I love this argument by the new Director of Communications for the Libertarian Party UK and fellow blogger "Devil's Kitchen" Chris "Fuck You All Lefty Cunts, I'm Better Than You" Mounsey:
"The usefulness of income tax is that it was introduced not too long ago and for a specific purpose: to fight the Napoleonic Wars.
It was abolished in 1802, having been in force for three years, and had to be levied again in 1803: again, because hostilities against France recommenced. It was abolished in 1816, a year after we won the Battle of Waterloo, and wasn't levied again until 1841, when Sir Robert Peel reintroduced it.
Peel, as a Conservative, had opposed income tax in the 1841 general election, but a growing budget deficit required a new source of funds.
Or, to put it another way, the government had been so profligate with its funds that it was forced to take more money off the hard-working people of Britain so that the state could continue to expand. Who would have thunk it?—a state, unable to balance its books, shakes down the taxpayers in order to pay for the state's failure. I've never heard of that being done before...
Some people, of course, have said that the state didn't need income tax then because it was much smaller. My reply?
"Exactly.""
Awesome! I love it!! It's simple, logically, popular and effective.
2 comments:
Why, thank you. It's true too...
DK
And bollocks...
It takes no account of factors likely to influence the public. It's all very well saying it would make councils vie for people and make a market in cuts, but that would mean that those best able to move could and the poor would be herded into ghettos.
A pipe dream.
Post a Comment