Thursday, November 5, 2009

ZenTiger Tax is theft or is theft tax?

DimPost has penned a post that I think could fairly be categorized as "chardonnay socialism" at its best, especially when taking the comments into account. One thread muses about the potential theft of public money. Apparently, such theft occurs whenever a Government decides to lower taxes. I think this quote by StephenR sums up the position nicely:

No-one is disputing that people should be able to spend “their” money on whatever they like. The question is, how much money should be “theirs” in the first place.

I must say that it is novel to see the "tax is theft" mantra turned on it's head. With socialism, paying less tax to the government means you are keeping their money you earned.

Another question might be, "And after disputing a person's earnings, why does it automatically become the governments to take?"

Yes, I realise this is all really about people paying their "fair share" for their existence in this world, and that the world isn't particularly fair about things like that. I'm just not so sure Socialism achieves the fairness people are looking for.

In any event, my point is nothing more than noticing that a perspective is such an interesting thing to move about the place. Take it out and push it about from time to time. A sense of humour or interior design skills may help find the optimal placement.

3 comment(s):

macdoctor said...

There's plenty of theft of public money going on, Zen. It's just not going on at the IRD input side...

ZenTiger said...

But by "public" money, do you mean 100% of people's wages, which they think is theirs, but it's all the government which kindly rebates some of it?

libertyscott said...

"I realise this is all really about people paying their "fair share" for their existence in this world"

Why does one have to pay "rent" to the state for existing? My existence is not a charge upon others. Why must anyone have such an unchosen obligation?

I exist for my own purposes and in my own right, as a sovereign human being. As long as I do not interfere with the same right in another (including their property), I should be left alone.

As it happens, I wish the state to provide me protection through the criminal justice system and defence, and would happily voluntarily pay for this.

It is plain as can be that taxation is the taking of property by force. For me to do it is theft. Government should only exist as an aggregation of the rights of the people it exists to protect and serve. So how can government have powers over those people that the people themselves could not exercise against each other?

If another commits a crime, I should have the power of a citizen's arrest so that person can be placed in police custody. If I am attacked, I may defend myself. These are all powers the state can legitimately have to protect citizens.

I cannot steal from another, so neither should the state.

You may question if people would voluntarily pay. I believe they would, but it will take for the state to be reduced to its core roles before that can be contemplated.

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.