[Peace-discussion] [Fwd: [wtr-s] no more wishful thinking about a "peace tax fund" bill]
Rebecca
rebelrot@yahoo.com
Mon, 2 Oct 2006 07:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
--0-1788040471-1159799042=:95090
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Thanks!
We used a spin on the peace tax at Malachy McCourt's fundraiser last Thursday. I basically said that we have all been paying a war tax and that it was time to pay a peace tax to help our peace slate. Named off a bunch of different things, if you've never voted, if you've never run for office, never worked on a campaign, never kissed an Irish person (we were in an Irish pub with Irish music), etc. and assigned an amount to each "offense," $1, $5, $20, etc. The sillier the offense the better as it keeps people's attention and they are more likely to pay.
Rebecca
michelle <michelle@usol.com> wrote:
GPAXers, this is from the NWTRCC's war tax resistance discussion list. I
recommend having a look at the link provided below (i.e.
)
Best,
Michelle
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [wtr-s] no more wishful thinking about a "peace tax fund" bill
Date: 30 Sep 2006 20:18:18 -0000
From: Moorlock.4295641@bloglines.com
Reply-To: wtr-s@igc.topica.com
To: wtr-s@igc.topica.com
The Religious Freedom Peace Tax Fund Act would not directly, indirectly, immediately,
or eventually decrease military spending. Its most immediate effect in this
direction, if it were to pass, would be to increase federal revenue and thereby
allow for greater military spending.
In order for the bill to actually
have any direct effect on military spending, about three-quarters of all taxpayers
would have to register as conscientious objectors. (Do the math yourself,
or check http://www.sniggle.net/Experiment/index.php?entry=27Apr05 for the
back-of-the-book answer.)
In the unlikely event that such a thing happened
independent of some seismic transformation of society that would make the
effects of this modest bill irrelevant, the general fund would thereby be
reduced below what is spent on the military, and if Congress wanted to maintain
its insane level of military spending, it would be forced to raise additional
funds, to borrow money, or to engage in creative accounting -- none of which,
by the way, would be at all out-of-character or unusual (Congress will be
borrowing $177 billion from the Social Security trust fund this year to fund
its current warmaking habit, for instance).
The Religious Freedom Peace
Tax Fund Act, and other such schemes, will not reduce military spending and
will provide a false moral figleaf to taxpayers who will falsely believe that
by checking a box or filling out a form before giving the government their
money, their dollars will only be spent on good things.
Furthermore, the
government would use such an act as an excuse to crack down on and drain sympathy
from real conscientious objectors to military taxation -- that is, those who
continue to refuse to pay in spite of this law.
The conscientious tax resistance
movement would be wise to drop all support for this legislation and to discourage
people from promoting it.
-- David Gross
http://sniggle.net/Experiment/
--- wtr-s@igc.topica.com wrote:
>
> Without reading the blog, I disagree
with the Peace Tax Fund Staffer in that it would be more correct to "admit"
that the bill does not DIRECTLY OR IMMEDIATELY decrease military spending.
>
> As I have maintained (when talking to groups sympathetic to such
decreases), there will be an INDIRECT reduction as the existance and exercise
of PTF is referenced by our friends in Congress (such a Lloyd Dogget) arguing
against military spending. Also, there could be an ULTIMATE decrease if enough
taxpayers register as COs, and this decrease will not be possible without
passage of the bill.
>
> Otherwise, without reading the blog, I am
glad to hear about an active Peace Tax Fund Staffer stirring up the PR in
general.
>
> wtr-s@igc.topica.com wrote:
> -- Topica Digest --
>
> Peace Tax Fund Staffer Admits "bill does not decrease military spending"
> By michelle@usol.com
>
>
> Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 19:21:25 -0400
> From: michelle
> Subject: Peace Tax Fund Staffer Admits "bill does not
decrease military spending"
>
>
>
>
> or http://tinyurl.com/ewqcf
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Stay in the know.
Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out.
>
>
> NOTE: opinions expressed
in posts to wtr-s are those of the author and do not express the position
of the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee, which maintains
this list solely for the purpose of providing a public forum for war tax resisters
and friends.
