Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 24, 2017, 06:07:45 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Cast your Ballot in the 2016 Mock Election

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
| | |-+  Is forced taxation necessary to raise revenue?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Is forced taxation necessary to raise revenue?  (Read 2372 times)
MasterJedi
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19920
United States


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: March 06, 2017, 09:16:17 pm »
Ignore

Necessary for the state to get revenue? Yes. Moral? No

It has been my belief that taxation is theft.

Taxation is sort of social contract (yes, I hate Rousseau, but couldn't think of any better word now). Taxes are necessary so the state can protect you.

I've never understood the "taxation is theft" argument. Without taxes nobody except the super rich would be able to actually afford to live. So only people who drive on the road should pay for it? Ok, well have fun with massive tolls that nobody could afford to get anywhere but you know "fake freedom!".

IIRC, are not highways already currently funded using the gas tax?

Supposed to be, but roads are hugely subsidized since it won't cover the cost. In WI it hasn't been raised in forever and there's a massive deficit for roads, they're bonding many millions each year now.
Logged

Rjjr77
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1475
View Profile
« Reply #26 on: March 07, 2017, 04:07:15 pm »
Ignore

Ceteris Paribus yes, but that's not how the real world works.
Logged
RFayette
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6578
United States


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: March 19, 2017, 02:39:21 am »
Ignore

It depends what you mean by "forced."  We could theoretically fund the entire government at all levels with road tolls and permit fees.  Obviously, this would still be "forced" taxation to the extent that all drivers would have to pay if they wanted to continue driving, but this tax scheme would make it at least theoretically possible to avoid being taxed directly [of course, exorbitant license/transportation fees for companies would still constitute an indirect tax as it would be ultimately passed onto the consumer].   Ultimately, someone has to pay for the government to function, though the degree of force could vary considerably. 
Logged

Solitude Without a Window
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 46197
United States


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: March 19, 2017, 02:53:43 pm »
Ignore

Why is the "degree of force" such a major concern anyway? Being forced to do things we'd rather not do (or prevented from doing things we'd rather do) is a fundamental aspect of life in society. It's how we learn to respect our fellow citizens and put general interest above our own. Living under the illusion that we can get all of society's benefits without paying any of the costs, and without ever doing anything we don't want to do, is not "liberating" - I'd argue it's morally and intellectually degrading.
Logged

Our numbers are dwindling. Our words are confused.
Some of them have been twisted by the enemy
until they can no longer be recognized.

Now what is wrong, or false, in what we have said?
Just some parts, or everything?
On whom can we still rely? Are we survivors, cast
away by the current? Will we be left behind,
no longer understanding anyone and being understood by no one?
Must we rely on luck?

This is what you ask. Expect
no answer but your own.


Bertolt Brecht
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines