On the Record: Tax Raise
•
by Aren Perry
It is with great consternation that I vote yes on this bill. I feel that the 10% is too high of a raise and that it should have been raised overall a more modest 5%. However, the bill is in place and the majority of congress prefers a 10% raise in taxes. Further, as another comment of dissent I would see a quarter of our previously earned money back in our coffers (not half) before we reverted to the 10% tax rate. The amount of time to retrieve half of the gold back will be more than two weeks, which is unacceptable to me.
This is affecting me too, the company I work for is closing. There is no great selfish motivation here.
I ran under the cause of lower taxes, something I believe in still and I do not want to seem to betray my own word in what I want to accomplish.
For the Recor😛
I voted yes, but I also will push, Illinois and eUSA, for a quicker end to the tax raises than is proposed and also for a lower tax rate when we revert to our original system.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Alby, there is plenty of money to go around. Businesses may crumble, and in fact I know of at least one (the one I worked for) has. However, this is due to profit not a lack of money in the market.
In fact, there was quite a significant boost to how much money there is in the market not too long ago...heh. We have plenty of money to go around, we just experienced an increase in inflation to the amounts of 3/4 dollars per gold.
If we were attacked tomorrow, would this plan actually save us? No, we would be dependent on the donations of motivated citizens and businesses to finance the defense of the country.
High reserves are a great target for theft and corruption. Why not keep that money in the hands of citizens until it is actually needed?
Defense of the country ensures our livelihoods and the citizens are prepared to pay it (when there is actually a threat). Raising taxes to build up another reserve just increases the odds of this happening again.
Aren@ If the government takes 20% on every trade-transaction and stockpiles that money, its no longer in the economy. It won't be long until people start noticing a shortage of dollars available on the money exchange.
Dollars are not infinite. There is a limit which exist in circulation. In the Fed Robbery, only $60,000 got snatched. The bigger issue is the 2000/Gold that is missing. The US Govt doesn't have the Gold to create a lot of new dollars, the thieves with rhe Gold cannot create new dollars, only buy them, and the Govt is removing dollars from circulation with higher taxes. That my friend is a recipe for deflation.
you're right Knight that if we were attacked tomorrow this plan would not save us and the buying power of the eUS citizen would be necessary.
You make good points knight. I'm sure the eUSA citizen will rise up.
I don't think that high reserves will be a problem with corruption and that this theft had not much to do with the amount that was in the reserve.
I wish people like you were more vocal on their opinions.
Still, I think having a reserve is smart. We need money/gold to buy tanks and tanks win wars. I'm sure the eUS citizens would step up alot if we were directly attacked.
I'm wondering how long we can sit around and watch smaller countries like eSwitzerland be corrupted and still last.
Here, here...to knightav!
Finally some common sense.
Perhaps an overthrow of our existing government and its leadership would be better for all of us!!!
alby I do believe the total $ snatched was 160 thousand, though I may be wrong. I think it was also about 3k gold though.
deflatoin/inflatoin doesn't really effect (except in extreme cases) the state of the market. yes, prices go up and down but then so do wages. What it DOES effect is import/export advantages which deflation would be a detriment to exporting.
You're right they could severely deflate the market which in such a severe case could cause problems. I believe that 57,000 would cause some issues, but not as much as you'd think (I would think the eUS citizens hold a lot more $ than that).
They can deflate OR inflate the market as they see fit with the money. They inflated it. Yes, now they can deflate it again if they like. Disregardless the we want to rebuild a cushion and with that cushion be able to have our own control over the market.
Further, I'm sure that if the market is deflated in the future we can disburse the money we have into the market.
You make a good point I did not think about previously about the possibility of deflation, which taxation would not help.
The problem is that is not what we are facing currently and, really, we can't help deflation too much by dropping taxes and we can recover from deflation by disbursing money, whereas inflation can only be fought via the long road.
The reserves will build up to a suitable level over time (as they did to this point). That's perfectly fine. Tax levels would stay the same and we would continue to be able to buy defense systems, hospitals, and weapons albeit more slowly.
The problem is the attempt to immediately recover the reserves by forcefully extracting them from the economy. We are raping the market for what amounts to be an illusion of security.
Peter, "overthrowing" the government won't do anything if all you do is talk about how bad it is and I have not heard your own plan on how things would be better, thank you.
knight, another good point, the security is not instantaneous but atleast it will be quicker than otherwise.
I agree with you on the ill economy effects. Really I think nobody disagrees that they exist. However as stated in my article a smaller tax increase would have been better.
good point Bank, although it isn't too hard for a government to get that gold it isn't pocket change and it wouldn't hurt us as much as you would probably think. The money will be re-released through time to get gold restored.
voted 🙂