Taxation CAN be ethical and legitimate... I just wish it actually were...

"ALL TAXATION IS THEFT!!!"

"TAXES ARE THE PRICE WE MUST PAY FOR CIVILIZATION!!!"

Hmmm... would it surprise you to learn that neither of those things are true... but that both are based on valid, and nonconflicting, principles?

... Yes, valid and non conflicting. Yes, even for libertarians and other individualists, not just statist and collectivists...

Being a libertarian... or even broader, being one who recognizes and accepts the notion of fundamental and inherent individual rights, regardless of ones political philosophy surrounding them... means that you must recognize that all people have equal rights, AND equal responsibilities.

It means you must recognize that the exercise of rights (even the right to attempt to continue living) has consequences, which we must own in the entire, as we own ourselves in the entire.

This includes recognizing and understanding that our actions, including those that are within and pursuant to our rights, DO impact others, including in ways which MAY create obligation.

Social debt is a real, valid, and legitimate concept; even... in fact especially...in a system of individual rights. To claim otherwise is to twist the notion of individual rights, and self ownership, to exclude certain cases of responsibilities and consequences... and to ignore basic economics for that matter.

Social debt is incurred by all who gain direct benefit or substantive indirect benefit, from a social good, or from the use of property held in common, even without their explicit consent; unless that social good is forced on them, both against their will, and without direct necessity.

For example, babies can't consent to incurring debt for police, courts, and national defense, however they both gain benefit from these social goods, and such costs are necessary to the functioning of society as it exists today (and it can be argued, some "things" which serve these unctions will always be necessary, as anarchy among a large population, always and inevitably results in the tyranny of the strong over the weak).

A man who is left unconscious, in the cold or heat, without food, water, and shelter, will die. If he is then given food, shelter, water, and medical care, necessary to sustain his life, he incurs debt for these goods, even though he did not consent to it. If he does not wish to accept such debt, then he must ensure that should he become unable to consent or refuse, that he be allowed to die rather than incurring such debt.

Of course... If "society", or the state, do not allow him to make this decision, to die rather than incur such debt... if we force him to accept such treatment against his will... then no debt is incurred. Otherwise, any debt whatsoever could be justified, by claiming it was necessary. This would abrogate the ownership of oneself, and arrogate such ownership to the state, or to "society" (of course, many people already believe that we are owned by "society", so this concept is not a problem for them).

Thus, yes, simply being born into, and living in, a nation or a "society", incurs obligation, even without your explicit consent. If you do not wish to incur such obligation, then do not live in that country or society. If you are unable to leave because of your circumstances, unless you are being explicitly forced to remain against your will, and not as a consequence of your own actions and choices (no matter how poor or limited your options), this does not free you of your obligations.

There must be some system for satisfying such obligations. Taxation, as a broad concept, is one such system (or set of systems, as there are many different types and means of taxation) for doing so, though there are others.

THIS, is how involuntary taxation CAN BE ethical, and legitimate, in a system of individual rights.

HOWEVER... in order to be ethical and legitimate, such obligations must be strictly limited.

Taxation is only ethical, and legitimate, if such burdens are: minimized, provide direct or substantive indirect benefit, and are either necessary, or voluntary. And no, majority decision is not "voluntary" automatically, unless one has consented to be governed by such decisions.

We implicitly consent to some degree of governance by accepting or maintaining citizenship, or residency, in this country... However, we also do so under the conditions of the constitution, AND those of our preexisting fundamental and inherent rights, which the constitution recognizes and protect.

Actions of the government can only be legitimate.... and can only legitimately create obligation... if they align with such principles; among which are that any impingement on one's rights (including property rights, which includes your wealth, cash, assets etc...) even as allowed by the constitution, must still be minimal, must effectively serve a compelling interest, and must be applied equally under the law.

