I somewhere missed the part of taxes that was voluntary.

There are reasons these people are homeless. Not everyone is Maggie (thankfully).
6

The 'voluntary' aspect of taxation comes in when we as a country vote not to remove them and to continue providing support where needed.

We all moan about taxes, don't get me wrong. But, whenever a party tries to push for tax cuts, the public want to know what happens to the serviices? Generally speaking, tax cuts are not a popular, winning agenda when it comes to elections. We've been there (under the last conservative government) and whilst people like the idea of lower taxes, they don't like the idea of fewer services and they don't like the idea of Pension cutbacks, NHS cutbacks and loss of social security. They DO however, still gripe about some of the people who claim social security and want more policing of the system to take away benefit fraud.

I didn't mean just you, or just today. ;-)

LoL

You wouldn't voluntarily give tax money for developing the Osprey? For roads? Police protection? Fire Protection? For trying to educated the homeless idiots? To try to motivate the lazy homeless idiots? To medicate the crazy, lazy, homeless idiots? To keep the crazy, lazy, homeless idiots from eating free food in the park down your street? To keep out illegal immigrants?

Just me, today. I have incredibly intelligent sperm. And I like killing them.:eyebrow:

Yes, there's that collectivist first person plural again. Of course there's more than one "we" in this equation...there's at least the "we" that pays taxes, the "we" that doesn't, and the "we" that makes money from the whole transaction.

And the "we" that votes.

All non-identical, but fun to blur together in rhetoric.

So would you entirely remove all taxes in the US?

Also, the 'we' in question all have a ballot paper. That collectivism you keep referring to bears a striking resemblance to the 'democracy' I hear so much about from your side of the pond. The idea that each individual should make their own personal decision as to ho wthey engage in the system (a system which requires some form of funding) bears an equally striking resemblance to certain forms of anarchy......you.....you're not an Anarchist on the sly are you Mags?

Actually, it's the majority of those who represent the "we" of the majority of voters. Unfortunately, majority rules, or "we" wouldn't have a moron in the whitehouse.

There's more than one "we" in question...that was my point.

If you actually don't know the difference between collectivism and democracy, that's too bad. One is a system of government, the other a political philosophy. But if you really do think they're the same thing, that would explain a lot.

Not simple majority. And there's reasons for that, too.

Quite a straw man there.

No, I would not eliminate all taxation...but that doesn't mean I approve of how all of it is currently spent.