I’m not going to “finely enumerate and spell out the letter of the law in hundreds of variations” for you.
Income and wealth taxes also have hundreds of variations and fine tunings. Saying I have to invent a whole new system on my own right here and now or else I’m not serious is not serious.
No, that’s how American K-12 schools are funded. That and infrastructure. Which is why poor areas have worse schools and roads; and police from outside their tax area. Which is both a great way to punish the poor in the old school protestant fashion and force them out the second the wealthy want their land.
And you know exactly what I mean by paying in his entire life.
Finally, paying half your income on property taxes is not financially sustainable. It’s ridiculous to me that you would even pretend it is.
It’s as fine tuned a proposal as, “tax property”.
We could always, also tax the wealthy. This is not fictional. Retired people in the US are facing a crisis as they’re priced out of housing because their social security is fixed and housing prices are skyrocketing.
The fact that schools are funded by the surrounding area is crap and needs to change. He’s retired with a social security income. He paid into the system his entire life already. Telling him he must sell and move out because he’s not wealthy enough is exactly what we should be working against. It’s a system by the wealthy, for the wealthy.
Have the rich actually pay taxes. Use that.
It’s based on wealth that matters for rich people. For the average person it’s extremely regressive. We’re telling people that they must sell and move if they aren’t rich enough. There are better ways to tax people and assets in the 21st century.
Is that what the kids are calling it these days?
We could also just pay for education differently.
Property taxes do hit retired people differently though. Taxing based on what the government says your land is worth instead of your income is absolutely meant to create opportunities for real estate agents and developers at the expense of the people living there.
He gets to claim he can ignore them. Laws take time to be enforced. Whether he can ignore them or not is up to a bunch of stuff, the courts, congress, the leaders around him, etc. We’re just now starting to come into any kind of possibility for real pushback with SCOTUS ruling some USAID payments still have to be made.
He doesn’t get to make laws. Protesting is as legal today as it was yesterday.
In one specific economic theory.
I’m not saying you’re wrong. I’m pointing out that it’s a whole debate.
It’s a real theory. From what I understand though the shredder is a thought experiment, not meant to be taken seriously. They do acknowledge that you have to receive money to spend money. they just think of it like a balancing act instead of a 1 to 1 relationship.
Is the President trying to tell private institutions who they can do business with?
Why I never!
Yup. They have the exchange operators on record saying they actively trade against their customers. It’s a club and if you’re not in it you don’t get to win.
The guy who made the claim had a .ca account. So I covered both countries.
Oh hey is that like the Irish stew with Potaytoes instead of Potahtoes?
Here’s the ADA government page. For Canada the only government page I can find is British Columbia which states you can train your own dog and after some paperwork do a test for the trained behaviors and public obedience.
At no point is a credentialed trainer a requirement unless you’re thinking about a different country.
So you’re just doubling down on what if this and that.