Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Recalculations place it at 0.4999.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


             

Civil-Service Forfeiture Law

Allows citizens to reject certain rights in return for tax-reduction.
  (+1, -4)
(+1, -4)
  [vote for,
against]

This law would allow citizens to voluntarily forfeit their right to certain services provided by local and Federal governments and thus be allowed to pay less taxes. For example, a citizen who does not own a car could give up his right to use the American highway system in return for a yearly tax-reduction of a certain size. However, the question remains as to whether governments could continue to provide public services if they were financed only by those who actually use them (or wish to be able to - i.e. the services of firefighters.)
dsm, Dec 21 2000

[link]






       I don't think anyone should have a choice about getting a response from emergency services. An out-of-control fire can spread to other buildings, uninvestigated crimes can lead to sprees and escalated losses, etc.   

       My question about taxes is this: is it possible to find a worthy charity and donate such a gob of money to that that you actually get a refund on your taxes? That seems like a good way to make sure your money is going to a good cause.
centauri, Dec 21 2000
  

       The way donations work in this part of the world is that you just don't pay taxes on the money you give to charity; there's no way to wholly redirect your taxes. Anyway, it's not always easy to be sure that charities will spend money wisely, and governments really do need taxes for good reasons -- they don't rush out every April and drop it all on hookers and blow.   

       This idea sounds like especially badly-thought-out libertarianism. If you just want toll highways and lower taxes, that's not unreasonable; but I get the impression that you've got a lot more services in mind (firefighters?).
Monkfish, Dec 21 2000
  

       Here's a better idea (I think) but along the same lines. Say you were in a line to get new tags for your car and when it gets to be your turn the clerk is hardly civil (they are supposed to be civil servants after all) then you would be able to claim your tags for free. Likewise if the IRS inspector were nasty to you then you'd be forgiven your taxes for the year. While I don't mind paying taxes, I expect service and the person serving to be civil, after all I am paying their salary.
Jonathan, Dec 22 2000
  

       It's people like you who made the service industry what it is today. For shame.
Detly, Dec 22 2000
  

       No, no, no! This is a good idea. Just remember that if you turn down certain emergency services, related insurance rates to cover collateral damages caused by your lack of participation will increase exponentially.   

       This is bleeding edge rugged individualism! Although I'd rather use my credit to not participate in support of the public school system.
wasraw, Dec 22 2000
  

       All in all, this idea does not work. Only a complete recluse is not dependant on society in some way. If you don't have a car, you still need roads. That is, if you want to have your trash collected, to be able to take the bus, to be able to get further than you can walk.
Another good example is education. Without paying some for younger people's education, we would be left with fewer competent professionals in any field, a detrement to the entire society. There is *no* area of government that does not concern everybody somehow.
badoingdoing, Dec 23 2000
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle