Live data from Hacker News

Thanks For Paying Taxes. Here's A Receipt.

npr.org

171–180 of 194 posts

Re: Thanks For Paying Taxes. Here's A Receipt.

#171
post #54
post #19

Nice viral night's project would be building a simple yourtaxreceipt.com website, reverse engineering those numbers and making a calculator.

Your wish is my command: http://www.incometaxreceipt.com

I emailed Jacob @ NPR (article writer) as well as the paper authors, share stats if you would as they come in -

Re: Thanks For Paying Taxes. Here's A Receipt.

#172
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there's a return policy then most people are going to be asking for a return on everything .

Which begs the question, why are we forced to pay for something we would just return anyways?

so that we have pavements rather than dirty earth to walk on.

Re: Thanks For Paying Taxes. Here's A Receipt.

#173
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you that the Republicans aren't going to do much of what I want. I don't agree that all politicians are Democrats or Republicans, or that it's pointless to speak about issues where the parties in power aren't making good proposals.

"I don't agree that all politicians are Democrats or Republicans, or that it's pointless to speak about issues where the parties in power aren't making good proposals." I didn't suggest that it was. I just think that if we're going to have an intellectually honest discussion about the matter, we have to disregard most of the Republican party rhetoric: the poor are not the problem. The elderly are the problem. As far…

It's not the elderly's fault that bad laws make them expensive. Elderly people aren't a problem, bad laws are.

Obviously poor people aren't the problem either -- personally I want to see far more immigration of poor people who want American jobs (yes I want rich immigrants too ofc) -- but inefficient govt programs like food stamps and unemployment benefits do cost a lot of money.

The problem is the govt and its mistaken idea that redistributing wealth can help people. It doesn't. It destroys wealth. We'd all be way better off if they'd never done it in the first place, including the poor and elderly. (Now we have transition issues. We need to abolish it in a way that doesn't screw people who are relying on it.)

Re: Thanks For Paying Taxes. Here's A Receipt.

#174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but there's an easy solution: take out a loan in your yet-to-be-born grandkids' name.

...after all, they benefit by their mother/father having a college education......

I suppose you have no problem with the underlying assumption in this scheme, which is that adults should be treated like children.

Re: Thanks For Paying Taxes. Here's A Receipt.

#176

Take it one step further and let people specify what their money goes to. Automate the politicians!

À la carte governance might be a good idea (though it sounds likely to produce the largest expansion of the IRS anyone has ever seen), but is there any empirical information on the use of such a system in governance? It is not too much to ask that the idea be tested and proven on smaller levels.

Re: Thanks For Paying Taxes. Here's A Receipt.

#177
post #163
post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your scenarios, while technically accurate, leave something out. Here's another version: D) Your child spends his/her high-school years mowing lawns, doing part-time jobs, etc, in order to save some money to help pay their way through college. You encourage them to do so. The money earned is put in a jar. You take that money, replace it with an IOU, and use it to pay for household expenses along with more frivolous t…

I think government t-bills are a little more reliable than a hand-scrawled IOU note in a jar.

Maybe for an independent investor. But how can a t-bill be an investment for the government itself?

I am naively assuming that what backs the value of a t-bill is the US government's ability to accrue future tax revenue to pay it back.

What is it that makes a t-bill owed to Social security an investment rather than a tax deficit when it comes time to cut a social security check?

Re: Thanks For Paying Taxes. Here's A Receipt.

#178
post #155
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is what I was about to post, but instead of 20-30%, make it 51%. Allow taxpayers to decide where (the broad categories the receipt listed are a perfect starting point) their tax dollars are going. The remaining 49% can be discretionary, let the government decide where that goes: fill in the gaps for items needed, but that no one wants to pay for. Such a policy would give people a sense of power over the mone…

But then the rich would have a lot more power over the budget then the poor.

Well, that's already the case, but I agree in that this would make it considerably worse. If you look at the government as legal force, then this scheme would amount to paying for influence over a group with legal force.

Re: Thanks For Paying Taxes. Here's A Receipt.

#179
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Social Security were a private company it would be considered a pyramid scheme and shut down. Imagine someone published a Fidelity internal memo to Wikileaks stating that all shareholders under age 40 were required to keep investing 12.5% of their salary every month, could not sell, and would receive a negative return upon reaching retirement age. It's so fafetched it's laughable. I don't have a problem with the g…

Well, for the record, SS is a very conservative market investment -- the surplus is invested in government T-bills every year, that's as conservative as you can get. Of course then people turn around and say it's the government writing itself checks or they're worthless IOUs or something. As far as the finances, as I understand things, simply raising the cap on income would extend things out a bit, FICA doesn't get c…

> As far as the finances, as I understand things, simply raising the cap on income would extend things out a bit, FICA doesn't get collected past 105k or something.

Since benefits are roughly related to FICA, extending the cap doesn't help much. It helps some, because the benefits system is progressive, in that folks who contribute a lot get less return on their contributions than folks who contribute just a little, but ....

The folks who designed SS thought that the cap was essential. Their argument was that SS wouldn't survive if it paid folks like Ross Perot $500k/year in benefits or if it was a tax with no benefits to folks like Ross Perot. The cap means that Perot doesn't get $500k/year but don't care because he didn't put much in.

Are they wrong?

Re: Thanks For Paying Taxes. Here's A Receipt.

#180
There's a lot of naive love here for a deeply flawed idea.

First, what is suggested in this article is not a receipt, but a breakdown. A sales receipt for a car, for example, doesn't start out, "5 tires (4 on vehicle, 1 spare), 2 axles..." It just doesn't work that way. You buy "government" with your taxes.

Even if you did get an itemized receipt for a car, that would be far easier than what's proposed here. You can always just point to the car and account for the parts. The part is either there or not, and meets specifications or not. The reason that government and spending are these intractable issues is that the parts can be arguably there or not, and arguably working or not.

As long as you can't opt out of all or a portion of your taxes, in other words, as long as tax policy is sane, the only "receipt" you should get should specify that you paid the amount you calculated. Any other discussion or education about costs and allotment should happen in a forum that at least has a chance of shedding some real light.

Finally, if the receipt ever became the focus of public attention, politicians will just monkey with the categories until you're happy again. It will cease to be an information tool and become an influence tool. It will merely add another layer of intractability to an already byzantine bureaucratic system.

Post reply on HN