Topic: Defend Taxation - page 7. (Read 6171 times)
So far nobody's given me a decent justification for taxation. The closest has been FirstAscent, and he can't come up with my rental agreement, since he says that's what taxes are, rent to the State, so am I to conclude that Taxation has no justification?
Government is inevitable. Government = taxation. Therefor the question is moot, but that is no fun is it. So...
I would rather "fund" a good, or at least decent government, than allow a bad one to take over. If one were to take over I would find a way for myself to stop paying taxes.
You asked where your rental agreement is. What makes your biological parents your biological parents? It just is. It is something we all have to live with.
You tell us not to attack ancap. A government without taxation is basically ancap, so it is kinda hard not to attack it.
I would rather "fund" a good, or at least decent government, than allow a bad one to take over. If one were to take over I would find a way for myself to stop paying taxes.
You asked where your rental agreement is. What makes your biological parents your biological parents? It just is. It is something we all have to live with.
You tell us not to attack ancap. A government without taxation is basically ancap, so it is kinda hard not to attack it.
I don't quite follow you.
I'm not saying "don't attack AnCap", I'm just saying that this is not the thread to do it in. I'm looking, here, for justifications of taxation. Defending taxation on it's own merits, not tearing down other systems.
I find it interesting that you say government is inevitable. Why do you say that?
So I say again, if I am a tenant of this nation in which I live, Where is the rental agreement?
I already answered your question.
Your answer was decidedly a poor one. I can own property without ever once touching a W-4. So, find me a better "rental agreement", and show me where I signed.
I'll find you a better "rental agreement" when you find me a nation that offers what you want.
Nice try. But the thread title is not "Defend AnCap" I did that one already. It's "Defend Taxation" and you're failing miserably.
So I say again, if I am a tenant of this nation in which I live, Where is the rental agreement?
I already answered your question.
Your answer was decidedly a poor one. I can own property without ever once touching a W-4. So, find me a better "rental agreement", and show me where I signed.
I'll find you a better "rental agreement" when you find me a nation that offers what you want.
So I say again, if I am a tenant of this nation in which I live, Where is the rental agreement?
I already answered your question.
Your answer was decidedly a poor one. I can own property without ever once touching a W-4. So, find me a better "rental agreement", and show me where I signed.
So I say again, if I am a tenant of this nation in which I live, Where is the rental agreement?
I already answered your question. You make choices when you agree to be paid, pay, or what you choose to own. Just like in your fabled AnCap world, you can agree to enter into contracts and get the benefits, or not, and not get the benefits. In a nation, you can make choices to not earn, to not buy, to not own.
Imagine now, how in your AnCap world, you still have to make those choices, and be bound to the respective contracts.
Really, it all boils down to bundled contracts. You prefer a general unbundling. Fine! Go find a service provider in the world that unbundles it all for you. Note: you should read the last sentence to mean "Go find a nation that unbundles it all for you."
You're a tenant within the nation you live in. You are granted rights to "own" property, which does not have the same meaning as the way the nation owns property. You are free to agree to these terms, or leave.
Where's the rental agreement?
Your W-4.
You seem to be mistaken. That is a tax form. It says nothing about tenancy. Moreover, it only applies to a specific subset of the population, of which I may or may not be a part.
So I say again, if I am a tenant of this nation in which I live, Where is the rental agreement?
You're a tenant within the nation you live in. You are granted rights to "own" property, which does not have the same meaning as the way the nation owns property. You are free to agree to these terms, or leave.
Where's the rental agreement?
Your W-4.
Quote
And if I don't own land, why am I being taxed for other things?
Because you're like a tenant of a landlord.
Quote
And more importantly, why do they call it ownership, if it's really not?
Semantics will never win an argument.
You're a tenant within the nation you live in. You are granted rights to "own" property, which does not have the same meaning as the way the nation owns property. You are free to agree to these terms, or leave.
Where's the rental agreement? And if I don't own land, why am I being taxed for other things? And more importantly, why do they call it ownership, if it's really not?
You're a tenant within the nation you live in. You are granted rights to "own" property, which does not have the same meaning as the way the nation owns property. You are free to agree to these terms, or leave.
Now, take the HOA as an example. You're free to stay, pay dues, be regulated, or leave, but you'll ultimately have to square up with the HOA. If you stay, but don't pay dues and refuse to be regulated while in the HOA, legal issues will befall you.
Now, take the HOA as an example. You're free to stay, pay dues, be regulated, or leave, but you'll ultimately have to square up with the HOA. If you stay, but don't pay dues and refuse to be regulated while in the HOA, legal issues will befall you.
You cant leave and go somewhere else without permission - passports etc
There really isnt anywhere to escape too from government on earth.
Then it appears that it's inevitable - government, that is. Ever considered then that AnCap won't last long, and evolve into government?
You're a tenant within the nation you live in. You are granted rights to "own" property, which does not have the same meaning as the way the nation owns property. You are free to agree to these terms, or leave.
Now, take the HOA as an example. You're free to stay, pay dues, be regulated, or leave, but you'll ultimately have to square up with the HOA. If you stay, but don't pay dues and refuse to be regulated while in the HOA, legal issues will befall you.
