Topic: Why do people think income tax is ok? - page 14. (Read 17875 times)

Nope. You can work and not pay any income or council tax or move to a place that doesn't require these things if you're so offended and outraged by state "theft". And it's not stealing if you willingly give up something. You choose to do that. You can't have it both ways. Or you could, but I guess you're not willing to do that or find ways around it without making some sacrifices, so you just continue paying your masters wages whilst doing nothing but complaining about it on the internet.

Take a step back and read this again.

You're saying it's fine to steal from someone just because they've decided to work and better their life. Is that a morally defensible position?

Again, what's the alternative? To live, you either earn an income, or you take from others. You seem to be advocating the latter.

Nazi Germany collapsed because it took a bite bigger than it could chew, not because of it's unethical ways.
America is unethical - they are doing ok. Emirates are very unethical - also ok. Etc, etc, etc...

On a side note: "holocaust" benefited every other jew on the planet. Mostly it enabled the bitching and moaning, or rather the "right to bitch and moan".

I think you're argument against my rationale is that while I may think that tax money may be spent on useful things for everyone, another may disagree, and therefore we have to decide who is correct.  Do I understand you?

We can argue anything is okay if it has benefits; perhaps the holocaust benefited someone who needed a Jew dead.  Naturally, we view the holocaust as a bad thing, because we apply the concepts of ethics.  I personally believe ethics should come standard to any society, otherwise it only collapses in the end; without a clear vision of what's acceptable behavior and what isn't, we get stuck with dichotomies such as, "It's okay for these people to steal and kidnap, but not okay for those people", and law so convoluted that not even lawyers understand it completely, so overdone that the average Joe commits at least one crime daily.  Naturally, anyone who wants to steal and kidnap legally flocks to the first group, and anyone who believes in a virtuous society gets stuck at the wrong end of the gun; it punishes the good and rewards the bad, and I'm certain you would agree that this is not the kind of behavior we should respond positively to, especially not when we have our own laws against theft that do not apply to this special group.

You are arguing that theft is moral if it leads to positive outcomes; this is an impossible position to hold without the belief that not everyone deserves equal rights, with yourself being one of those people who requires less rights than others, which is the most troubling aspect of such a belief; surely you seek the same rights as everyone else, don't we all?  If some people can steal, why can't we all?  Rather, I would prefer it if we all had this right to protect ourselves from thieves, as opposed to the right of robbing everyone, as the former seems sustainable.

Even if the stolen money is used for good deeds, are you not capable of paying for these good deeds voluntarily?  Are there unknown forces of this world which prevents people from paying for the transportation that only the group with special rights can conquer?  It seems unlikely to me.

The reason that I think that income tax is okay is that my government uses it to do useful things for everyone.  One example is funding the public transportation system which we all benefit from (both riders and non-riders benefit; non-riders benefit from reduced traffic on the roads).  There are many other examples of useful things which can be done with taxes.

I don't have the right to access public services in the country I'm currently staying, so I can't speak for myself, but I hear the locals complain a lot, and there has to be a reason. Back to myself, since I'm much less "protected" by a nation above my shoulders, I have to be much more cautious. Now, let's imagine a world where everybody would live in a foreign country, without access to the safety net they have in their own country. I say it would be a better place.

I'm not sure what you mean exactly. Can you elaborate?

Have you ever taken a look at people who try to be productive and work, and also try to not pay taxes? The force quickly becomes evident.

EDIT: Of course, I'm speaking of within countries where they steal your labor and call it an "income tax."

Poor you.

Is working not voluntary either? Were you forced into a high-paying job by someone? It continually baffles me how people seem to think that they don't have a choice. You choose to work and choose to pay taxes on the money you earn, you just like to have a whine about it sat in front of your iMacs and iPhones whilst shaking your first angrily at all that tax you was (not) "forced" to pay on them.

You could vote with your taxes. Stop paying their wages, but of course people don't want to do this as they don't want the possible discomfort because you want your cushy little life and lots of money and nice things. I don't think you can have it both ways.

I'd gladly contribute to charities which I believe make a real difference. And if those charities start fiddling their expenses or embezzling money I'd instantly switch my donations to another one. What's the choice now - wait five years for a vote, and expect that to make a difference?

Seeing as I have an income, I owe money in taxes. Seeing as I need an income to live and sustain a decent standard of living, there's no choice about tax. Tax isn't voluntary.


The middle-class majority.

It's high for who exactly? And hiring security personal is up to the individual business. The police are not there to keep an eye on the contents of your store 24/7, but if there was any trouble the police would be the first people they call as security guards are essentially powerless.

People often complain that public services are shoddy yet I've never really had any problems with the NHS or police or environmental health services etc etc nor do I know anyone who has. Could they be run more efficiently and better? Of course. If I had any say I'd slash the defence budget and stop frittering money away on wars and put that money back into the system, but regardless of that; if your house burns down or you're in a serious accident you'll get sorted fairly quickly, but yeah, you might have to wait a few hours, but I can guarantee you wont get sorted pretty quick if we got rid of all these public services and you had to rely on community & charity emergency services or you couldn't afford to pay for them. People don't seem to think about the impact their choices have on others, just as long as they can say "I want the right to choose", and people already have that, but they'd just rather hypocritically keep paying their taxes and not cause a fuss.

I'd say exactly the opposite. Your tax money is very high and you get second rate services.
Public healthcare services are poor, and many firms have to hire security agents because in many cities, the police forces have failed to deliver what was expected from them.

The original poster has left and that's probably a good thing, but for this post, I'll stand by his side, because somehow, it is possible not to pay any income tax. But few people can do it.

We've already seen the hypothesis of living in the streets, but there are also upmarket solutions.

There is no income tax, nor any capital gains tax in Monaco by example. One could move there, the only problem being that property is incredibly expensive as the city-state is so small. A small one bedroom costs more than a million $! If you can afford that, and don't mind living in a small place, then it's fine.

So you've got the choice of being dirt-poor or filthy-rich, but if you're the average person, you'll have to pay plenty of tax.

I'm happy when no-one is pointing a gun/court at my head and demanding I do what they say. Violence is bad, mmmm'kay.

So you're happy to pay taxes as long as they're not called taxes?



 .

Isn't there some states that have no income tax?

Before the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913, there was no income tax in the US. Just some tariffs, and limited government. There were some states that had no tariffs, either; the state governments paid for their existence by issuing currency at (minimal) interest, and levied no tax of any kind on their citizens.

I'm equally reminded of American's first reactions to the idea of compulsory schooling; they fought against it, understanding that their children were to be indoctrinated by the state. That indoctrination has been so successful that most people don't even know that a bare 100 years ago, there was no income tax.

I have no idea why people think any form of tax is ok, because it's akin to saying that violence is acceptable. I would happily, voluntarily pay for services like hospitals and roads; I do not happily pay at the point of a gun/court.

Some history at http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/14268-before-the-income-tax

Income tax with EITC is great in the US so long as you're relatively poor. I can't wait for workplace to send over my W2s.

Where exactly did I say there's only one system or say anything intolerant? In fact, I said the opposite. People have a right to choose and there are already other choices and people do in fact choose alternatives. It's these 'taxes are bad people' who are making out like they don't have a choice at all because they like to feel persecuted whilst simultaneously paying their masters wages. Ironically they do have a choice, they just don't want to choose.

How about allowing a different system? You keep telling people what they do and do not have the right to choose, and you're desperate to prove that no-one should be able to choose anything anything but this one particular model of delivering services to people. That's kind of intolerant really, if you or whoever wanted to be a full-on communist, I wouldn't care, as long as I could choose something else.