The liberal/libertarian hatred for tax and arguments like "tax is theft and immoral" essentially aids the regressive taxation that exists in the neoliberal world. It's nothing but a push to sustain the status quo and can't be seen as championing the ideal of liberty.
@ilr @dearthofsid aren't you consenting to be taxed when you earn money/use resources of the place where you live? Like...how does this not make sense?
(also I did think it was a very rw/conservative thing to not want to be taxed. Liberals believe in tax being theft is news to me!)
@Neeneen @dearthofsid what if i own the place where i live and use my own resources ? Have you heard of allodial title ?
If im using somebody elses resources of course i need to pay that person. But that’s a voluntary transaction, not expropriation by coercion.
@dearthofsid @Neeneen socioeconomic inequality is a fact of life. If anything it is increased by things such as minimum wage laws.
Before taxes and welfare were such a big thing, the less privileged were empowered by private charity. In fact mandatory taxation reduces the incentive for charity.
But the crux of the problem of inequality is not taxation by the way, it’s fiat money. Check out the graphs here :
Www.Wtfhappenedin1971.com
Also, PLEASE see this lecture in your free time. Given a choice we’d rather concede on taxation than on fiat money :
@ilr @dearthofsid I used to think "expropriation by coercion" about paying condo fees. I don't use the gym and pool in the bldg, why should I pay it monthly? But the fee wasn't just for the upkeep of luxury facilities. It's also to keep hallways clean and remove snow from the entrance and maintain regular bldg checks to keep its structure intact and safe for everyone's use. Which is something I realized when I lived in a condo that didn't have these fees and didn't care to clean as much.
@Neeneen @dearthofsid exactly, so it was voluntary and not by coercion. If you thought it wasn't worth it you would have moved out. Nobody would have forced you to keep paying. That's not how taxes work.
@ilr @dearthofsid I meant this more in terms of how taxes mean better facilities. the fact that the leadership fails to use it right or that there's loads of corruption in its process due to unethical people doesn't mean taxation as a system itself is bad.
@Neeneen @dearthofsid the reason the "leadership" fails is because there is no exit from the system. If ur condo owner does a bad job you can stop paying him and leave. That gives him an incentive to do a good job. No such incentives for bureaucrats because there's no exit from taxes.
@ilr @dearthofsid wait what happened to voting them out
@ilr @dearthofsid because if it's a condo I own, I'm not going to sell and move every time the board doesn't do its job. We get the condo board to change or push for reforms.
@ilr @dearthofsid but of course, all of this is theoretical. I get that people feel the pain when a percentage of their salary gets taxed and you're not getting its worth in welfare. I was there, I felt that in India. Ground reality, no one likes to part with it unless they feel like they're getting something in return. But getting rid of taxes isn't feasible either, no?
@Neeneen @dearthofsid it is in the long run. We can begin by keeping it for the minimal functions of the state : defence, internal security, judiciary. Maybe some wealth redistribution for very poor people, but that's a slippery slope
@ilr so as an aside, is this a conservative view or a liberal view? (genuinely curious)
@Neeneen @dearthofsid it is called the "libertarian" point of view, but we prefer the term "classical liberal"
@Neeneen @dearthofsid Some further reading for your free time :) https://mises.org/library/anatomy-state/html/c/31
Audiobook : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVEBrEjE36k
@Neeneen @dearthofsid in the condo case you went in with eyes open and knew that the board was subject to a particular voting process which you accepted.
@Neeneen @dearthofsid as for "democracy", an individual's true agent or "representative" is always subject to that individual's orders, can be dismissed at any time and cannot act contrary to the interests or wishes of his principal. Clearly, the "representative" in a democracy can never fulfill such agency functions
@ilr do you acknowledge that the socioeconomic inequality between different individuals in the society and the absence of a level playing field? if you do, are you asserting that you're against the idea of less priveliged being empowered via progressive taxation by state?
@Neeneen