The Money Masters

[TruthSeeker1234]

I
Now I pay 42-45% of my pay to income tax.

I do not like losing my hard earned cash to income tax, but I believe in the system. I also believe that when I worked as a gas attendant/grave digger, i was paid what I DESERVED, based on the AMOUNT OF SKILL required, and the amount of TRAINING/EDUCATION (none) required to perform my job.

TAM

No, sir. incorrect. You are a physician in Canada, your pay comes entirely out of tax money. Your paying of taxes is a statistical fiction. If you receive $200,000 per year out of the general fund, and pay $90,000 tax back into the general fund, it is identical to your having simply received $110,000 and paid no tax.

People would do very well to consider the Rothbardian concept of "net tax-payer" vs. "net tax-consumer".

 

[imstellar28]

I have seen both sides of the spectrum. When I was between the ages of 16-19, I worked for minimum wage as a (1) Gas attendant, (2) Grave digger.

I now work as a Physician, and I make a very good living.

When I was younger I paid only 16-20% of my pay to income tax.

Now I pay 42-45% of my pay to income tax.

I do not like losing my hard earned cash to income tax, but I believe in the system. I also believe that when I worked as a gas attendant/grave digger, i was paid what I DESERVED, based on the AMOUNT OF SKILL required, and the amount of TRAINING/EDUCATION (none) required to perform my job.

TAM

You think its fair to tax peoples labor? When you go to work you aren't making a profit you are making a trade--your labor and skills for wages. When they tax you 40-45% they are taxing your time, your labor, in effect they are taxing you. You might feel free but your 45% slave.

 

[imstellar28]

Some people just have no idea how to think.

Let's just say that all of a sudden income taxes were abolished. What do you think would happen to the price of that $150,000 house? I guarantee it won't be $150,000. Like so many other things in our society, houses will sell at the prices that people are willing to pay. If everybody suddenly made more money, that extra income would be reflected in the prices around you.

Would removing income tax make you richer? Yup. But it would also make everyone else around you richer as well. A rising tide lifts all ships.

Instead of whining about taxes, why don't you get an education, get a good paying job, and work hard.

Heres where your wrong. Ok, so the house price (may or may not) go up, but who is selling the house? Another American. Ok, the price of consumer items (may or may not) go up, but who is selling them? Another American.

When you take away the income taxes you stop putting money into the pockets of bankers and put it back into the pockets of the American people.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

You think its fair to tax peoples labor? When you go to work you aren't making a profit you are making a trade--your labor and skills for wages. When they tax you 40-45% they are taxing your time, your labor, in effect they are taxing you. You might feel free but your 45% slave.

Exactly correct imstellar. People would do well to imagine what they could buy with the money that is confiscated from them in taxes. That car, those clothes, that trip to Hawaii, that is what is stolen from you, year after year.

Inflation (that is printing of additional money beyond goods and services) is another method of transferring real wealth away from those who earned it, and into the hands of those with the money monopoly.

It is theft, and it is most certainly a conspiracy.

 

[332nd]

Heres where your wrong. Ok, so the house price (may or may not) go up, but who is selling the house? Another American. Ok, the price of consumer items (may or may not) go up, but who is selling them? Another American.

When you take away the income taxes you stop putting money into the pockets of bankers and put it back into the pockets of the American people.

So you give the money to different people and they become the class of social elite?

 

[VespaGuy]

Heres where your wrong. Ok, so the house price (may or may not) go up, but who is selling the house? Another American. Ok, the price of consumer items (may or may not) go up, but who is selling them? Another American.

When you take away the income taxes you stop putting money into the pockets of bankers and put it back into the pockets of the American people.

But that wasn't your argument, was it? You were saying that you couldn't afford that $150,000 house without taking a loan (and paying interest to the mean bankers).

I will repeat, if you eliminate the income tax EVERYONE gets more net income. The person who COULD afford the $150,000 house can now afford the $200,000 house. So guess what happens to that $150,000 house you liked. It's now selling for $200,000... and you still can't afford it.

Want to know how to buy that $150,000 house? Get an education, get a job, and stop complaining.

 

[Pardalis]

Heres where your wrong. Ok, so the house price (may or may not) go up, but who is selling the house? Another American. Ok, the price of consumer items (may or may not) go up, but who is selling them? Another American.

What the hell does that paragraph mean anyway? Are you saying don't buy from Americans?

 

[imstellar28]

What the hell does that paragraph mean anyway? Are you saying don't buy from Americans?

No, I'm saying that even if prices did somehow increase (which I don't think they would) you would still be giving your money to other Americans...who give it to other Americans...etc. Which is much better than giving it to the billionaire banking execs.

 

[Pardalis]

No, I'm saying that even if prices did somehow increase (which I don't think they would) you would still be giving your money to other Americans...who give it to other Americans...etc. Which is much better than giving it to the billionaire banking execs.

