If you didn’t have to pay taxes, but you still had to place that capital somewhere that benefited society (ie: not personal leisure or luxury), where would you place it?
Discussion
I like public libraries, parks, public transit, smooth roads, infrastructure in general
Should those be privatised?
I’d prefer not.
Taxes is the equivalent of trying to figure out how a large group at a restaurant should split the check on an exponential scale. You can call it something else. End of the day someone still needs to pay the bill.
Should the tax code be simplified, yes. Should we have a discussion about what gets taxed and how much, yes. Should we discuss what our taxes fund, yes.
And can this be decided centrally with an outcome that is different from the present one?
Please clarify what you mean by decided centrally
If a decision(a) needs to be taken and agreed upon/enforced universally, then I am assuming there’s a central authority that does it.
Do you consider government as a whole to be a central authority?
If there were no taxes and no social support by the state, I think non-profit charities and companies would emerge that would fill the gap and compete against each other, which most effectively serve the needs of society. ppl would then choose which social company or charity they would invest in.
Would you always consider it an investment that requires a return? What percentage would you be comfortable simply donating away with no direct personal benefit?