Bob Calco wrote: > Leland: > > History quiz for you: On what did the federal government subsist, and more > importantly _why_, prior to 1913? > > - Bob > I'm not exactly sure of the answer to your question, but I'm sure your going to tell me. Anyway, my guess would be that at some point after the American revolution and independence, the USA created its own currency. Perhaps the USA government was financed by deficits and individual contributions before the income tax system was developed.
Regards, LelandJ > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Leland F. Jackson, CPA > Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2007 12:03 AM > To: ProFox Email List > Subject: Re: [OT] Question for the economists > > Following along the line of thought from my previous post, if every > business, whether incorporated or no, passed their income tax back to > the consumer, any advantage gained by entity A from passing it income > taxes, or income tax increases, to others would be lost, when entity A > in turned purchased the raw materials, labor, services, and parts it > needed from outside entities B, C, D, E, ..., that also includes income > tax ,or income tax increase, in their products, so it become an exercise > in futility, where all the passing around of income taxes cancels out > with increase in sales price of products, offset by increase in cost of > good and services purchased from outside businesses due to income taxes > being passed around. > > Carrying the concepts on to the next logical step, the question then has > to be asked whether the payment of income taxes is really and expense; > since, the payment to the government is on our own behalf for good and > services that we ask the government to provide. Examples of the things > we ask the government to provide the people are universal health care, > social security, a military to protect the country and subdue the > killing going on in Iraq, agencies to regulate the environment and > protect against global warming, the cost of the executive, legislative > and judicial branches of government, the cost of agencies to regulate > agriculture, labor, Justice Department, etc. The money we pay Uncle Sam > is on our own behalf , and the value come right back to you and I, who > are benefited. In effect, when we pay taxes, we are paying money to > ourself. > > The big difference between income tax and regular expense is regular > expenses we pay someone else benefits them, but the money we pay in > taxes is money we pay to ourself for our own benefit. This make income > taxes, even if viewed as an expense, a special kind of outlay. > > Regards, > > LelandJ > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> The involved explanations of the benign nature of corporate taxation are >> > ample illustrations of academic and government speak. You can go into all > kinds of verbal gyrations, but the fact remains that unless the law of > supply and demand is in strong opperation in the competitive free market > world, an increase in expense (and as was said before, a tax is an expense > to a corporation as well as to myself) will cause an increase in price. > Hence, corporations do not pay taxes, consumers pay the taxes for them. > >> Think of it this way, if the corps did not have to pay taxes, in a >> > competitive world, the prices would go down. > >> Larry Miller >> >> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- >> multipart/alternative >> text/plain (text body -- kept) >> text/html >> --- >> >> [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
