Taxman goes after small guy again - leaving giant tax avoiders alone

There isn't a pure Libertarian country anywhere to match her "ideology" (rehashed Ayn Rand) but some are trying. Right now I am outraged that she has the cheek to use the internet, which was developed by taxpayers money in the US and by international universities (heavily subsidised) and government programmes. Don't go around thinking just because you pay a tenner a month for broadband that you are paying the whole cost.

And if you couldn't be treated and passed away before you made the payment - that would be a waste of other people's money..

In all honesty, everyone moans about paying for the NHS but tax goes towards a range of services in our country too so realistically, you're probably not paying THAT much towards the NHS specifically each month

Haha, what?! Of course I pay the full cost. I pay for the provision of internet services and that's what I get.

I didn't pay for the research and development that went into the creation of the internet, no... but if the people who created the internet wanted to make a proprietary venture out of it, they could have, and I would be paying for it, but they didn't.

I can't be held responsible for their refusal to capitalise more majorly on their discovery.

But it's against your ideology to be taxed to pay for such things, so you should (to avoid hypocrisy) refuse to use services that were created by governmental action. This also applies to your university, unless you are some "private" university.

It's a very sad state of affairs when somebody is in this situation, but I'm not responsible for their circumstances - I never put them in that position and I'm not the one that's keeping them in that position.

I do feel for these people, but I don't accept responsibility for their troubles, and I'm certainly not going to take financial responsibility for their lack of resources. Why should I?

Considering so many roads, schools, airports etc. were only built using taxes, your point makes no sense as well, however as for your exceedingly right wing view on society, if you are made redundant and you realise how few jobs are available, will you be claiming JSA? Guess who pays for that.....

When people say they would just 'pay as they go' with nhs treatments I think they underestimate how expensive it actually can be. For how much the nhs can pay for an individual's treatment we pay very little towards it. Yesterday I gave someone just one IV that would have cost him £4000. He has this every day and that is ONE part of his treatment. Could the poster who is claiming he would pay as and when he used the nhs really afford this? I think probably not. I hope most of us never get something like lymphoma but I know I'm glad I won't have to worry about paying for my treatment if I do. A few pound a month is definately worth it in my opinion.

And as for going private, you know when they mess up? Guess where they send you.

So what though? Even if the price was sky-high, shouldn't I reserve the autonomy to pay for MY medical care where and when I need it, and not pay ALL my life for medical care that I may never use?

Shouldn't that be my choice?!

YOU WILL HAVE MEDICAL CARE, YOU WILL HAVE IT AT THIS PRICE, AND YOU WILL PAY FOR IT VIA TAX, ETC.

It's just ridiculous.

Yes... and I already pay for all that through tax. And when you pay for it through tax there's an additional and unnecessary party who also want their cut - the government, the politicians, etc.

If I paid for my own medical care and got back all my taxes that aren't currently spent on the wasteful NHS, then I'm sure my medical care would be much cheaper. Sure, there are vulnerable people who aren't as well-off as me and couldn't afford a single penny towards their own healthcare - but quite frankly, that's not my problem, and I resent the government for assuming that I accept it as my problem and assuming that I'd be willing to pay to fix that problem.

Even if I did accept it as my problem, I'd prefer a system where everybody who can afford it takes on the healthcare responsibility for one other person who can't, and pays privately, again missing out the money-thirsty middle-man that is the government.

I can see where our tax goes - I just think there are much better alternatives to the system of getting the government to buy my things for me, but also taking their own cut, and spending a lot of the money I gave them on people other than myself.

I reject the notion that I have a social responsibility for others in terms of their healthcare and education. That may not be a popular opinion, but why should it be regarded as illegitimate? Why should it be okay for the government to mow my opinion down and coerce money from me regardless?

Surely to **** I should be allowed to sign up to a system which reflects my own ideology, as long as it's not criminally harming anybody?