Now... I don't know about anyone else... But I don't feel that our current regime of taxation... and much of what those taxes are used for... are aligned with either the constitution, or our individual rights, nor do they impose the minimum necessary burden, nor do they effectively serve a compelling interest, and they are most certainly not applied equally under the law.

I'm Sure Costco Refers to This as Customer Education

Posted from within one of the Costcos in Spokane:

The only good thing about a 148.4 mile daily round trip...

Is that it isn't technically a commute.

I'm a contract consultant, with a dedicated primary business location (with it's own phone lines, internet service, computer equipment, entrance and exit etc...), completely separate from the living area of my home. My clients site is not in the same metropolitan area as my home.

Even better, I'm working in one state, and paying taxes in my home state, as local income. That makes it VERY clear, that my clients site is not my "primary work or business location".

Also, I'm technically on a less than 1 year contract, both for my client, and for my parent consulting company (yes, I'm technically a small businessman, contracted to the big consulting company, then further contracted out to the small company).

There is really no legal way the IRS can try to claim that I am a direct employee, or that my primary place of business is my clients site.

So, my 148.4 mile per day round trip isn't a commute; it's travel to and from a clients site, and is therefore tax deductible at the standard IRS mileage rate for 2012 of $0.55 per mile.

On Wednesday, it will have been a month since I started work (4/23 to 5/23), with one day taken off (my birthday, April 27th); and this is what my mileage log summary shows for the past month (today, and tomorrow extrapolated from the previous record):

Report 2012/04/23 - 2012/05/23

Business	Rate	Vehicle	Miles	Mile Deduction	Expenses	Total
Crispin Enterprises	0.555	cadillac sts	2503.8	$1,389.62	$0.00	$1,389.62
		vstrom	742.0	$411.83	$0.00	$411.83
Total:			3245.9	$1,801.45	$0.00	$1,801.45
Grand Total:			3245.9	$1,801.45	$0.00	$1,801.45

That's for one month.

For the next seven months it's going to be a bit less (since I'm probably going to be working from home one day a week), at more like $327 a week for the remaining 31 weeks of the year, minus three weeks (between vacation and holidays)... That's a total mileage deduction of just about $11,000. Oh and I can also take a deduction for the portion of my loan interest that covers my business usage.

Of course... I am putting 3000 miles a month on my vehicles; and all the maintenance and depreciation cost that incurs (a full years deduction would come to just about $20,000; and as a small businessman, isn't subject to the 2% limit).

Right now, the depreciation on my STS is something like $3,000 a year base, plus mileage... Call it $6,000 total at current used car pricing. My actual expenses (projecting to a full years mileage and costs) for fuel are something like $6,000. My actual expenses for maintenance are something like $3,000 (two major maintenance periods a year, plus two additional oil changes, plus a set of tires a year, plus incidentals).

So, I'm coming out a bit ahead on the standard mileage rate with the STS; and well ahead when I'm using the bike (which gets about 1.75x the mileage of the car, and has basically zero depreciation from what I paid).

Between that, the rest of my uncompensated and unreimbursed business expenses, and all my other business, and personal deductions (and of course, being unemployed for the first four months of the year, and the big pay cut I took from my previous job); my taxable income (and therefore my tax burden) for 2012 is going to be... low. VERY low.

In fact, so low, I think I will have covered my expected tax burden for the year before fall (between my unemployment, the taxes my wife has paid, and the last months taxes paid from the new gig, I've already covered more than 1/4 of it).

So, at least there's that.

Woo hoo, my last ponzi scheme "contribution" for the year is Friday

As of this coming Friday, I will have paid my maximum social security contribution for the year... Yay, I am not being stolen from as much starting next week.

And yes, if you're a smart boy you can figure out how much I made this year from that. I don't really care. My salary is actually published by my company anyway, since I'm a "person of responsibility" under Sarbanes Oxley.

Now if only they would stop stealing the other 26.85% (20% approximate income tax after deductions, plus 1.45% medicare, plus approximately 5.4% Idaho income tax after deductions).

