Re: TAX EDU: ( was Compulsory service)

Michael Lorrey (
Tue, 22 Apr 1997 18:10:08 -0400 wrote:
> In a message dated 97-04-22 14:56:29 EDT, you write:
> > twice as much
> > money is stolen from working families as is necessary for education,
> So simplistic. Half truth.Somewhat valid comment made less valid by
> oversimplifying relationships. Context dropped intentionally.

True, its a half truth, because the multiplier effects of taxation at
every level of the economy causes people to pay an average of 60% more
than true market cost for anything they buy. THis means that not only is
50% of your income being taken by government in direct taxes of various
kinds, but 60% of the remainder is being taken indirectly. Essentially
people live on 20% of their earnings, while the government lives on the
other 80%. Makes me almost yearn for the middle ages, when we mere
peasants only expected 10% of their earnings to be taken each year.
> Some families likely feel this is stealing - and the compulsary nature of
> taxation does not work out for everyone. This is a valid point. Some find it
> acceptable, others not.
> Qualified in that light it *could* be fairly called stealing.
> But not if I agree to pay it willingly. And I would.

Yes, many women voluntarily stay with the husbands and boyfreinds who
beat them regularly too.

> However, among those who favor educational taxation, some agree that if it
> was spent better, we would willingly pay for social institutions like
> schools, and would even spend *more* on education ( for the selfish reason of
> wanting a better, more advanced society) - even some who do not have school
> aged children. The problem is far more complex, and in most debates,
> arguments abound as to where and how the money is misused and if private
> sector schools not controlled by and involving less govt. money would be
> better.
> Then we get into voluntary taxation, trusts, school bonds, vouchers, etc.
> GC

I think that the comparison between public and private education is an
excellent example of where free society out performs compulsory society
in every way. Taxation for education probably would be spent more
efficiently if school systems had to compete with each other like
private insitutions do. As a contrast to our monopolistic primary
educational system, we can even look at publicly financed college
education, where colleges do not have guarranteed student bodies, and
have to compete with each other for customers. While our primary
educational system is considered the laughing stock of the
industrialized world, no one can say anything but praise for our college
system. We have free markets and competition to thank for that.

			Michael Lorrey
------------------------------------------------------------		Inventor of the Lorrey Drive

Mikey's Animatronic Factory My Own Nuclear Espionage Agency (MONEA) MIKEYMAS(tm): The New Internet Holiday Transhumans of New Hampshire (>HNH) ------------------------------------------------------------ #!/usr/local/bin/perl-0777---export-a-crypto-system-sig-RC4-3-lines-PERL @k=unpack('C*',pack('H*',shift));for(@t=@s=0..255){$y=($k[$_%@k]+$s[$x=$_ ]+$y)%256;&S}$x=$y=0;for(unpack('C*',<>)){$x++;$y=($s[$x%=256]+$y)%256; &S;print pack(C,$_^=$s[($s[$x]+$s[$y])%256])}sub S{@s[$x,$y]=@s[$y,$x]}