What are the benefits of taxes?
So, a simple idea: The government can simply commission things. It can theoretically legally oblige companies to simply do things (e.g., repair a highway). Since such orders don't go down so well, it's better to commission and pay for things the traditional way.
The government can simply print the money for this. Or, theoretically, simply order the banks to "add amount X to company ABC's account (without any money being deducted from anywhere).
But he doesn't.
Instead, it becomes very classic, as if the state itself were just like a person or company, transferring money from its account to that of company ABC. And where does the money come from? Exactly, from those who pay taxes.
In effect, I can buy less ice cream and cinema tickets because part of the money I earn has to be given to the government so that highways, etc., can be maintained.
And that's the part I don't understand: What sense does this connection make? Why should I be able to afford less just because something completely independent is being done somewhere else? Why should I have to "tighten my belt" so that tar can be rolled out somewhere? I'm not asking from a libertarian anti-tax stance, but I simply want to understand the connection, why this is (supposedly) necessary. Because in my opinion, the one has nothing to do with the other. If I work as a gardener, for example, then in a sense I'm using my taxes to work part of my time not for myself, but for the state. But does the state or society really benefit from me being able to afford less? Why don't they just let me do whatever I want, and handle what the state wants to commission differently?
(1 votes)
Loading...
Can he, we are not a villain
In the end, the laundry basket in which the money is transported is worth more than the money itself. We’ve had everything
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation_in_the_Weimar_Republic?wprov=sfla1
I’ll try it with the fruit
Taxes are means which the State collects in order to provide services to the Community. These include basic medical care, infrastructure, training, defence etc.
The argument that its own performance would go down so that the state’s goes out is nonsense.
Let’s see if things are needed to maintain the ability to lead:
Without this all, its own performance would in general hardly be retrieved at all.
In fact, we have no personal influence on whether the local airport is built expensively by dilettantic politicians and perhaps never opened. But only by the fact that we (you, I, etc pp) are in a community funded by taxes, leads to the conclusion of a kind of “contract”, of course you cannot choose your birth death (and therefore your country). But this “contract” allows us to use all of the infrastructure financed by taxes (inefficiently, if necessary) and, in some ways, obliges us to pay taxes.
Taxes are therefore a countervailing for the services and services received by the State (even if §3 AO defines this somewhat differently).
Sounds good, but the whole state apparatus with its salaries…
that answers the question now how?
That there are more objections than one wants to perceive
Taxes are actually intended – as the name says – to control something, that is to say it is taxed slightly higher if it is undesirable (bake, fossil fuels…) or lower if not (basic food…).
Of course, you can argue why work is taxed so high, after all, work should be desired, but anyone will have thought about it.
The state provides infrastructure, from roads, via public transport to schools, courts, water etc., that must be paid somehow. Simply creating money from nothing, as needed, would lead to massive inflation, as taxes are better.
Of course, taxes are not only roads built, but they are still much more recklessly wasted USA, 1 billion against law, Islamism, antifa, any promotions, bullshit, as can be seen in real madness, and on top of that there are still legal broadcasting for public public a Zwnagstax on top.
If you make money, inflation will rise even more. In addition, Germany owes itself to the central banks. Like when you take credit. In the end, the blow hits us.
He can’t. In any case, not in a state of law like the Federal Republic of Germany.
Enchanting the money – in an answer!
First of all, roads are no longer destined because carcinogenic. Instead, you take bitumen.
With regard to taxes: who should the state commit to building roads? Only the specialist companies or all companies? And if the companies refuse what sanctions should there be?
I don’t even say that the state is supposed to commit it, but to conjure the money. have you not read the question correctly?
Upstairs there was “theoretical obligation”. I asked.
So who should build the streets?
The existing tax system is necessary because no better one has yet been invented. And as long as there is no better one has to go on with the existing system.
I have nothing to control I just want to understand the mechanism behind it why it is absolutely necessary and no other way
It’s clear to me and he’s comprehensible. Paying taxes, which is annoying especially when you have nothing directly from it.
But the question must still be allowed: who builds roads that are not used equally by all?
that is 1 thought construct for building up the man but not more actual point, the question is in the lower paragraph. Mannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
Never visited a library? The tax money is not just going to the streets, Dumbatz!
pars pro toto. the question also applies to everything else. Why does it need to control it and cannot simply be “printed”?