A future goal, I do not have the financial capital to currently do this.

Thanks for throwing around the word dodge even though I did no such thing.

It costs $125 to register a business with limited liability (c-corp, s-corp, LLC) through sunbiz.org, and it's free to get an EIN from the IRS (and you can just be a sole proprietor and save the $125 and accept full business liability), and you can pretty much make your business charter "for any legal purpose" and cut grass or sell chewing gum and write off your losses.

Oh shit, you had to drive 50 miles to sell a piece of chewed chewing gum? Thats a $17.50 tax credit, bro.

Oh shit, you bought lunch? 50% of it gets written off.

Had to buy a hotel room for that hooker last week? Business travel.

Use your cell phone to plan chewing gum sales? Write the bills off.

Use the internet to do it? Free 'net for you, too.

Use a corner of your apartment to conduct business? Measure the square footage and deduct the percentage off the rent.

Took a loss this year and made negative dollars? No problem, IRS pays YOU.

This post was edited by inkanddagger on Mar 24 2011 07:18pm

This would require much more than his usual 1040EZ form .

indeed but it is a sweet gig.

This is a legitimate concern...

However, in theory, the citizen choice tax system (for lack of a better term) would dictate what kind of institutions would be implemented. To clarify, if people did not want to deal with paying for disposal of nuclear waste, they would put their tax dollars towards other forms of energy and nuclear plants would be shut down, nuclear waste disposal would eventually become a non-issue, and other forms of energy would be used instead. On the other hand, if the majority of people favoured nuclear energy, than the taxes collected to build/maintain nuclear plants would go towards nuclear waste disposal.

It would be rational to direct a portion of one's taxes towards infrastructure (potholes), fire services (house burning down), police, etc.

Any surpluses from these accounts could be directed to an emergency fund, that would be saved and maintained by the government, and spent when a disaster, such as Katrina or an oil spill occurred.

I'm not suggesting that this is a very pragmatic concept...it requires people to be rational...and not just assume because that their neighbor will most likely put some tax dollars towards the infrastructure fund, that they could put all their money towards the education fund, or whatever.

Again, on the other hand, it would allow for the citizens to choose how the government spends its money...and, in theory, it should represent the public services that would benefit them (the citizens) the most.

An argument such as this is usually not something I would contend myself...as it is almost certainly unrealistic and unattainable...and I do agree that in practice, the government is needed to disperse wealth as its sees fit...hopefully, in the interests of the citizens of the state.

However...like I said...it's still an interesting concept that could be explored further.