🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@hammerhead Hi, if youd be willing to tell me more about your situation and whats going on, and what your needs are I'd be happy to consider if I could (or would be willing) to help.

If you arent willing to go into more discussion (as is your right) then I'd like to just say i wish you the best of luck and hope things work out.

@admitsWrongIfProven

Yup. I am this weird mix of generally fisically conservative (not republican conservative but in the sense of being stingy)... I really want to see the overwhelming majority of govt programs abolished or at least significantly reduced

Yet at the same time I see things like education, public transit, and even pregnancy tests and abortions (as long as abortions are illegal after the first 2 months) as all free and tax paid. Which is very much out of line with most people who are fisically conservative.

@Hyolobrika

@admitsWrongIfProven

My general metrix for "what should we make tax paid (free)" is anything that will benefit all of society more than it costs us.

The benefit of people moving to public transit alone, and the benefits to our health, I think that alone makes the argument well enough. Add to that the reduction in drunk drivers, the fact that homeless and poor people will have transport accessiblity for interviews and anything else they need... it just makes sense as a ROI on every level. Even the people who wont directly use it benefit by having a cleaner environment and fewer poor people or people on welfare.

@Hyolobrika

@admitsWrongIfProven

The IRS used to have a policy where they only pursued large debts (when taxes owed were above 500K). From what people have told me they now persue people at all levels of income.

@Hyolobrika

@admitsWrongIfProven

I actually probably wouldnt mind if all public transit were free.

@Hyolobrika

@admitsWrongIfProven

In practice if you dont pay your taxes you will probably wind up paying thema t something like 5x what you owed.

@Hyolobrika

@Hyolobrika

Yea I would hope debtors prison would be a thing of the past... i really dont know much about it outside of the scope of the USA.. ive paid taxes and worked in most major countries. But im not one to skip on my taxes :)

@admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

I am not sure, but they probably can take you to the bring of homelessness but would have to leave you with enough pay in your paycheck for your most basic needs.

@Hyolobrika

@admitsWrongIfProven

> Oh, i was under the assumption that you had to declare your taxes and would be punished (financially or with jail if you cannot pay) if you did not declare anything.

This is mostly correct except you have to remove the "or with jail" part, remove that and its correct.

> So that is wrong, you can just not do anything and the default tax is payed/deducted in the US?

If you do nothing then the IRS will call you in for an audit and demand you pay and give you a chance to argue the amount owed. There will be a very hefty penalty of interest for back taxes owed you didnt file (As they dont tend to come after you until youve done it for a few years). If you refuse to cooperate the IRS will do their best to estimate the value for you and just forcable deduct from your account. But it wont be a fair amount it willb e a HUGE amount over what you would have paid if you did it the right way. Both that they overestimate by a huge margin, and because there are huge financial penalties.

You are only safe from jail time, not from financial penalties.

@Hyolobrika

@admitsWrongIfProven

> So you would be in favor of the company going under because nobody works for them

If people feel the demands the company have for employment, along with the offer of pay, is not fair then yes, I am ok with people choosing not to work there and having the company go under as a consequence of that companies unfair bargaining position.

> but if people do work for them, it’s fine

Don't follow what your saying. Perhaps you missed a negation somewhere. It is fine for companies to go under whether they have employees or not if the reason they go under is because no one wants to accept their employment offer.

@Hyolobrika

I only know the USA for sure. I can say this it was a fundemental thing for the USA when it was founded. In the England at the time the UK seperated debtor prisons were common, and as yous ay not paying taxes could get you in prison, as could not paying other debts.

In the USA we established early on debtors prison was a human rights violation, so you can never be jailed in the USA for not paying something you owe, even taxes. That said I am not sure if the UK still employees the older unjust laws of a debtors prison or if they have gotten some common sense and improved their approach.

@admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

> Not paying taxes in germany is more complicated.
>
> Most taxes are deducted automatically. Stores collect added value tax, income taxes are deducted from wages. You can get some back, so you could cheat by declaring fraudulent returns, but if you do nothing, the tax is payed.

In this regard the USA and germany are the same, income and sales tax and everything else happens at the point you receive it. So your ability to simply not pay taxes is fairly limited. There are a few ways you can do it (these will result in lawsuits fromt he IRS but jailtime only in situations where you outright lie or something illegal).

So one way is if your full time if you list more deductions than you actually will have, then dont pay the difference at the end of year on income.

The other way is to work as a contractor, in whcih case you pay taxes at the end of the year and not when you are paid.

@Hyolobrika

@Hyolobrika

As established, simply not paying taxes will never equate to a death of threat. Not paying will never get you jail time or any criminal threats. You will be sued by the IRS, loose, and have your money taken virtually without a single threat being made.

Not saying if this is right or wrong, but trying to equate taxes with a death threat isnt accurate (even though associating criminal laws with death threats has some validity)

@admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven

Were the employees promised enough money to live off of when the employees decided to take the job? If so I see no attribution error. Everyone knew the arrangement going in, dont like it, dont take it. Thats how free markets thrive, when both sides have marketable value to offer.

@Hyolobrika

> Welfare is funded by taxes. Is not paying tax a civil offense or criminal in the US or Netherlands (your countries of residence) or Germany (admitsWrong's)?

No, simply not paying taxes is a civil offense, not a criminal one. They will come and take your money, but no risk of jailtime in and of itself.

Now it **can** be criminal but only indirectly. Like **lying** on your tax returns can absolutely be criminal. But simply not filing them at all, and therefore not paying taxes is not.

> What if you refuse to give them your money?

Then they will just take it by either directly taking it from your bank or by calling your employer and directly taking it from your paycheck before you get it.

If you have no bank account, or pay check they may take your property in a lawsuit such as putting a lein on your home. But it wouldnt be criminal to simply not pay. Civil cases dont become criminal when you dont pay. However if a judge makes a very explicit injunction in a civil case that you arent allowed to do something, and you do it anyway, then it can cost you much much more. If you misbehave in court you can get jailtime for contempt too, but again thats a bit of a stretch.

@admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven "fundemental" in what sense? and what is the nature of the contribution? I mean if your asking if there always needs to be attribution, what if i pay you specifically for your silence (not to tell others you contributed)?

@Hyolobrika

I think there is some truth to it. True by hyperbolic and lacking some nuance, but true enough to be a discussion point.

Civil laws for example, no matter how much you refuse to follow such laws, will ever wind you up in jail or (Assuming you dont have a corrupt cop) a death threat. The only way we could make this assertion is if we consider loosing all your money the same as a death sentance, which also has some truth to it, but is a stretch.

But for criminal laws, yea, at the end you either need to coorperate with the law or the consequences of breaking the law, or escalate the matter to the point of violence or jail time, and if you resist jail time by executing "self-defense" when they try to take you then you will likely end up dead.

So while I do get the point and admit to the principle having elements of truth, to say such a think is highly hyperbolic and lacking a complete picture.

@admitsWrongIfProven

@admitsWrongIfProven Yea I agree, if it helped you make better logical arguments (even if your stance hasnt changed but you argue it more logically) then I too consider that a success.

@Hyolobrika

Sure, thats not relevant here because most interactions where someone fears a cop it is the first time they interacted with that person. So while they have seen cops do wrong to others, or maybe them more generally, and this generates the fear through association, that doesnt apply to this first-time interactions.