_______________________________________________
Peace-discussion mailing list
Peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org
http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/peace-discussion
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
--0-1788040471-1159799042=:95090
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<div>Thanks! </div> <div> </div> <div>We used a spin on the peace tax at Malachy McCourt's fundraiser last Thursday. I basically said that we have all been paying a war tax and that it was time to pay a peace tax to help our peace slate. Named off a bunch of different things, if you've never voted, if you've never run for office, never worked on a campaign, never kissed an Irish person (we were in an Irish pub with Irish music), etc. and assigned an amount to each "offense," $1, $5, $20, etc. The sillier the offense the better as it keeps people's attention and they are more likely to pay. </div> <div> </div> <div>Rebecca <BR><BR><B><I>michelle <michelle@usol.com></I></B> wrote:</div> <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">GPAXers, this is from the NWTRCC's war tax resistance discussion list. I <BR>recommend having a look at the link provided
below (i.e. <BR><HTTP: index.php?entry="27Apr05" Experiment www.sniggle.net>)<BR><BR>Best,<BR><BR>Michelle<BR><BR>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: [wtr-s] no more wishful thinking about a "peace tax fund" bill<BR>Date: 30 Sep 2006 20:18:18 -0000<BR>From: Moorlock.4295641@bloglines.com<BR>Reply-To: wtr-s@igc.topica.com<BR>To: wtr-s@igc.topica.com<BR><BR><BR><BR>The Religious Freedom Peace Tax Fund Act would not directly, indirectly, immediately,<BR>or eventually decrease military spending. Its most immediate effect in this<BR>direction, if it were to pass, would be to increase federal revenue and thereby<BR>allow for greater military spending.<BR><BR><BR><BR>In order for the bill to actually<BR>have any direct effect on military spending, about three-quarters of all taxpayers<BR>would have to register as conscientious objectors. (Do the math yourself,<BR>or check http://www.sniggle.net/Experiment/index.php?entry=27Apr05 for the<BR>back-of-the-book
answer.)<BR><BR><BR><BR>In the unlikely event that such a thing happened<BR>independent of some seismic transformation of society that would make the<BR>effects of this modest bill irrelevant, the general fund would thereby be<BR>reduced below what is spent on the military, and if Congress wanted to maintain<BR>its insane level of military spending, it would be forced to raise additional<BR>funds, to borrow money, or to engage in creative accounting -- none of which,<BR>by the way, would be at all out-of-character or unusual (Congress will be<BR>borrowing $177 billion from the Social Security trust fund this year to fund<BR>its current warmaking habit, for instance).<BR><BR><BR><BR>The Religious Freedom Peace<BR>Tax Fund Act, and other such schemes, will not reduce military spending and<BR>will provide a false moral figleaf to taxpayers who will falsely believe that<BR>by checking a box or filling out a form before giving the government their<BR>money, their dollars will
only be spent on good things.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Furthermore, the<BR>government would use such an act as an excuse to crack down on and drain sympathy<BR>from real conscientious objectors to military taxation -- that is, those who<BR>continue to refuse to pay in spite of this law.<BR><BR><BR><BR>The conscientious tax resistance<BR>movement would be wise to drop all support for this legislation and to discourage<BR>people from promoting it.<BR><BR><BR><BR>-- David Gross<BR><BR>http://sniggle.net/Experiment/<BR><BR><BR><BR>--- wtr-s@igc.topica.com wrote:<BR><BR>><BR><BR>> Without reading the blog, I disagree<BR>with the Peace Tax Fund Staffer in that it would be more correct to "admit"<BR>that the bill does not DIRECTLY OR IMMEDIATELY decrease military spending.<BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> As I have maintained (when talking to groups sympathetic to such<BR>decreases), there will be an INDIRECT reduction as the existance and exercise<BR>of PTF is referenced by our friends in
Congress (such a Lloyd Dogget) arguing<BR>against military spending. Also, there could be an ULTIMATE decrease if enough<BR>taxpayers register as COs, and this decrease will not be possible without<BR>passage of the bill.<BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> Otherwise, without reading the blog, I am<BR>glad to hear about an active Peace Tax Fund Staffer stirring up the PR in<BR>general. <BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> wtr-s@igc.topica.com wrote:<BR><BR>> -- Topica Digest --<BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> Peace Tax Fund Staffer Admits "bill does not decrease military spending"<BR><BR>> By michelle@usol.com<BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 19:21:25 -0400<BR><BR>> From: michelle <BR><BR>> Subject: Peace Tax Fund Staffer Admits "bill does not<BR>decrease military spending"<BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> or http://tinyurl.com/ewqcf<BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> <BR><BR>>
---------------------------------<BR><BR>> Stay in the know.<BR>Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out. <BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> <BR><BR>> NOTE: opinions expressed<BR>in posts to wtr-s are those of the author and do not express the position<BR>of the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee, which maintains<BR>this list solely for the purpose of providing a public forum for war tax resisters<BR>and friends.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Peace-discussion mailing list<BR>Peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org<BR>http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/peace-discussion<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><p> 
<hr size=1>Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman1/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39663/*http://voice.yahoo.com">Make PC-to-Phone Calls</a> to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
--0-1788040471-1159799042=:95090--