HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Do "taxpayers" ...

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:05 PM

Do "taxpayers" have greater rights than citizens?

I am not aware of any legal status known as "taxpayer" that gives a person a greater say in government.

I would have guessed that, theoretically, all citizens are supposed to have an equal say in how tax revenue is spent. But I must be wrong about that, because I am forever hearing about the rights of tax-payers to control how "their" money is spent.

What exactly is the point in talking about ones self as "a taxpayer" (versus "a citizen"), and complaining about the use of "my tax dollars" and such.

If that is a sensible way to talk then shouldn't someone like Mitt Romney who pays over $3 million a year in federal taxes have more proper say in what the government does than me and a couple of thousand other low income DUers combined?

To my naive ears the whole "taxpayer" thing sounds like an ongoing demand for a class system in American politics where people with more money are presumed to have more "skin in the game" and thus deserve a greater say, and a demand that government be more responsive to certain citizens based on how much they paid in taxes last year.

8 replies, 817 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 8 replies Author Time Post
Reply Do "taxpayers" have greater rights than citizens? (Original post)
cthulu2016 Jun 2012 OP
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #1
HopeHoops Jun 2012 #2
panader0 Jun 2012 #3
Posteritatis Jun 2012 #4
JVS Jun 2012 #5
cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #7
Motown_Johnny Jun 2012 #8
MichiganVote Jun 2012 #6

Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:14 PM

1. only rich ones. but i agree, you rarely hear the media talking about citizens anymore.

 

taxpayers, consumers, investors -- only money guarantees rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:24 PM

2. What is this "taxpayer" of which you speak?

 



It certainly doesn't involve the 1% or major corporations. They know how to avoid it completely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:27 PM

3. Everyone pays some kind of taxes.

When you shop, get gas, go out to eat, whatever.
When my kids, (now gone) were younger, I got back more in tax returns than I paid in.
But I paid payroll taxes and sales taxes every day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:31 PM

4. In that context, "taxpayer" is usually a synonym for "me me me me me." (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:38 PM

5. Probably.

I'd surmise that in addition to their rights as citizens that there are some provisions for how the IRS deals with people within the context of the tax system which could be argued to be additional rights if you want to be super technical about things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JVS (Reply #5)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:53 PM

7. I actually considered that

But the citizen gains the use of those rights by virtue of being hassled by the IRS, rather than by virtue of paying taxes.

A person who pays no taxes and owes no taxes might be called before the IRS to explain why they don't pay taxes, and would have the same rights, but wouldn't be a taxpayer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JVS (Reply #5)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:56 PM

8. I would argue that non-taxpayers have those rights but don't exercise them.


If we follow your line of thinking then men have less rights than women because of abortion rights.



Just because a right is non applicable does not mean it is nonexistent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:47 PM

6. Well its complicated...

How tax revenue is spent:

a. Corporations that live and provide work in the US or elsewhere are now people and they have the right to influence government and complain about the government even though they don't pay taxes, receive substantial tax breaks and are permitted huge tax loopholes.

b. People may or may not be people depending on which religious point of view you have AND what view you lobby for. If you're a fetus person, you're the recipient of tax revenue but not necessarily a citizen till' you're borned.

c. People may or may not be citizens of the US depending on whether you're found out, run for office, enroll in a school or serve in the military. Either way, you'll pay more tax revenue for something than the the corporation people.

d. People who are not born in the US are not citizens unless the corporation, the State Dept. or Karl Rove says so.

e. Disabled citizens (as recognized by birth in the US) require significant tax revenue to function. However they may be unable to take part in representation via voting, etc. They may not be taxpayers, they may not be active voters and yet they are citizens of the US.

f. Barack Obama is both a tax payer and a citizen of the US (unless you're some backwoods barmaid with a swamp fox mentality). Nevertheless, as President of the US he is constrained in his ability to influence the dim witted policies and laws that Congress enacts (or fails to)

g. Congress is not a corporation. Since we can't be sure any of them were borned, we can't be sure they are citizens. They pay less in taxes than the vast majority of their constituents and do even less to represent them. They need a new name. Cognitive corpses comes to mind.

Hope this helps!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread