Taxpayer 's Manual

We have such a small manual for the taxpayer for you - or how the taxpayer, the "taxpayer", should have access to state money - that is, if any.

Red Meat - maybe only somewhere in Bananistan ...
Red Meat - it would probably be just somewhere in Bananistan ... (click to enlarge, we recommend, it's worth it)

Taxpayer - Do You Know How To Access Government Money?

Almost every day in the newspapers, on television and in various other news, we learn how our political representation redistributes state money. Here he adds or reduces salaries, subsidizes someone here, someone from the (un) advantageous and so on. How do you taxpayers approach these reports?

First, you need to realize that you are paying for it all. There is no state money there is only your money. Every time a politician raises someone's salary, adds up some subsidies, sets up a new office and so on, he practically does it by taking your money and giving it to someone.

As already mentioned, there is no state money, there is only your money.

You have to be careful about politicians - they are as cunning as any other employee. They will always make excuses for that tu whether UN The subsidy or office is not paid by you, but by someone else, such as businesses through taxes.

However, this statement is false. You always pay every tax directly or indirectly, dear taxpayer.

You ask yourself - how is that possible? How come I pay corporate tax just me?

The answer is simple - the company is in a similar position to the state. The company has only your (consumer) money. He has no other. Every business has only its customers' money or investors (who have them, however, guess where). The company will pay the tax with your money. Yes, you are again the one who pays the corporate tax, yes, you are again the one who finances all those state programs.

Once we have clearly demonstrated that the whole burden of the state apparatus lies solely on you, let's see how to look at all those news about how politicians handle your money.

Imagine that a politician decides to increase teachers' salaries. According to you, the taxpayer, the teacher is certainly an important person and you want him to be well paid. But do you want it to be paid well without your influence with your money?

Every one of us at school sometimes had a teacher we hated from the bottom of our hearts, who we thought had nothing to do in education. And now imagine that your money will also increase his salary. The hated teacher he laughs in your eyes - He could have ruined your youth and you still pay him for it. How does it feel?

You might say to yourself: God! I only want to pay for those good teachers! I want to appreciate only those who can teach well, only those who are quality teachers! Let the state add only to capable teachers!

However - the state? Who is this state? Can we go to a coffee shop with the state and talk about taxes? We can't. But we can go talk to the official…

If you want the taxpayer to make the "choice" to which teacher to add and which to not, the "state" do, in fact, you want the "official to decide for you." This request of yours will cause the state apparatus to take additional money from you to decide for you. However, it is even more absurd - the official will select according to his subjective criteria.

As a result, it's the same as giving a stranger in a cafe money to order you the coffee he likes. So - although you like mild espresso, a "Turk in glass" can get to you. You can't complain - you paid for something you wanted and got. Regardless of the fact that you have to pay the stranger for making that choice for you.

Wouldn't it be cheaper and more beneficial if you could choose your own coffee? Wouldn't it be better if you decided which teachers you would appreciate and which you wouldn't?

Imagine all those annoying officials who ever bothered your life, and now realize that you pay them for it. I don't know about you taxpayer, but it strikes me as a form of sadomasochism.

Surely you will argue now that this is not true. That you are paying those officials to help you!

I have to disappoint you again, but this is not the case. All state laws, regulations and rules are artificially created and we humans create them. Every rule that delays and annoys us is only our creation.

If it is the official's job to apply these rules, we have the official to restrict us by regulation. At present, however, the situation is all the more absurd because, in order to be familiar with all those officials and their rules, we need other officials who, in turn, limit us, because we also have to pay for them.

It's as if the owner of the company hired officials who should "help" him in orientation in his own company - what kind of department does, which department it belongs to, and so on. Every business that needs its "bureaucracy for bureaucracy" is doing badly and not working effectively. It does not create costs for customer satisfaction, but costs for self-satisfaction. That is absurd.

Dear taxpayer, let's go back to the beginning - there is no state money, there is only your money. This is a basic principle that you should apply when receiving all reports on the state's finances.

But also, realize that just as it is your money, so is the money of other taxpayers in that "bundle" of money. Realize that not everyone has your subjective preferences and Not everyone wants to give money for the same thing you do. It would be bad if we forced others to pay what they did not want, or if we denied them the right to pay what they wanted.

You may now be wondering what the way out is. The starting point would, of course, be to abolish taxes, but let us accept that this solution is unrealistic at the moment. The real solution is to keep taxes as low as possible - to force as few people as possible to pay what they do not want to be damaged as little as possible. And then, then it will be time to decide if we still need taxes.

Of course, if someone wants to pay something extra, we can't stop anyone from doing so. Whether he goes to the market and "buys" the farm or service. Just as we cannot prevent anyone from buying a "Turk in glass" that we do not like, we cannot prevent anyone from voluntarily contributing to various funds that may help poorer people. Just as we can't block this payment, we shouldn't force anyone into this payment.

I hope, dear taxpayer, that you take something from this little guide. Thank you for your attention.


  1. I can't agree with the previous comment "Clasica", the article is exactly what every taxpayer should be aware of very often and that it is always about his money, when it comes to the budget of any state-run institution, building, anything. Unfortunately, I think that there are many people like Clasic, to whom the article will not bring anything, because, for example, they just do not want to hear about the fact that state money is also his money.

Comments are off.