I want to opt out of the NHS because I don't want to use it and I don't want to pay for it - same goes for many other "services". I reckon I'd get cheaper deals elsewhere without having to pay any middle-men, and without my payment stretching to pay for services for others. That would be in line with my ideology and I don't see why that can't be respected.

I pay for that... while I'm working.

You're not getting this are you? If the amount of tax I paid towards the welfare state was given back to me, I'd have several years work of JSA payments there.

This tax money doesn't come from thin air - I PAY FOR IT. And if I didn't pay for it, then I wouldn't need things like JSA, or state healthcare, or state schools, etc.

And whose fault is it that there are so few jobs? Oh yeah, it's the people that we pay taxes to in trust that they'll use it to stop our country entering the situation that it's entered into - well, that worked didn't it.

Government doesn't work. Taxes are theft, and the autonomy of the individual is paramount.

As for 'right-wing', first of all you don't know the meaning of the term - something you've read in the Sun probably. And secondly, if politics was so simple as to fit snugly into a one-dimensional or even two-dimensional scale, then the act of government would be a lot easier to apply.

What I am proposing is libertarianism... which, if you are so narrow-minded as not to be able to imagine anything that doesn't exist on a 1D scale, is about as left-wing as it gets.

Your idea also makes no sense for children born without parents to support them. You could leave them with child care? Oh wait....taxes pay for that.

Ayn Rand was callous and ruthless - followers of her "philosophy" are uninterested in the fate of the poor, as they "deserve it" by not achieving enough or just having been born with the wrong genes. It's basically a neo-Nazi position, the weak go under and the strong dominate.

Listening to people with this philosophy really makes you wonder about humanity

I describe you as right wing because in your belief in supporting yourself, the government has no responsibility for your wellbeing. THAT'S RIGHT WING. You haven't actually answered my original question, would you claim it? Your idea also makes no sense for children born without parents to support them. You could leave them with child care? Oh wait....taxes pay for that.

Yes, you made alot of sense in your second paragraph.....damn all those on the dole for stealing our jobs? Really?

Never mind the bankers, the wealthy paying 0.5% tax, governments awarding contracts to their mates, NO......it's the fault of those who got made redundant, damn them!

Sure, so long as you accept that when you are a hard-up pensioner or down on your luck, you will be left to rot in a pool of blood in the street.

I suspect our way is better.

I would accept that - and it would drive me not to be a hard-up pensioner down on my luck.

The fact that we have the NHS and we have the state pension, etc, just means we have too many people who rely too much on government handouts and don't support themselves. If these people were forced to make their own way and lie in their bed the way they made it, then things would be different, I'm sure.

People have no incentives to succeed on their own basis. Fortunately, I do, so I will never, ever, need the government.

I would accept that - and it would drive me not to be a hard-up pensioner down on my luck.

The fact that we have the NHS and we have the state pension, etc, just means we have too many people who rely too much on government handouts and don't support themselves. If these people were forced to make their own way and lie in their bed the way they made it, then things would be different, I'm sure.

People have no incentives to succeed on their own basis. Fortunately, I do, so I will never, ever, need the government.

If I fit into your narrow-minded political spectrum in that way then so be it - I don't really care what words you use to describe my position.

At the moment, yes, I certainly would claim it. Because:

a) I've put money into my pot (against my will, certainly), and in my view I deserve it back.

b) BECAUSE I've put that money into the pot, I don't have a stash of money saved away for a rainy day, which is the kind of cash I would use to support myself if the worst were to happen.

But I don't see myself ever being unable to make money. I've spent my whole life not only developing into a young professional in a thriving industry, but also developing a whole host of important and valuable skills. At that moment I make a tonne not just from my 'day job' but from a variety of services I provide to people in the evenings.

I'm not stupid or skill-less enough to ever be left unable to make money, debilitating illness/disability excluded.



I have no idea what you're on about ... I never said anything remotely like that in the post you're quoting .



Again, what?