Now, take the HOA as an example. You're free to stay, pay dues, be regulated, or leave, but you'll ultimately have to square up with the HOA. If you stay, but don't pay dues and refuse to be regulated while in the HOA, legal issues will befall you.
You cant leave and go somewhere else without permission - passports etc
There really isnt anywhere to escape too from government on earth.
You're a tenant within the nation you live in. You are granted rights to "own" property, which does not have the same meaning as the way the nation owns property. You are free to agree to these terms, or leave.
Now, take the HOA as an example. You're free to stay, pay dues, be regulated, or leave, but you'll ultimately have to square up with the HOA. If you stay, but don't pay dues and refuse to be regulated while in the HOA, legal issues will befall you.
What happens when the tax is global and collected by the UN? Now, take the HOA as an example. You're free to stay, pay dues, be regulated, or leave, but you'll ultimately have to square up with the HOA. If you stay, but don't pay dues and refuse to be regulated while in the HOA, legal issues will befall you.
Complacency or rebellion, depending on the happiness of the people. Simple question. Simple answer.
You're a tenant within the nation you live in. You are granted rights to "own" property, which does not have the same meaning as the way the nation owns property. You are free to agree to these terms, or leave.
Now, take the HOA as an example. You're free to stay, pay dues, be regulated, or leave, but you'll ultimately have to square up with the HOA. If you stay, but don't pay dues and refuse to be regulated while in the HOA, legal issues will befall you.
What happens when the tax is global and collected by the UN? Now, take the HOA as an example. You're free to stay, pay dues, be regulated, or leave, but you'll ultimately have to square up with the HOA. If you stay, but don't pay dues and refuse to be regulated while in the HOA, legal issues will befall you.
here we go...
You're a tenant within the nation you live in. You are granted rights to "own" property, which does not have the same meaning as the way the nation owns property. You are free to agree to these terms, or leave.
Now, take the HOA as an example. You're free to stay, pay dues, be regulated, or leave, but you'll ultimately have to square up with the HOA. If you stay, but don't pay dues and refuse to be regulated while in the HOA, legal issues will befall you.
Now, take the HOA as an example. You're free to stay, pay dues, be regulated, or leave, but you'll ultimately have to square up with the HOA. If you stay, but don't pay dues and refuse to be regulated while in the HOA, legal issues will befall you.
What if we silently stole all of Bill Gates' money and used it for welfare? Would that make many people happy?
I'm fairly certain it would... except for the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, Bill & Melinda themselves, their kids (do they have kids? I'm not sure.), All the people they employ, Microsoft, etc. So while it might make some people happy for a while, it would cause deep and lasting harm to many others.
What if we silently stole all of Bill Gates' money and used it for welfare? Would that make many people happy?
Aha!
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-purpose-of-life-and-the-goal-of-a-perfect-society-98916
If forcibly taxing a few rich people to make many poor people happy works, and it results in more total happiness than a charity would, then that taxation should be done. That's a big if-and, but I stand by the if-and-then. (Logically, taking the ((a AND b) --> c) as a whole, the whole is only false if (a is true, and b is true, and c is false)).
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-purpose-of-life-and-the-goal-of-a-perfect-society-98916
If forcibly taxing a few rich people to make many poor people happy works, and it results in more total happiness than a charity would, then that taxation should be done. That's a big if-and, but I stand by the if-and-then. (Logically, taking the ((a AND b) --> c) as a whole, the whole is only false if (a is true, and b is true, and c is false)).
Except that forcible taxation has demonstrably been proven to create a great deal of unhappiness.
Aha!
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-purpose-of-life-and-the-goal-of-a-perfect-society-98916
If forcibly taxing a few rich people to make many poor people happy works, and it results in more total happiness than a charity would, then that taxation should be done. That's a big if-and, but I stand by the if-and-then. (Logically, taking the ((a AND b) --> c) as a whole, the whole is only false if (a is true, and b is true, and c is false)).
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-purpose-of-life-and-the-goal-of-a-perfect-society-98916
If forcibly taxing a few rich people to make many poor people happy works, and it results in more total happiness than a charity would, then that taxation should be done. That's a big if-and, but I stand by the if-and-then. (Logically, taking the ((a AND b) --> c) as a whole, the whole is only false if (a is true, and b is true, and c is false)).
I'll bite.
Sure, the government does provide some services which are useful; I might even go so far as to say that a subset of those are "necessary."
Sure, the government does provide some services which are useful; I might even go so far as to say that a subset of those are "necessary."
Thanks.
I'd say yes but on reflection its hard to say what services would require government
You're making my case for me!
I meant, specifically, that some services currently provided by government are necessary and useful. Some examples: Transportation infrastructure, mail, protection, and justice.
My case is that these services can be provided privately, without resorting to force to get people to pay for them. Because they are both useful and necessary, people will pay for them. Some of the other ones which while not necessary, are useful, such as welfare, and other social support services can be paid for voluntarily as well, because those who would not object to contributing would contribute voluntarily, to a charity which provides them.
Jump to: