Is taxation moral?

Figured I'd have fun with this topic; is taxation moral? Is it moral at any percentage to force others to provide money to the government?

Is it moral at a certain percentage level, and then anything about that is confiscatory?

I personally can't justify a MORAL reason for taxation. After all, it is an authorized form of theft with the seal of approval of the state. Of course, without it, running a nation would probably be next to impossible. But morally, I can't see a justification. Others can feel free to persuade me though.

I don't thinks it's immoral as long as the services being rendered are worth the tax. How else are we going to get all those great services from the likes of the TSA, the US postal service, the FDA, EPA, etc. Not to mention, somebody has to pay for their pensions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

Figured I'd have fun with this topic; is taxation moral? Is it moral at any percentage to force others to provide money to the government?

Is it moral at a certain percentage level, and then anything about that is confiscatory?

I personally can't justify a MORAL reason for taxation. After all, it is an authorized form of theft with the seal of approval of the state. Of course, without it, running a nation would probably be next to impossible. But morally, I can't see a justification. Others can feel free to persuade me though.

---

Yes, it can be a moral dilemma. That's why we should stop all unnecessary government spending, and focus just on the intent of our constitution.

I'm not sure 'theft' is the right word.

Close, but not quite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

I'm not sure 'theft' is the right word.

Close, but not quite.

---

It is theft when it is done in the unfair manner that it is. We are approaching that 50% point where more people benefit from other people's money than those who pay in to the system. At that point, our democracy is like three wolf's and two sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

Figured I'd have fun with this topic; is taxation moral? Is it moral at any percentage to force others to provide money to the government?

Is it moral at a certain percentage level, and then anything about that is confiscatory?

I personally can't justify a MORAL reason for taxation. After all, it is an authorized form of theft with the seal of approval of the state. Of course, without it, running a nation would probably be next to impossible. But morally, I can't see a justification. Others can feel free to persuade me though.

---

If you view the Constitution as a contract then, by the consent of the governed, some taxation is permitted and, therefore, moral.

I think taxation without representation or that which is outside the contract of the Constitution (Obamacare's individual mandates for example) are immoral.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

That's why we should stop all unnecessary government spending.

---

why hasn't anyone thought of this before?

The "morality" of taxation is more about the application than it is the concept. The government needs revenue. If not taxation, what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

It is theft when it is done in the unfair manner that it is. We are approaching that 50% point where more people benefit from other people's money than those who pay in to the system.

---

just wait until that richest 1% of Americans hold >75% of the nation's wealth.

Quote:

---

At that point, our democracy is like three wolf's and two sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

---

what do the sheep vote on to eat?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coyotes_geek

The "morality" of taxation is more about the application than it is the concept. The government needs revenue. If not taxation, what?

---

If they were to sell Mary Kay, if they sell enough products, it would eliminate the need to buy vehicles....

of course, other countries might laugh at our President driving a pink caddy.

libertarian threads are the worst.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

just wait until that richest 1% of Americans hold >75% of the nation's wealth.

---

So they would pay >75% of the tax revenue.

You miss my point. I have stated this several times, and I am consistent on this idea. When you have voters who's lives are subsidized rather than contributing to the general welfare, they vote in politicians who are willing to take more money and funnel it their way. This should never happen. If all working voters are tax payer, then all working voters will think twice before voting for politicians running on platforms that demand more revenue.

I believe in equal suffrage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

what do the sheep vote on to eat?

---

I don't know, but they aren't carnivores.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheSullyMonster

libertarian threads are the worst.

---

At least they are retarded like libtard threads.

from what I see, the most vocal conservatives on this board dont know what it means to be conservative. You guys are looking more like republican rah-rah-rah fanboys, not conservatives.

Which might give insight into the current "dumbed-down" state of the party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I don't know, but they aren't carnivores.

---

true.

what if two of the wolves vote to eat berries along with the sheep?

Is it moral to force the last wolf to eat berries too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

true.

what if two of the wolves vote to eat berries along with the sheep?

Is it moral to force the last wolf to eat berries too?

---

Problem is, the nature of the beast doesn't work that way.

When you have a growing class of people, dependent on government one way or another, are you comfortable when that voting population exceeds the 50% of the voters?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

If they were to sell Mary Kay, if they sell enough products, it would eliminate the need to buy vehicles....

of course, other countries might laugh at our President driving a pink caddy.

---

What if we just put the entire budget on our Capital One card?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Problem is, the nature of the beast doesn't work that way.

When you have a growing class of people, dependent on government one way or another, are you comfortable when that voting population exceeds the 50% of the voters?

---

huh?

I thought it was a simple yes or no question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coyotes_geek

What if we just put the entire budget on our Capital One card?

---

Maybe also look into getting a home equity loan on the White House

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

It is theft when it is done in the unfair manner that it is. We are approaching that 50% point where more people benefit from other people's money than those who pay in to the system. At that point, our democracy is like three wolf's and two sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

---

Source?

If you really want to get into questions of morality then explain to me how land ownership is moral.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scott

Source?

---

Don't be ridiculous.

This is a well known established fact, for years now.

Look it up yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Don't be ridiculous.

This is a well known established fact, for years now.

Look it up yourself.

---

No, it isn't. Back up your BS or keep your trap shut.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarrinS

I don't thinks it's immoral as long as the services being rendered are worth the tax. How else are we going to get all those great services from the likes of the TSA, the US postal service, the FDA, EPA, etc. Not to mention, somebody has to pay for their pensions.

---

Well, basing the morality of the theft on the services it renders leads to a problem; your opinion of what is "worth the tax" can differ from others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blake

I'm not sure 'theft' is the right word.

Close, but not quite.

---

If you can come up with a less inflammatory but equally acceptable word, I'm all for it.