[languagewars]

> Saying "it's nothing" is a losing argument in every town hall meeting that ever takes place. $32 million is a lot of parks, operations, libraries, and whatever else you like.

You have changed the scale by 2 orders of magnitude to make it something.

$100 is a 5th of someone people's yearly salary, so how dare you waste it on entertainment every month?

[blowski]

Compare:

    $100 is nothing so it doesn't matter what I spend it on.

to

    I spend $100 on entertainment every month because I like watching TV.

To clarify, the $32 million spent by 18F sounds like fantastic value for money, and we should emphasise that value.

[languagewars]

I left out that I meant 2 orders of magnitude in government. Comparing federal spending to what would be waste in a town or county is an example of giving into propaganda steered stupidity as an acceptable norm.

I don't disagree that this is a terrific value. I disagree with it coming up for discussion like this in absolute terms when nothing the federal government does that is blatantly absurd could ever discussed in absolute terms without seemingly like an unworldly statistic at any local level besides, maybe, in NYC.

There are 34,000 $32 million dollar units in federal discretionary spending. I'm willing to bet that if someone randomly samples another one it will be worse than this one.

That 32 million may be enough for a town to redo it its main library if it received it through complex graft using a rider (and then some kind of magic to get it to the town level) is a bizarre distraction from anything meaningful at the federal level.

[blowski]

I refer you to Tip O'Neill's observation that "All politics is local".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_politics_is_local

I believe the Government should spend the money, but I also believe that you can't wave away any concerns about it by claiming it's not worth worrying about.

[languagewars]

Well, I like the "see also" in that entry.. Do you think they will buy a school or a prison with their graft? Will the 99 other senators who want $32m each be so good as your own?

If you want to reduce federal spending and federal tax so that the local system can tax then that's great. If you question the federal government spending $1 out of $34000 on a reasonable global service, then please tell me why my wife would be reasonable in questioning my $1 a year new year's burger, but my converting from a standard $40 a month ATDT service to a $3400 a year program to turn our kids into psychopathic murderers who are sometimes willing to protect us is an unquestionable rational expense.

[MichaelBurge]

If you don't pay even $100 in taxes, the government will seize your assets with a levy or - if you continue to resist - send goons to threaten you at gunpoint to turn the money over. Snapchat gets a free pass, because they don't force their investors to pay using a police force. The IRS maintains its own SWAT team dedicated to enforcement of the tax code.

I'm not saying the FBI shouldn't get a TV in the breakroom, but there's no level of money that shouldn't have a good justification.

18F seems easy to justify.

[vkou]

False. This is complete nonsense.

If you owe $100 in taxes, the government will ask you nicely to pay it.

Then, when you refuse to pay it, they will mark it up with a bit of interest, and ask you nicely to pay it.

Then, when you refuse to pay it, they'll deduct it out of your next year's tax return, and call it even.

Then, if you didn't have a tax return, they'll put a mark on your social security account, and will pay themselves out of your social security cheque.

Then, if you didn't have a tax return, or social security, they'll put a lien on your house, so if you refuse to pay it, they will get paid when you sell your house.

Then, if you still haven't paid your taxes, and don't have a tax return, or social security, or a house, they will complain to a credit agency, and ding your credit rating.

Then, if you still haven't paid your taxes, don't have a tax return, or social security, or a house, or care about your credit, and you are not going to suffer economic hardship because of it, they may take money out of your bank account, or your car, or your property, sell it, and give the remainder to you.

Then, if all those means are exhausted, and you have been particularly belligerent about this process, and owe a lot of taxes, you might be looking at jail time. (At this point, have you considered just paying your debts? Or, perhaps, declaring bankruptcy?)

They will give you many, many, many chance to pay what you owe. The steps that they will take to collect are both reasonable, and proportionate.

Please don't spread nonsense about armed goons at gunpoint stealing 'your' money. That would be civil forfeiture, courtesy of your local police department, not the IRS.

[protomyth]

Actually, what you wrote there has some false parts. They send a certified letter and will put a lien on you bank account for the amount if you don't respond fast enough[1]. They add interest immediately, there is no grace period. You can arrange monthly payments (they are required to let you do this the first time). They will deduct the money you owe from the next year's return.

1) Fast enough can get a little weird. Had to loan a friend money because of a mistake and he didn't even get the letter before the lien happened. Saw him pull up his bank account on a Monday morning after his card was rejected at breakfast. He came in the next day with the certified letter and listened to him call the IRS about the problem with his return. They did get new computers a couple years ago, and it was not a good thing since it seemed they might have sent the first letter to a prior address. They were sorry, but too bad.

[MichaelBurge]

The context is someone arguing that you shouldn't worry about the federal government wasting $32 million, because it's chump change for them. My point is the polite requests they make are ultimately backed up by these SWAT teams, and that you shouldn't take taxation lightly as a result. Obviously very few cases require them to deploy a SWAT team, since most people would rationally choose to pay the $100.

I'm not saying taxation is bad or that they'll jump on you at the first sign of disobedience, just that the commenter's callous attitude towards spending tax money is bad. It's a very entitled mindset that no government official should have.