Subnostr

In my opinion, I think I have made a number of compelling cases in defense of taxation. I have yet to hear a convincing rational argument from anyone.

One thing to note about my opinion is level of nuance entailed to understand. People talk about wokism being a mind virus but don’t stop to consider maybe their conspiratorial ancap/right wing/libertarian viewpoint is equally capable of being a mind virus, so much so they can’t appreciate the nuance of my opinion. I put forth this idea and see if anyone wishes to discuss further:

Any possible critique that you have against taxation, is a critique against the current instantiation of taxation. If you critique the endless wars, the wasteful and frivolous spending, the COERCIVE nature of taxation, the “too high” nature of taxes; those are all good and valid critiques to make and point out.

Let me posit you this question. If you paid $0.01 cent in taxes every year, would you argue as vehemently that taxation is theft? Maybe, but that would be an absolute abysmal hot take. Paying $0.01 in taxes to gain access to living in the greatest country in the world would be an absolute steal of an exchange to take advantage of. If the US government could somehow provide all of the services that it currently does, without using deficit spending, while only collecting $0.01 in taxation, it would be the largest asymmetrical bet in history, even bigger than bitcoin 🫨 the opportunity it would gain you in exchange for the cost of what you payed is inconceivable. This is all to point out… taxation is a discussion of whether you feel the taxes you pay are worth what you receive in exchange for them. It is not theft, because it’s an exchange. It doesn’t have to be coercive, because there is a low enough amount that you would willingly and gladly commit (clammer and beg even) to that exchange.

The Beave 2y ago

I am consistent: all taxation is theft.

I should not have to pay anything to exist. That's the same as slavery. I'm not afflicted by any mind virus. My beliefs and logic are consistent and sound, based on morals and virtue that are also grounded in substantive and vetted foundations.

If one person may not steal from me, a group of people doing it is only that much worse. You are, equivalently, promoting gang rape. It doesn't matter if it's "just the tip." Rape is rape. Theft is theft. Taxation is also theft since it is only promulgated via the coercive power of the state.

You are trying to get people to tolerate evil. You are uncomfortable with someone who is not afflicted with your ignorance and want them to stop questioning your logic and your motivation.

Can you have a small community with like minded people who give of their resources willingly and possibly even contractually to improve the lot of those in said community? Yes. But, that does not scale well, or, it hasn't previously.

I do not require many of the services that you think are necessary. Therefore, I should not be forced to pay for them. Your arguments are hollow since they still rely on coercive power, which, IMO, is actually evil.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Dakota 2y ago

When you pay for food, is that theft, or an exchange? That’s you paying to exist.

The Beave 2y ago

It's a willing exchange of money/value for goods.

Dakota 2y ago

I guess you could willingly choose to not procure food and then starve to death, is that your point?

The Beave 2y ago

No, ya dingus. My point is that I am free to make that exchange if I desire and have the resources to trade.

Dakota 2y ago

No, the point is that you have to make the exchange at some point, or else you die. You have to pay to live, it’s not an argument about whether you have a choice or not. You said “I shouldn’t have to pay to exist” but you do. At some point you have to pay to live; you have to pay for the food at some point or else you die. Whether you have a choice regarding who you buy the food from is a mute point.

There are other examples like land/property. You exist in physical meat space, and you must exist in a location. Land is not free. In order for you to exist, you have to either buy land, or rent land from someone else. That means you have to pay to exist.

If you want to talk about having freedom to make exchange, that’s what democracy and voting is. In a perfect world, you can vote and control the terms of the exchange; how much you pay and what you get in return. In a perfect world you would get the same optionality as you would from buying groceries. But at some point, the exchange must occur, just like groceries.

The Beave 2y ago

The point is that I'm making the exchange with other people, directly. No government or taxation is needed or wanted. I could also beg or panhandle. I could trespass and forage if I don't have my own property. (Though I'd rather not have to do that.)

Let me clarify: I should not have to pay taxes to live freely. There are many costs associated with living, and at the bare minimum: food, water, clothing, and shelter. There's no reason for any government to be involved in any of those, as that only increases costs and diminishes quality.

Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is the tyranny of the majority. Voting is directing where the guns are pointed. Both are bad, at best, and downright evil in practice.

Voting does not control terms of exchange, especially not now. Voting has been co-opted into a game of diminishing liberty and extracting more and more value from more and more people.

Yes, exchanges must occur, but, taxation and the government are not at all needed to live well on one's own.

Dakota 2y ago

What if I told you taxation is an exchange with other people, directly. You pay money to people, directly, and in exchange, you are given access to certain good and services. At what point are people not involved with taxation? And how is it not direct? And if it were indirect (which I don’t know if it is isn’t and whether it has to be that way or not) what is your disagreement with the indirectness of it?

The Beave 2y ago

I think your definition is incorrect if you think that a middleman or ten in between my money and some effect is "direct."

In my definition, I directly give money to a person and receive expected goods/services.

My issue with taxation is that it is immoral. It is wrong to steal. How is taxation NOT theft? I am coerced to pay taxes or face penalties up to and including death if I (rightfully) resist. I have never once signed a contract guaranteeing that my taxes go towards anything that I might consider useful. Which, even it things are useful, it's still wrong since others wouldn't and NO ONE should have heave their earned money taken from them without permission.

Nobody 2y ago

Don't forget all the in effective middle men get paid for being leaches 🙄

Jac 2y ago

It is possible to control taxation such that you see the taxes you pay as an exchange for goods and services. Having read this conversation it seems to me that you think you’re paying a fair tax load for the services you’re receiving and the Beave doesn’t. To some degree your choice of state makes a difference. Pay to live in CA if you love the weather, live in WY if you hate paying taxes and the weather isn’t as important. Federal taxes aren’t 30%, and some military presence is important. It’s not all or none, having lived outside the US, I appreciate, and don’t mind paying for some of what US governance offers. Start a business and learn how to fill out the long form 1040 and required schedules yourself. You will pay less tax and feel better about the taxes you do pay likely. The business doesn’t have to be profitable, in fact it’s better if it isn’t, choose something you do and enjoy anyway, fishing guide, photography, it doesn’t matter. Take the reigns, you aren’t a victim. 😁 👍🏻 @The_Beave

Dakota 2y ago

No, I don’t think we are paying a fair tax load for the goods and services we receive. I think we are getting shafted by high taxes probably as much as anyone. I think taxes should be lower, and I think taxes shouldn’t be spent on nearly as many things as they currently are. But this is not an argument against taxation in general. You can critique the current instantiation of government/taxes. But that is not an argument against government/taxes.

Jac 2y ago

Sales tax makes some sense in the right context, property and income taxes make no sense economically because a tax disincentivizes the activity. Could it be that we just need more pay for use and accountability?

Dakota 2y ago

The exact methods with which taxes are collected are up for healthy discussion. I don’t presume to have the answers. Critiques with the current methods are not arguments against taxes in general.

Jac 2y ago

No disagreement here. Same.