If you were given the choice by your fellow countrymen to eliminate one law from your country for a duration of 2 years, which one would you choose?
If you had 2 years where you could rob banks with impunity you could get very rich. You'd tank your country's economy and suddenly find banks taking drastic measures to protect themselves but you wouldn't be breaking the law! /s
There may be some pushback on the idea of tanking the economy.Some people may not like banks,but for the most part,they want their country to do well.Unless there's rampant corruption.
Indeed. I can't think of any NZ laws that I'd seriously like to see gone. Maybe marijuana but we had a referendum and the hypocrites voted against it. Maybe speed limits but we have so many incompetent drivers they'd all kill themselves and others.
The law establishing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and empowering it to collect federal income tax.
All U.S. states have some reliance on federal funds. I suspect that California gets the most, but I am no expert on this. I also do not know how much of a state's revenues come from federal coffers, but states have their own ability to collect any taxes they may need. I would like to see the federal government stop the punitive income tax (punishing those that generate income, save money, etc.) and switch to a VAT that is based on consumption and can be seen and felt by taxpayers on a daily basis.
Most likely a tribute to the fact that no matter their population size, each state gets two senators. Those five states have very, very small populations to spread the booty that is delivered from their two senators who have as much clout as the two senators from California.
Yeah.It's like people are not adult enough to handle their own finances.We have to confiscate a portion of your hard earned money and dole it out to you like an allowance.There must be a better way and a consumption tax might be that way.If a VAT was put into place,alot of obsolete laws would become obsolete.
I need to correct part of my statement: Washington, DC is not actually a state and has no senators. They, of course, are the city that the federal government resides in and they have been so mismanaged by leftist, Democrat city politicians for so many decades, that the city is simply a basket case that the feds have to constantly bail out if they want basic services to keep being provided for them.
The US is almost there with user-pays healthcare and education, toll roads. Hard to see how it would work with the military and the wages of those senators
You have unhealthy rich people too.Money is not going to stop you from dying.Changing your eating habits will.I always keep this in mind, that if something catastrophic was to happen,money would become obsolete and we would have to rely on our community.Government programs would not be available.
People in apartments will be stuffed. Rich people will always be able to buy their way out of trouble.
I don't know and I don't claim to have all the answers but, If your going to have a system of paying someone by the hour, that money should be the workers money free and clear and that person should be able to spend it how they see fit. We're talking about your labor and time. Something you'll never get back.As far as how they would distribute the funds after a consumer makes a purchase, I don't have a clue.Of course, money is very useful and what you say maybe true, but the system that the average American people live under needs to be changed.It's outdated.