a price, except themselves of course

as for me, i work for a software company that creates programs for insurance agencies, at least one of which was covering the WTC, does that make me complicit?

 

[maccy]

Can I just add that such a combination of a simplistic view of economics and of personal ethics is typical of TS1234.

You're behaving despicably Ace, apologise.

 

[fuelair]

Sorry, but if truthtweaker is saying (and the Austrian thing definitely IS NOT) that a government employee is a net tax consumer he has walked on his own ....,er , argument. A person working for NASA pays back income tax, social security tax, sales tax, state/local taxes and performs a service considered necessary for the general functioning of the government : i.e. the citizens of the country. A net tax recipient ,under the logical terms of the Austrian thingie, would be a welfare recipient, a person getting lost job supplements or food stamps, prisoners getting food , housing and education at taxpayer expense, etc. Not quite the was TS seems to interpret it. (IF TS has a source that explains it exactly the way he interpreted it, I will happily challenge that sources' correctness.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

Since you haven't identified a conspiracy, this is a non-starter. Are you going to ask the mods that this be moved, or shall I?

This would be any government conspiracy. Evidently I've touched a nerve with this one. I think it is a perfectly relevant area of discussion, that of financial self-interest vis-a-vis conspiracies.

 

[maccy]

This would be any government conspiracy. Evidently I've touched a nerve with this one. I think it is a perfectly relevant area of discussion, that of financial self-interest vis-a-vis conspiracies.

Demonstate the financial self-interest.

How does an government employee suffer financially if a conspiracy is disclosed?

 

[stateofgrace]

This would be any government conspiracy. Evidently I've touched a nerve with this one. I think it is a perfectly relevant area of discussion, that of financial self-interest vis-a-vis conspiracies.

Please don't delude yourself any further. You have not touched a nerve you have simply offended.

People who offend, when it is pointed out to them that they have offended,apologise.

I will not write what I wish to write because it is pointless. I will not name call, I will not lower myself to your level,I will simply withdraw from this thread and allow you to spew your garbage.

Expect no further comment to the vindictive and highly offensive insults you have put forward.

 

[Horatius]

The point is that net tax consumers have a financial incentive to support the conspiracy.

Do you really believe that if there was a conspiracy and it was revealed that all the people who worked for the government would lose their jobs?

Not only that, but he also has no idea how much rivalry there is between different departments. If someone in NASA has info that could devastate the CIA or FBI, they would have a huge incentive to rat them out, so that their budgets will be slashed, opening the way for other departments to seize their funding and areas of responsibility.

Prestige in such organizations is measured by how big your budget is, and how many people report to you. Anything that gives you a chance to enhance that, enhances your prestige, and therefore your influence.

If you want to know how government actually works, watch all of Yes Minister and Yes, Prime Minister. It's British, but it pretty much applies everywhere.

There's plenty to be disgusted with in how governments are run, but this CT BS isn't one of them.