Recent Haloscan with togaprez

Gene made this post. A mindless repeat of tax protesting drivel and I decided to call him on it by breaking down the federal distribution of income tax.

To the best of my ability, scrolling through pages upon pages upon pages of numbers and political bloviating is not fun and I found myself zoning out at times...

Now, it's entirely possible that Gene or his slave sidekick may actually delete the haloscan thread, so I've posted it here for posterity.

As I understand it, property taxes also pay for local county Govt. So you would have no money for that and every public school closed. That doesn’t sound very good. AFTP | 08.01.06 - 10:32 am |

"The income tax pays nothing but interest to private bankers"... Wow, I must have slept thorough that portion of the Krazy Klown Skool of Ekonomiks. Were you to actually read something like..I don't know..the federal budget - you'd see that the crap that they feed you in tax protesting 101 is wrong. The distribution of INCOME taxes actually goes a great deal towards military spending. If you were able to read the Budget of the United States FY 2007 with any amount of statistical knowledge, you'd see that the breakdown (sorry gene didn't mean to use the word "breakdown" and dredge up any unpleasant memories) of the income tax distribution is: 33% to Human Resources (HHS,SSA,Education,Food/Nutrition programs,HUD,Labor Dept, other) 12% to the General Fund (interest on debt 20%,Treasury, Govt. Payroll,Justice Dept, State, DHS,NASA,Judical, Legislative, Other) 6% to Physical Resources (Ag,Interior,Transportation, DHS,HUD,Commerce,Energy (non-military) EPA,NSF,ACOE,FCC,other) 30% Current Military Spending 19% to past Military (veteran benefits, plus %80 of the interest on the national debt, since a large part of the national debt stems from the military) 56.2b from General Government and 353b from Past Military goes towards the Debt. 409.2b out of an over 2 trillion dollar budget. That's hardly "all", don't you think? Frank Buckner | 08.02.06 - 12:21 am |

I'd be happy to see you and Bob Schultz debate. gene chapman | 08.02.06 - 1:31 pm |

Well it just so happens that Bob Schutlz has not declared himself a candidate for President. You have. You posted a baldfaced assertion that the "income tax pays nothing but interest to private bankers..." and I refuted that assertion, handily. At this point of the process, it's incumbent on you to show where I'm wrong by use of a cogent argument, or failing that, concede that your point was fallacious. Frank Buckner | 08.02.06 - 3:58 pm |