OT: Sales Tax (Response)



On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 12:52:54 -0600, "jmcquown"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Remind me not to vote for you the next time you run for public office.

Maybe if you spent more time being policitally active<trying to lower taxes and spending> rather
than bragging about sticking other TN residents with your obligations....you wouldn't catch as
much heat.
 
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:55:51 GMT, "Peter Aitken"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>To liken a legal avoidance of sales tax to robbing a bank does not speak well for your mental
>capacity.

It's not LEGAL not evade paying sales/use taxes. That's the POINT. A person is STEALING from other
state residents when they don't pay their legal obligations in the form of taxes. It's no different
from reaching into a person's wallet/purse and taking money. That you can't see that says something
about your mental capacity.

>
>> There's always justifications available if you look for them.
>>
>
>Why don't you tell that to our president? Oh wait, he already knows.

Under the 2 wrongs make a right theory? Thanks for being another "justifier".
 
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 11:45:07 -0600, John Gaughan
<[email protected]> wrote:

>ga_dispatcher wrote:
>> I think bank robbers don't like to work either....much easier to steal from others.
>
>I think most taxes are similar to robbery. I am sick and tired of all these taxes, and I am willing
>to take fewer government services as compensation. Unfortunately neither the democrats nor the
>republicans are willing to cut the pork and other ****. When will big government ever end?

When the public actually starts to get involved in the political process and puts people in office
that do what we want them to do. Until then......

Personally....I don't like excessive taxes either....spending needs to be cut. But I certainly don't
like individuals bragging about how they are sticking others with even higher taxes than they would
otherwise have to pay.

Same thing with people who file false insurance claims. The other policy holders are the ones who
get higher premiums to pay those who steal from the insurance co. People need to take these things
personally....it's not some big faceless corp/govt that is being cheated. It's other consumers and
tax payers that are picking up the tab.
 
Siobhan Perricone wrote:>Shopping online doesn't make me avoid taxes at all. My state requires me to
>pay a tax for items I've purchased online and haven't paid sales tax on. If you don't want to keep
>track of your purchases through the year, they have a formula you can use that's based on your
>income, and you pay that. It's called a "use" tax.

You actually pay use tax on your state income taxes? My state has use tax and I never pay it.
There's no way they can check up on it unless they passed a federal law that required every SINGLE
merchant in the country to send them a list of names of people who bought items and the states these
people live in.
 
"jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>> "jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> It is not in the name of tax evasion but rather in the name of *hate to shop*
>>>
>>> Jill
>>>
>>>
>>
>> If you buy from a business that has a "presence" in your state, they are required to collect the
>> tax anyway. Not every mail order purchase is tax free. Ed
>
> Indeed... I often buy online from companies that have stores just a few miles away. I could have
> walked into a store and bought this computer by Dell, for example. I chose not to. Paid the sales
> tax. Ditto my lingerie from Victoria's Secret; there is a store not far from where I work. Choose
> not to. I pay my share of taxes, never fear.
>
> Jill
>
>
>

If the State was worried about it there would be an accounting paid by the store you bought from on-
line...Which of course the store would pass along to you.

--
Once during Prohibition I was forced to live for days on nothing but food and water.
--------
FIELDS, W. C.
 
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 19:42:27 GMT, hahabogus <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>If the State was worried about it there would be an accounting paid by the store you bought from
>on-line...Which of course the store would pass along to you.

The state of TN has no authority on businesses not located<nexus> in the state of TN. SO the state
of TN REQUIRES TN residents to pay the USE tax due.

Where did you get the idea that the state of TN<other other states> have the right to force any
company without nexus in that state to do anything including collecting taxes?

Apparently the state was worried enough about USE tax that they passed a law requiring it's
collection when it passed the Sales tax laws. USE tax is nothing new....it's been in the books as
long as Sales tax...

Apparently you need to look into the definition of personal responsibility. It's not always someone
else/company/govt that needs to be there spoonfeeding a person info on their obligations.
 
"ravinwulf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 13:20:20 -0600, John Gaughan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >We could do a lot to cut spending while not giving anything up, but it will never happen because
> >the people want "free" **** from the government.
>
> And worse, the vast majority of the people wanting "free" **** aren't the same ones paying
> taxes. :p
>
> Tracy R.
>

That's not true. You qualify for SS only if you have paid into the system. In any case, even if what
you say is true in part, so what? That's the way it is supposed to work. To their great credit, most
Americans have decided that it is OK for the better off to help the less well off. If you are
concerned about your tax bill perhaps you ought to work to see that corporations and billionaires
pay a reasonable share and stop worrying about the pittance that poor people get.

--
Peter Aitken

Remove the **** from my email address before using.
 