If I've calculated it right, up to today I've actually under-witheld by about $3,000 but the rest of the year should more than make up for that (they're going to kill me on some cash payments later in the year, with 28% federal and 5.4% state. That should more than cover my total liability for the year).

I made 20% on my investments last year (yeah I know, good year) but my moving 10 year average is 13%; including all losses in that time period, which involved two major crashes and a couple of minor ones. That's better than the average investor of course. The 50 year moving average for a well managed pension fund is about 8%; but if you watch the market psychology, you can grab a couple extra percent here and there every year (at a slightly larger risk of course. I lost $7,000 in the last month for example... a little bit more than a more conservative pension fund would have).

My employers and I have made the maximum social security contribution each year. That's currently just over $11,000 but it's been adjusted up a few times in the last 10 years (and slightly down for 2011); so let's treat that conservatively as a constant dollar contribution.

Hmmm... 10 years 13% annualized rate of return on $11,000 annual contributions and reinvestments... That would have been worth about $260,000 (more than double the funding contribution). Even at the average 8% return, that would be $195,000 (a little less than double)

And yet people are still against private accounts...

You are "The Rich", and you didn't even know it.

Video From Reason.TV:

A lot of folks hear numbers like "the top 5%" of income earners, and they think that means Bill Gates, and fortune 500 CEOs etc...

No, although that's exactly what the government, and the media, would love for you to believe.

It's how they pit us against one another. It is a very deliberate divide and conquer strategy for class warfare; and the fact that 52 million people voted for it shows just how well it's working.

It works, because "The Rich" is always the other guy. You aren't "The Rich" after all, you're "working class" or "middle class" whatever those mean (and who exactly says the "middle class" don't work?).

Nobody wants to pay more taxes (well, except some of the extreme left), and very few people would vote to increase their own taxes; so they employ this class warfare rhetoric to get you to support tax increases on "The Rich", which will supposedly favor you, and "the less fortunate".

The only problem is, according to the government, there's a pretty good chance that You (yes You, with a capital "Y") ARE "The Rich".

How can that be? They're always talking about the "top 1%" or the "top 5%", and again people start thinking about Bill Gates, and bank CEOs, and Wall Street traders...

Actually, the top 5% likely includes a lot of folks you know. Theres a fair chance it includes you. It almost certainly includes people you interact with every day.

When we get down to as low as say, the top 15%, most folks would think that got to be people making like $250,000 a year right?

No, actually people who make $250,000 a year are the top 1% (in fact, anyone over about $180,000 a year is in the top 1%. $250,000 puts you into the top .8% or so).

Wait a sec... the top 1% is just $180,000 a year?

Yes, yes it is.

The estimated individual income numbers for 2008 (actuals wont be available for another two years. Also don't confuse these with household numbers, which account for multiple incomes) look like this:

The "top 1%" of earners in this country, is everyone who makes over about $180,000 a year.

The top 5% is everyone who makes over about $152,000 a year

In case you were interested, $100,000 is the top 5.63%

The top 10% is everyone who makes over $76,000 per year.

The top 15% is everyone who makes over about $64,000 a year.

The top 25% is everyone who makes over about $46,000 a year.

The top 50% is everyone who makes over about $32,000 a year.

So when somebody says "we're going to tax the richest 15% to pay for the other 85%" what they're really saying is anyone who makes more than $32 an hour.

Ayup, if you make more than $32 an hour, guess what, YOU are "The Rich".

If they say "we're going to tax the richest 25%" that means anyone who makes more than $23 an hour.

So, let me ask you, are you rich?

The top 15% pay more than 85% of all income taxes.

The top 50% pay more than 96% of all income taxes.

The bottom 50%, pay less than 4%.

The bottom 40% pay nothing at all.

The bottom 30% are actually PAID BY THE GOVERNMENT (and I don't mean civil servants).