But if you can't afford the house, and still want to purchase it, are you going to ask for a loan to a stranger?

 

[imstellar28]

But that wasn't your argument, was it? You were saying that you couldn't afford that $150,000 house without taking a loan (and paying interest to the mean bankers).

I will repeat, if you eliminate the income tax EVERYONE gets more net income. The person who COULD afford the $150,000 house can now afford the $200,000 house. So guess what happens to that $150,000 house you liked. It's now selling for $200,000... and you still can't afford it.

Want to know how to buy that $150,000 house? Get an education, get a job, and stop complaining.

Not everyone gets more net income. For one, someone is out the billions of dollars raked in from income taxes--thats going to be the government and/or the bankers. For two, just because you get more money doesn't mean you have to spend it instantly. It's money in your pocket. Third, your interpretation of "money" assumes that the money itself represents no store of value which is exactly what I'm saying is the problem. The fact that our currency has become completely arbitrary in that it represents nothing but the hopes and dreams of little children is a huge part of the problem.

Now if we return to having the money represent a store of value, the price of a house does not increase because of net income because the money is worth exactly what it was before and after, and the house is worth exactly what it was before and after. Supply and demand works to an extent but if everyone gets back 50% more income, and the money actually represents something, prices will not magically rise by 50% to nullify the gain.

 

[imstellar28]

But if you can't afford the house, and still want to purchase it, are you going to ask for a loan to a stranger?

There will still be banks around giving out loans but the interest will be lower due to decreased need, and the fact that they no longer get a third of the entire sum of wages in this country as an interest free loan for a year until April 15th. Also the loans will most likely not be for 30 years, but rather much shorter duration such as 5 years etc.

 

[Pardalis]

Now if we return to having the money represent a store of value, the price of a house does not increase because of net income because the money is worth exactly what it was before and after, and the house is worth exactly what it was before and after.

Say what?

What establishes the price of a house?

 

[Pardalis]

There will still be banks around giving out loans but the interest will be lower due to decreased need, and the fact that they no longer get a third of the entire sum of wages in this country as an interest free loan for a year until April 15th. Also the loans will most likely not be for 30 years, but rather much shorter duration such as 5 years etc.

How come I feel the goalposts have been moved on me again?

 

[imstellar28]

Say what?

What establishes the price of a house?

Materials, construction, location, etc. Its not a magical number tied to the amount of money a citizen has...unless you are paying with magical money which is basically what the US dollar has become.

 

[Pardalis]

Materials, construction, location, etc. Its not a magical number tied to the amount of money a citizen has...unless you are paying with magical money which is basically what the US dollar has become.

Doesn't the market also play a big role? The market fluctuates doesn't it?

So the price of a house is never fixed, because so is money itself, right?

EDIT: Heck, come to think of it, the price for materials construction and location also fluctuates because of the market. Where do you get that the price of a house will remain the same all the time?

 

[chipmunk stew]

No, I'm saying that even if prices did somehow increase (which I don't think they would) you would still be giving your money to other Americans...who give it to other Americans...etc. Which is much better than giving it to the billionaire banking execs.

That's quite the rosy utopian dream, but unless you want to close trade at the borders, the reality is, money will start flooding out of the country and into the pockets of Chinese and Indians (for example). And ultimately, it will go into the pockets of billionaire manufacturing execs (for example) from who-knows-what country. Why is this "better than giving it to billionaire banking execs"?

 

[imstellar28]

Doesn't the market also play a big role? The market fluctuates doesn't it?

So the price of a house is never fixed, because so is money itself, right?

Once upon a time money represents goods. The money system was created so you could walk to the store and buy some milk without having to bring a bag of potatoes to trade. The currency works because people have faith that it represents a tangible item--in most cases gold.

Now yes the market is going to fluctuate due to supply and demand but its not going to double instantly unless they printed out more money and handed it out for free. As a contained system, our economy has a total amount of money which remains fixed unless we export labor or goods.

Inflation only occurs when the relationship between money and the stored value its tied to changes, not when people acquire more money.

 

[chipmunk stew]

Materials, construction, location, etc. Its not a magical number tied to the amount of money a citizen has...unless you are paying with magical money which is basically what the US dollar has become.

It's tied to supply and demand, like any product. The prices (and the supply) rise with demand. As the supply catches up with the demand, the prices level out.

 

[Pardalis]

Now yes the market is going to fluctuate due to supply and demand but its not going to double instantly unless they printed out more money and handed it out for free. As a contained system, our economy has a total amount of money which remains fixed unless we export labor or goods.

What about the rest of the world? Doesn't the price of money fluctuate because of the world market?

 

[imstellar28]

By your logic after 1913 we should have seen a huge drop in prices due to the sudden inception of the income tax, but is that what occurred?