"John Gaughan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> ga_dispatcher wrote:
> > I think bank robbers don't like to work either....much easier to steal from others.
>
> I think most taxes are similar to robbery. I am sick and tired of all these taxes, and I am
> willing to take fewer government services as compensation. Unfortunately neither the democrats nor
> the republicans are willing to cut the pork and other ****. When will big government ever end?
>
> --

I sympathize with your opinion but am curious - what services exactly are you willing to do without?
This has to be a service that you actually get, not something that other people get and you don't.
It's easy for a comfortable middle-class person to say "cut welfare" or for a 20 year old to say
"cut social security," but when it comes to cutting something that you benefit from, people are a
lot less forthcoming.

I am certainly not saying that government spending is all justified. I'd like to see agriculture and
other subsidies eliminated, as well as tax laws and loopholes that let billionaires and hugely
profitable corporations avoid paying their share of taxes (not technically a government expense but
it works out the same). There are lots of other examples. But in my experience, people who complain
about high taxes are suddenly very quiet when asked for specific programs to cut. They are equally
quiet when asked how many letters or calls thay have made to to their state and federal
representatives.

--
Peter Aitken

Remove the **** from my email address before using.
 
in article [email protected], Peter Aitken at
[email protected] wrote on 2/22/04 3:08 PM:

> "ravinwulf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 13:20:20 -0600, John Gaughan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> We could do a lot to cut spending while not giving anything up, but it will never happen because
>>> the people want "free" **** from the government.
>>
>> And worse, the vast majority of the people wanting "free" **** aren't the same ones paying
>> taxes. :p
>>
>> Tracy R.
>>
>
> That's not true. You qualify for SS only if you have paid into the system. In any case, even if
> what you say is true in part, so what? That's the way it is supposed to work. To their great
> credit, most Americans have decided that it is OK for the better off to help the less well off. If
> you are concerned about your tax bill perhaps you ought to work to see that corporations and
> billionaires pay a reasonable share and stop worrying about the pittance that poor people get.
>

I'm all in favor of helping out those less fortunate who cannot provide for themselves.

But what burns my ass is when people lie about their qualifications for assistance, for example, by
living in a two income household but only declaring their own income. I know someone who lives with
her boyfriend and their 1 yr old child. They are not married, and it's only HER name on the lease.
She gets Section 8 (which is a govt program that pays rent for low income people, usually with
children), WIC (nutritious, basic foods like milk, juice, fruit and cereal are paid for by the
government for women with infants and children), energy assistance from the electric utility, etc.
She works, but is way underpaid, through no fault of her own, her boss is a miser.

They have no intention, btw, of getting married. Why should they? If they do, they lose all their
"benefits". Which people like you and I are paying for.
 
ga_dispatcher <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 19:42:27 GMT, hahabogus <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>If the State was worried about it there would be an accounting paid by the store you bought from
>>on-line...Which of course the store would pass along to you.
>
> The state of TN has no authority on businesses not located<nexus> in the state of TN. SO the state
> of TN REQUIRES TN residents to pay the USE tax due.
>
> Where did you get the idea that the state of TN<other other states> have the right to force any
> company without nexus in that state to do anything including collecting taxes?
>
> Apparently the state was worried enough about USE tax that they passed a law requiring it's
> collection when it passed the Sales tax laws. USE tax is nothing new....it's been in the books as
> long as Sales tax...
>
> Apparently you need to look into the definition of personal responsibility. It's not always
> someone else/company/govt that needs to be there spoonfeeding a person info on their obligations.
>
>
>

Isn't it part of the federal inter state comerce regulartory board, or what ever...? Up here in
Canada the Provinces have rules and regulation on that stuff. So they must talk over what businesses
must do if Shipping to another Province. Sure if I buy stuff in a drugstore in Alberta I'll not pay
provincial taxes but if I buy stuff from a store that regularly ships stuff I will.

--
Once during Prohibition I was forced to live for days on nothing but food and water.
--------
FIELDS, W. C.
 
jmcquown wrote:

> Let me state this plainly: I don't buy online to avoid sales tax, although that is certainly a
> benefit. I buy online because I do NOT like to shop! You won't catch me in a Mall, WalMart or
> whatever. I buy everything online, even my pet food. The only stores I go to are the grocery store
> (which is rare and then I stock up) and the drug store to pick up prescriptions. Period. It is not
> in the name of tax evasion but rather in the name of *hate to shop*
>
> Jill
>

You realize the self-rightious bickering is gonna go on for *days* now? :-(

Bob
 
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 20:08:21 GMT, "Peter Aitken"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"ravinwulf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 13:20:20 -0600, John Gaughan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >We could do a lot to cut spending while not giving anything up, but it will never happen because
>> >the people want "free" **** from the government.
>>
>> And worse, the vast majority of the people wanting "free" **** aren't the same ones paying
>> taxes. :p
>>
>> Tracy R.
>>
>
>That's not true. You qualify for SS only if you have paid into the system. In any case, even if
>what you say is true in part, so what? That's the way it is supposed to work. To their great
>credit, most Americans have decided that it is OK for the better off to help the less well off. If
>you are concerned about your tax bill perhaps you ought to work to see that corporations and
>billionaires pay a reasonable share and stop worrying about the pittance that poor people get.

