Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Awful argument in favor of taxation

rated by 0 users
This post has 7 Replies | 4 Followers

Top 200 Contributor
Posts 412
Points 8,630
fezwhatley Posted: Mon, Nov 30 2009 3:34 PM

http://www.philosophyetc.net/2005/06/why-taxation-is-not-theft.html

Before i read it i was optimistic that they would give a real compelling argument for taxation, but it is remarkable weak.

1. Author claims that inequality in an economy is arbitrary lol. So thats one reason for redistributing wealth

2. Claims taxes are needed for negative externatities. Apparently consumption of fossil fuels needs to be punished and curtailed, even though modern civilization and all the wonders of technology are made possible by these awful externalities.

3. Couldn't make sense of his "social" argument. Need more clarification on that

4. Claims that taxes are a fundemental part of a political system, as if a government must inherently tax its citizens.  If it seems so fundemental and implied, then How did the US government exist for 100 years without an Income tax?

 

do we get free cheezeburger in socielism?

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 785
Points 13,445

All arguments on the subject are invariabley bull. It's just confiscating money at gunpoint and putting it where no sane system would recieve a payoff.

"Lo! I am weary of my wisdom, like the bee that hath gathered too much honey; I need hands outstretched to take it." -Thus Spake Zarathustra
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 166
Points 2,875
Beefheart replied on Mon, Nov 30 2009 3:38 PM

I have no idea how in the hell he thought this refuted the "taxation is theft" argument, but I am just dumbstruck all the same by the poorness of this argument.

My personal Anarcho-Capitalist flag. The symbol in the center stands for "harmony" and "protection"-- I'm hoping to illustrate the bond between order/justice and anarchy.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 300
Points 5,325

omg the princeton doofus just dropped the "taxation is justified because no one would have gotten to where they are if it wasn't for the community's help... like government schools! .... and so people should be forced to give back to the community"  (in the comments)

Logic:  taxation provides for government schools ----> taxation is justified

In other words: taxation exists ----> taxation is justified

Are people really this stupid?

I mean this is "deus ex machina" school of philosophy.  Analyze the current criminal gang that is performing violence to people, and then somehow introduce some ridiculous after-the-fact explanation that justifies it.  Their violence is okay, well, because sometimes they give a bit of their loot back to people...  Oh, and there are government schools!!!

The guy even admits that he went to government school and liked it.  So it's no wonder where he got his philosophy.

The fact is, he can't imagine a world without government because he knows little about human action.  And because he can't imagine a world without government, he feels to need to come up with a justification for it.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 76
Points 1,100
Amadeus replied on Mon, Nov 30 2009 7:57 PM

NewLiberty:

omg the princeton doofus just dropped the "taxation is justified because no one would have gotten to where they are if it wasn't for the community's help... like government schools! .... and so people should be forced to give back to the community"  (in the comments)

 

I always like hearing this argument. My dad got cancer, had chemo, had his arm amputated, and when offered food stamps, or forms of government welfare, he denied them. And now he's successful. What does his argument mean now that my dad didn't take any forms of welfare, and became successful?

 

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 7,105
Points 115,240
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

i think this means that your dad is awesome

Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid

Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 114
Points 2,280

Amadeus:

NewLiberty:

omg the princeton doofus just dropped the "taxation is justified because no one would have gotten to where they are if it wasn't for the community's help... like government schools! .... and so people should be forced to give back to the community"  (in the comments)

 

I always like hearing this argument. My dad got cancer, had chemo, had his arm amputated, and when offered food stamps, or forms of government welfare, he denied them. And now he's successful. What does his argument mean now that my dad didn't take any forms of welfare, and became successful?

 

Wow, that story is pretty inspirational.

It means that  the losers in a trailer park that live off welfare, who grew up in a "bad home environment", have no excuse get paid with other people's money to sit on their asses for the rest of their lives.

 

Robbery: The nation's fastest growing career!

Duties: Giving the people their bread and circuses, extracting payment by force, validating legitimacy, etc.

Job Outlook: Ever increasing and shows no signs of stopping!

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,552
Points 46,640
AJ replied on Tue, Dec 1 2009 10:12 PM

The worst effect of the welfare state may be the damage it wreaks on human psychology. Taking away people's sense of personal responsibility and accountability is one of the surest ways to ensure they achieve little.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (8 items) | RSS