Consume Product

The next generation starts with you

I am training my kids how to not zig for zog, but to zag.

You're on the right track. IMO, federal government should be limited to tariffs and a 10% consumption tax only as a way to raise revenues.

Municipalities/States should be limited to a combined 20% in consumption taxes.

That's it. The end. Tax system complete.

Direct democracy only works in homogenous white society where land owning males with nuclear families are the sole voters.

The most common excuse I hear in defense of taxation is that it's necessary to pay for modern things, like roads, schools, and other infrastructure. However, we had these things prior to crushing taxation.


All governments need some form of taxation to fund what they're doing, but there's clearly something wrong with how it's implemented today. Probably the biggest mistake I see people make on the subject (even among the right and far right) is the belief that it must be centralized more and more toward the top.


That's not how people work. That's not how reality works. Mathematically, it's called the inverse square law. The farther away you get from something, the less effect it has on you, and you on it. With respect to people (and all life forms), the closer you are to someone the more in common you have with them, and the farther away you are, the less in common. Of course, this assumes we're not being maliciously diversified, and there are a few exceptions to this, but the rule remains true. You have more in common with your family, friends, neighbors, community, and people than you do with those putside those boundaries. Location matters. It's one of the factors involved in the homogeneity of a group.


This is one of the primary reasons why local and state governments should hold the most power and centralized federal (or God forbid globalist) governments should hold the least power, because the larger the area (and population) becomes, the less in common the people have, and the less effective universally applied laws, policies, and regulations become. Elections and public policies aren't meant to be divided so closely for and against (49% to 51%, assuming the numbers they give us are true). As distance decreases, homogeneity should increase, and the beliefs of the people should be more aligned, and government (if not corrupt) can better enact the will of the people, and thus can be given more power. The larger the distances, the less in common, and the less power government should hold, only enacting policies along common belief and mutual interests.


This, in turn, would also solve most welfare issues, as communities are supposed to take care of themselves, not by nebulous foreign/federal entities thousands of miles away. Local governments are also much less prone to corruption, as the people are within a days walk of their politicians.


This all doesn't necessarily mean a homogeneous people can't form strong governments that govern larger areas, only that it relies on stronger homogeneity that's often not seen on that scale.

Ripped off big. You guys are already completely plundered, theres just more wealth in the states to steal.

It's both. Your house in Sweden is built better, sturdier, and with slower burning materials. And we're getting ripped off big. There's very few break measures for American insurance companies, so they can set rates and payments as they please. It's one of the manifold ways our healthcare system became an unhealthcare system.

I'm not sure how full coverage home insurance is only $50/yr in Sweden, but I have to assume it's a difference in coverage. I'm not sure what full coverage home insurance covers in Sweden, so I will say what it generally covers in America and you can tell me if it's the same in Sweden.

I highly doubt that it has much to do with quality of home builds. Even if Swedish homes were built a million times better, they would conversely be more expensive to replace when one does topple, so it would roughly balance out.

I'm sure we're being ripped off a little, but I'm also confident $50/year is wickedly, unsustainably cheap if the coverage is the same as what we get in America.

In America, your home owner's insurance covers your house and all of your possessions against... pretty much anything. It also covers a lot of lawsuits you may face in America, like if someone gets hurt on your property.

Yeah, (((they))) use money as a source of control, but once people realize that it has no value outside of that, the system will begin to collapse if we can find means of exchanging value outside of it.

Back when I lived in Washington State, in Pierce County, the auditor literally told the taxpayers something like: "I am going to assess your homes for the MINIMUM value. If you think it is worth even less, write me a letter, AND I WILL REDUCE ITS VALUE ACCORDINGLY." Property prices were easily 3x the taxable value. People who complained about property taxes on public forums would see their assessed values drop the next year. He even went out of his way to find retirees and elderly people with difficult living circumstances and assessed their properties at much lower values. Needless to say, the city of Tacoma HATED him, but the residents loved him.

Again it's a big depends. With big infrastructure projects like these you aren't going to have company A and B both lay water pipes along the same road, or even have two roads running in parallel right next to each other just for the sake of competition. What eventually happens is that each company claims its own 'turf' in which it runs a local monopoly, which is the worst of both worlds.

That was the highest median of any county in Texas. For the entire state, the median rate is less than half of that.