Plumbers, carpenters, electricians, mechanics, pretty much anyone with more than 10 years experience in any mid-level or higher job, in any professional career field or trade; that most likely puts you into the top 15% or so. Are you rich?

If you own your own business, the government ALMOST CERTAINLY classifies you as earning in the top 10% or higher... of course how much of that you actually KEEP is another story. Are you rich?

If you're reading this right now, demographically speaking, it's very likely you are in the top 15%. Are you rich?

If you have a college degree, live in or near a major city, and have more than 10 years experience in your career field, you are very likely to be in the top 5%, and almost certainly in the top 15%. Are you rich?

I'll tell you right now, I'm in the top 5% of income earners, and with my wifes income we're in the top 5% of household earners (in fact, the top 3%); and we are very definitely not rich.

We don't live an extravagant lifestyle. We have a 1600 square foot house in an old neighborhood in Scottsdale (not one of the McMansion areas), two used cars that were both under $30,000 each when we bought them, and we send our two kids to Catholic school that's subsidized by the parish, or else we couldn't afford it. We don't have a vacation home; no RV, no boat, no vacations to Switzerland every six months...

We're not rich.

As far as the government is concerned though, we are "The Rich".

In fact, it's very likely that you are "The Rich" too.

What they're really saying when they talk about "taxing the rich", is taxing you. Because as far as the government is concerned, unless you're taking money from them, hey, YOU'RE RICH.

Our Tax Day Protest, and Celebration

We’re not going to a tea party; mostly because we have jobs, and also because I think they’re both great, and ineffective.

Great, because it’s amazing that so many people are making it known publicly that they don’t want to have their freedoms abridged, and more of their money stolen from them.

Ineffective because basically all protesting is ineffective; unless the media is actively on your side, and making the protests seem huge, and significant etc….

Let’s face it folks, we could have 5 million people out there on tax day; the media would still report it as “a few right wing whackos, who are racist because they don’t support Obama, and hate poor people because they don’t want to have the government steal all their money”.

The only media reporting on the Tea Parties in any meaningful way (including the supposedly conservative Fox news; who are reporting in their typical populist and shallow manner) are the alternative conservative and libertarian media; like our blogs and other websites, and talk radio.

In effect we are playing to the home crowd with the Tea Parties. It’s a great pep rally and all; and I’m glad they are happening, but I don’t want to participate.

Besides which, there’s a lot of standing around at these things, and I’ve got bad knees.

I prefer more direct action. Lawsuits are a good start. Refusing to pay unlawful and unconstitutional taxes are also good; and generally result in lawsuits or even criminal prosecutions which can be taken to the supreme court etc…

Also, direct contact with your congresscritters tends to have at least some effect… sometimes… Make them understand that their constituents won’t vote for them if they don’t vote for tax cuts, spending cuts, etc…

So instead of standing around and getting all shouty, our tax day celebration and protest will involve pork.

Not the kind that Washington generates; the kind that you eat with sauce, beer, and cornbread. We’re going to be smoking pounds and pounds of pork, and then consuming it; along with other delicious comestibles.

We’re also going to be playing with firearms, and consuming large quantities of alcohol (obviously not simultaneously). We’d throw tobacco in for the full ATF trio, but none of us actually use the stuff.

To Amy (and others who believe government can do good)

Let me say again, for the statists on both the left and the right:

the government has no rights. Anything the government does, it must do within the rights that we as individuals delegate to it; and in order to delegate that right to government we must first possess that right.

You as an individual do not have the right to hold a gun to my head, take my money, and give it to someone else; no matter how good the cause. Neither do you as an individual have the right to hold a gun to my head and tell me how I can or cannot behave, or what I can or cannot do; unless you are preventing me from violating your rights, or the rights of others by doing so.

So, if you don't have the right to steal from me or tell me how to live, you cannot delegate that task to the government; because the government derives it's power from the rights you delegate to it.

