Honestly at this point you either seem like you’re trolling or you’re very passionate but haven’t done your research beyond reading a few articles years ago without following up or verifying their sources.
Then when people point out the flaws you go into personal attack mode
No one’s distorting your words, that’s literally what you said, you literally said the government could fund themselves through crowdfunding, it’s right there, you said it.
How the hell would that work. People already dodge taxes that they have required to pay, I WAS if you’re not required to pay taxes then they definitely won’t do it at all.
I don’t need to rearrange your words to make them sound stupid.
I said it can be one of the sources of income and it already is in the form of war bonds and donations.
How the hell would that work. People already dodge taxes that they have required to pay, I WAS if you’re not required to pay taxes then they definitely won’t do it at all.
Some dodge taxes, some donate. I’ve donated to some things. Many others did.
You need something, you want something done, you have a motivation.
But how is any of that better than the current system of taxes which will ensure they get money?
It doesn’t seem like relying on the good will of people could possibly work. And I don’t see how the richer incentivized to pay literally anybody anything at all.
This all seems like the sort of thing a hippie comes out with, but they’re allowed to come out with that kind of rubbish because their brains are permanently suzzled, so what’s your excuse?
But how is any of that better than the current system of taxes which will ensure they get money?
Ideological problem, where you can’t opt out.
It doesn’t seem like relying on the good will of people could possibly work. And I don’t see how the richer incentivized to pay literally anybody anything at all.
This has some similarities with wind as a source of renewable energy. It’s one of the inputs, not all of the budget.
In this particular line of the list there’s no incentive other than goodwill.
This all seems like the sort of thing a hippie comes out with, but they’re allowed to come out with that kind of rubbish because their brains are permanently suzzled, so what’s your excuse?
I don’t need any excuse for thinking about possible solutions. I’d argue people with such reactions to those do.
And since you said “this all”, other points are not reliant on goodwill. If by excuse you jokingly meant the reason we can’t do with usual taxes - because of corruption in the wide sense. Unfair advantages gotten by some companies paying full taxes and other getting exemptions in various ways, bribe money finding more targets in a complex bendable system, imbalance of interests affecting lawmakers though the way the budget is comprised.
Wait you’re calling us stupid and you think the government can fund themselves through crowdfunding.
The government tells people they no longer have to pay taxes but they can if they want. That’s your pitch is it?
I don’t.
Why can’t leftists argue without distorting their opponents’ words?
We aren’t distorting your words. Just rearranging them so your logic becomes clear.
Please, tell us what you exactly mean then.
How would crowdfunding work if it isn’t based on non-mandatory donations?
Removed by mod
Oh fuck this extremely salient point has changed my mind entirely.
It’s actually profound is what it was.
Removed by mod
You are sounding a bit SovCit adjacent in the old glaring-holes-in-your-theory kinda way
This is what’s called a strawman fallacy kids
I know what my words mean, so arguing to me about that is … (without insults) … never right.
Honestly at this point you either seem like you’re trolling or you’re very passionate but haven’t done your research beyond reading a few articles years ago without following up or verifying their sources.
Then when people point out the flaws you go into personal attack mode
Have you rehearsed this phrase before a mirror? I mean, where specifically in these insult exchanges was research required?
Also people don’t reason with “ahahaha, this has been disproved many times, everybody knows this”. Not all social changes since Lucian’s time I like.
There’s been one (1) person who came really pointing out something, which I gave answers for.
Okay
No one’s distorting your words, that’s literally what you said, you literally said the government could fund themselves through crowdfunding, it’s right there, you said it.
How the hell would that work. People already dodge taxes that they have required to pay, I WAS if you’re not required to pay taxes then they definitely won’t do it at all.
I don’t need to rearrange your words to make them sound stupid.
I said it can be one of the sources of income and it already is in the form of war bonds and donations.
Some dodge taxes, some donate. I’ve donated to some things. Many others did.
You need something, you want something done, you have a motivation.
It’s a part of a list.
But how is any of that better than the current system of taxes which will ensure they get money?
It doesn’t seem like relying on the good will of people could possibly work. And I don’t see how the richer incentivized to pay literally anybody anything at all.
This all seems like the sort of thing a hippie comes out with, but they’re allowed to come out with that kind of rubbish because their brains are permanently suzzled, so what’s your excuse?
Ideological problem, where you can’t opt out.
This has some similarities with wind as a source of renewable energy. It’s one of the inputs, not all of the budget.
In this particular line of the list there’s no incentive other than goodwill.
I don’t need any excuse for thinking about possible solutions. I’d argue people with such reactions to those do.
And since you said “this all”, other points are not reliant on goodwill. If by excuse you jokingly meant the reason we can’t do with usual taxes - because of corruption in the wide sense. Unfair advantages gotten by some companies paying full taxes and other getting exemptions in various ways, bribe money finding more targets in a complex bendable system, imbalance of interests affecting lawmakers though the way the budget is comprised.