********. I can name dozens of people getting various government "benefits" who never paid jack into
the system. Take my husband's ex for instance. She had 7 kids with 6 different daddies after she ran
out on him, and lived on welfare (and child support) until they kicked her worthless ass off it
(years later); I have no doubt she wouldn't be working today if she had any alternative. She
complains a lot these days about how broke she is. Well, duh! And she deserves all the hard times
she gets; she created them for herself (and everyone else who has the misfortune to have gotten
entangled with her, I might add.) I'm not opposed to paying social security to old or disabled
folks; I'm opposed to paying the various forms of welfare to young, able bodied people who are too
damn lazy or conniving to work. And don't kid yourself, there are =plenty= of them out there.

Tracy R.
 
John Gaughan wrote:
>
> ga_dispatcher wrote:
> > I think bank robbers don't like to work either....much easier to steal from others.
>
> I think most taxes are similar to robbery. I am sick and tired of all these taxes, and I am
> willing to take fewer government services as compensation.

Which??? Schools? Police? Fire department? Highways? Postal service? Street plowing/repair? Water
treament? Sewage? Airport safety/regulation? Food/drug safety? FDIC? Code enforcement? Public
records keeping? Zoning? Courts/judicial system? Defense/military? Unemployment compensation?
Retirement benefits?
 
zxcvbob wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>
>> Let me state this plainly: I don't buy online to avoid sales tax
>>
>> Jill
>>
>
>
> You realize the self-rightious bickering is gonna go on for *days* now? :-(
>
> Bob

Sorry, Bob. I've been trying to post food related items and recipes since this but this ga-guy
won't give up.

Jill
 
hahabogus wrote:

> If the State was worried about it there would be an accounting paid by the store you bought from
> on-line...Which of course the store would pass along to you.

It will come. Some already do collect to avoid potential problems.

--
Ed [email protected] http://pages.cthome.net/edhome
 
Peter Aitken wrote:
>
> I sympathize with your opinion but am curious - what services exactly are you willing to do
> without? This has to be a service that you actually get, not something that other people get and
> you don't.

Steet lighting is a good start. Get rid of some of the "fluff" courses in schools and stick to basic
education. Take a look at any town/county/state/fedral budget and I'd bet you can cut 25% and not
reallly hurt anyone but the state worker that is not needed to provide oversight of programs that
are not needed.

Much of it could be eliminated. How about some of the funded "studies" that are useless but keep
some university professor employed? -- Ed [email protected] http://pages.cthome.net/edhome
 
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:50:12 -0600, "jmcquown"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Sorry, Bob. I've been trying to post food related items and recipes since this but this ga-guy
>won't give up.

As long as you deny and try to stick others with your obligations.....

See what braggiing about stealing from others gets you???
 
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 21:12:31 GMT, Puester <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Which??? Schools?
Private schools...let the parents pay for their own kids education. Let's not stick it to the
property owners....many of whom have no kids....and definitely have fewer kids than non-
property owners.

>Police?

While worthwhile there's also private security possibilities.

>Fire department?

Private fire depts have been done in the past.....such was the case in my area in the past.

>Highways?

Toll roads? Highway use fees?

>Postal service?

Email? UPS/FedEX?

>Street plowing/repair?

Private services...or live in a place where thsi isn;t an issue....snow...blah.....

>Water treament?

private wells?

>Sewage?

Septic tanks?

>Airport safety/regulation?

Compared to the federal rent a cops we have now?

>Food/drug safety?
private firms like UL?

>FDIC?

Private insurance co's?

>Code enforcement?

Existing housing inspectors? Don't pass code then you won't get a loan,,....

>Public records keeping?

Private credit reporting firms?

>Zoning?

Actually allowing property owners to do with their property as they wish? <faint> If you don't own
it....you shouldn't have the right to say what's done with it in my view.

>Courts/judicial system?

Pay per use fees? Private binding agreements?

>Defense/military?

Likely something that needs to be on a national basis.....but there might be other options.

>Unemployment compensation?

Savings?

>Retirement benefits?

Savings?
 
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 20:46:45 GMT, hahabogus <[email protected]> wrote:

>Isn't it part of the federal inter state comerce regulartory board, or what ever...?

Nope.

>Up here in Canada the Provinces have rules and regulation on that stuff

Down here there's many 1000's of tax jurisdictions and each has their own rules/regulations.

http://www.turbotax.com/articles/FAQonSalesandUseTaxesandtheInternet.html

>. So they must talk over what businesses must do if Shipping to another Province.

Not the case in the USA.
 
ga_dispatcher wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:50:12 -0600, "jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Sorry, Bob. I've been trying to post food related items and recipes since this but this ga-guy
>>won't give up.
>
>
> As long as you deny and try to stick others with your obligations.....
>
> See what braggiing about stealing from others gets you???
>
>

See what I mean about self-righteousness?

Best regards, Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back