It's wrong for you to steal from me; and getting 52 million of your friends together to to vote on it and say it's OK, doesn't make it so.


HT: Doug Mataconis

Want a bloody revolution?

End backup witholding, and have the IRS send everyone a bill every three months. There will be riots in the streets the next day.

As I mentioned a few days ago, I have a substantial bonus coming to me for my work last year.

So I got my pay and bonus today...

It's interesting how they choose to do the calculation.

Now, what SHOULD happen, is that my base pay is calculated at my normal rate (28%), and withheld at my normal rate. Then, my bonus should be calculated and withheld at whatever higher rate that would put me in if it was my actual salary (I did the math, it's 33%).

That would result in 28% (minus exemptions) being taken from my regular paycheck, and 33% (no exemptions) being taken from my bonus.

Instead, my entire pay and bonus were lumped together, my 401k (which has at least stopped losing money for now) contribution was taken out of both (again, bonus pay shouldn't be counted for such things), and the whole thing was taxed at 35% (minus exemptions), plus FICO, medicare/medicade and state taxes.

All told, they took $7000 out of my check today, $1600 of which was deductions and benefits (the normal amount is $600), and $5400 of which was for taxes... which was actually more in taxes than I have paid since the beginning of the year.

Now I'm going to need to adjust my withholding for the rest of the year to avoid being overwitheld. I don't give the government at interest free loan all year, just to be grateful when they give me back part of the money they've stolen from me.

Seriously, $5400 in taxes out of one check; and believe me I don't make so much that that doesn't sting, hard.

Happy Involuntary Servitude Day

Also known as national Buy A Gun (BAG) day.

This year things are a bit tight between taxes and legal expenses so far this year, but I still wanted to buy a gun for BAG day.

So, this weekend we grabbed one of these:


A SIG P6 (aka P225) from J&G sales, for $270 with a spare magazine and holster.

I haven't had a chance to shoot it off yet, but I've shot a p225 before, and it's an excellent pistol. On this particular example, the single action trigger is amazingly good for a SIG. It's about 5lbs, very crisp, with no creep, no grit, and minimal overtravel. Of course being a former German police gun, the DA pull is ridiculous. My trigger pull scale only goes to 12lbs, I'd estimate this breaks at 14lbs; but other than the weight, it's also sooth and consistent.

The pistol is in absolutely excellent mechanical condition; looks like it was shot very little, but has a lot of holster wear.

So, over the course of this year, I'm going to do something interesting.

I'm going to refinish this gun with durakote or gunkote (or possibly some other spray on baked epoxy finish); and change the sights out for whatever my readers think would be the best choice. I'm also going to try and find a set of the nice wood grips, or at least the pachmayer rubber grips, that you can sometimes find for these guns; and see what I can do about that DA trigger pull (I suspect not much actually).

Then I'm going to do something interesting with it.

Last year, I held a charity auction by proxy; awarding a Hungarian PA-63 to the reader who gave the largest donation to Soldiers Angels - Project Valour-IT during their annual fundraising drive.

This year, the gun I'm auctioning of will be the to-be-restored P6.

So, what sights should I grab?

Holy Crap, I got a Refund!!

So, I had all my taxes estimated and such, but I hadn't filed, because my estimates indicated I'd be owing about $5 grand.

Well, I just filed, and instead I'm getting back about $2500, between federal and state.

Apparently I'd estimated my schedule 179 deductions improperly. My initial estimate was off by $2500, and that was before recalc ulating my AMT etc... I also overpaid my SSN by $490 because I had multiple employers.

I ended up with 5 grand worth of offsets against Federal, AMT (which I would have otherwise owed $1250 of), and state taxes (which I would otherwise have owed about $240).

I've been over it 1000 times, and I'm absolutely sure I've got it correct... which is kinda funny, because I deliberately maximize my witholding allowances so that I owe a bit.

Did you hear that? It is the sound of ultimate suffering...