So…
Now that the US income tax deadline is behind us, how about a discussion on representation and taxation? If it holds true that taxation without representation is axiomatically a bad thing, wouldn’t the opposite possibly be as reprehensible? If a segment of the population pays no taxes (I don’t want a debate on what percentage - ANY percentage is applicable for the purposes of this discussion), do they deserve representation? Should they have a say in governance and how tax monies are spent, if they themselves do not contribute? What about if they directly benefit from the disbursement of tax funds? Is that not a case of the fox watching the hen-house? To what extent does the last question apply to any entity that benefits from tax funds and has voting power?
Note that I’m not advocating a particular position, just posing the questions for debate.
Wouldnt that be considering the “Taxation” only means income tax?
It’s an inevitable part of being in a democracy-- one of those things that isn’t particularly good, but that the solution would be worse.
Better, in my mind, is to have a uniform tax rate so that any increase affects everyone. You’d still have to have a standard deduction so you’re not taxing people into poverty, but at least that minimizes the effect.
And to stir the pot a bit more: I live in the US, I’m taxed heavily, but I’m not allowed to vote!
I haven’t lived in Canada for 5 years, I don’t pay any taxes there, but I just sent in my vote for the federal election.
In the end, does it matter? Corporations control it all right?
Way I see it is, if a government has coercive power over me, absent other considerations I should have some say in the government.
Shhhhh! Don’t stir up the sheeple!!
That is the argument of people in Washington, DC.
Well, it seems to me that you are suffering from taxation without representation, while “committing” representation without taxation by casting your vote in a locale wherein you pay no taxes…but yes, that is an extreme and unusual case, and I was looking more at a macro issue, rather than a micro issue.
That was a bit of the point of my last question: if we consider taxes beyond income tax, such as road levies, sales taxes, etc., many people benefit from those with the results of better roads and the like. Does paying those taxes automatically “buy” them the right to representation? I would think at the local level it does…but what about at the federal level, if they pay no federal income taxes?
To the extent that people who pay no income tax are still subject to the country’s laws and ordinances, can be conscripted if such a decision is made and so on, then yeah, they should definitively have a say in those laws. The poor are citizens too, and have just as much of a stake in the country they live in and the direction it takes as Richy McFatcat.
That’s an excellent point - I don’t earn enough to pay any income taxes myself, but I still pay the tax on tobacco and alcohol, sales taxes, housing taxes, I’d pay gas taxes if I had a vehicle (and a vehicle tax to boot I suppose 
)…
Emphatically no. Flat taxe rates are a rich man’s idea of fairness and place the burden squarely on the lower classes.
To tell the truth I was thinking more of the sales tax (you know that tax where you tedious Americans force everyone to be good at maths, cause it’s actually not included in the price ), in most Western nations, this is usually one of the biggest money provider for the State (though as you’re a federal system, I dont know if sales taxes go the Federal state or the various States). It works as a flat tax and you can be sure the lower income classes feel it harsher than the upper income classes do.
I agree with this. It’s clear to me that, with 40-something percent of the US who pays no income tax, it has created a situation where a huge part of the population feels they have no skin in the game and are motivated to freeroll on those who produce (and therefore pay taxes).
Like the old joke about 3 wolves and 2 sheep having a vote on what’s for dinner; if everyone had to kick in, there might be some hesitation to continue to advocate for more and more government services, which is pretty clearly bankrupting our country and turning us into England, or worse, Greece.
True. Too bad the Constitution makes it very clear that representation is accorded only to states.
From where I sit (in Northern VA, outside DC), if they don’t like it, they should just move to Maryland. In fact, Maryland should take back everything but a small district, maybe bounded by St E’s, Constitution, and the Potomac.
Edit to add: I guess we could extend that alleyway leading from the Wash monument up to the WH…
next issue to ponder is net taxation. If a family gets slightly more in government welfare benefits of various sorts than what the adults are paying in taxes, should they be allowed to vote? Now, what if the gap between their taxes and the benefits drawn from the public purse is a massive one and not expected to improve at any time in the future?
Yet a very different angle on the same problem is as follows. Suppose the government decides to enslave the populace while convincing them that it’s only just. So suppose the government massively increases the taxes and regulations on businesses, fuel (or CO2 from fuel), health care and various other things that tax payers themselves are not directly involved in. As a result, private businesses reduce salaries to their employees and so employees also now pay a lot less income tax. The employees now find themselves impoverished and reliant on government assistance. Now in comes the government and says, you are all parasites, off with your civil rights.
So I don’t think that this issue is a clear cut one. It depends on the circumstances. E.g. it depends on the question “why are people paying little taxes and why are they apparently drawing expensive services from the government?”
Well, that all depends on the flat rate and the standard deduction, doesn’t it? I don’t think it’ll be the poor complaining if the rate is 50% and the standard deduction is $100,000.
Are you under the impression that these 40% don’t produce anything ? Just sit on their thumbs all day long ?
For the most part they still pay other federal taxes, such as social security tax, medicare tax, gasoline excise tax, etc.
For example, if all the farm hands and laborers went on strike, how long would the food last? Clearly they contribute nothing but keeping us from starving. Lazy parasites.
Were you under the impression that group is allowed to vote?
I’ve had an agricultural job, and I vote as a natural born citizen. Stereotypes aren’t all they’re cracked up to be.
Edit: this list has a bunch of other jobs people do that pay about what ag-work does, at least until item 60 or so. Some don’t’ seem so necessary but some are vital.