Is taxation moral?

[Parker2112]

It simply won't do to define all taxation as fraudulent or confiscatory. Without the power to raise taxes there is no state.

and yet the power to tax is the power to destroy the subject.

And even more, who has the right to make their living off of anothers toil? How many career politicians do just that?

Its a two-sided coin with no clear answer, but one which should favor the state and the individual if the cons ution is to have meaning

[Parker2112]

It simply won't do to define all taxation as fraudulent or confiscatory. Without the power to raise taxes there is no state.

If you want to repeal the income tax, or other taxes, or limit the government more or less to the proceeds of customs house like we did in the 19th century, then please either make that argument, or address something that's already been said here.

two things I like:

1) cap tax rates at the actual rate paid by the top 1%. (16.6% according to http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/...400-taxpayers/)

And thats just on principle. It doesnt touch the moral aspect in question.

2) Consumption tax removes the link between one man's work-product and govt income. Sounds ideal really. Drawback: less predictable than income tax, and wont allow for the consistent operation of such a bloated en y as our fed gov. good thing IYAM

[Parker2112]

Please progress past the full stop at your own peculiar set of abstractions and join the conversation. If you want others to bow to your mental icons, you'll need to explain them a little.

Fair enough.

[Parker2112]

If you want to say the state has no legitimacy to tax, then you are basically in open revolt against that state.

You're basically saying the US cons utional order no longer has any moral or political legitimacy. Correct?

Actually, the cons ution clearly limits the power to tax. The open revolt against the do ent has been waged and won by way of SC rulings on Commerce Clause and Nec and Proper Clause (as means of sidestepping limitations on the size/scope of fed govt.)

(it seems in my old age, me and Antonin are drawing closer by the day)

[Winehole23]

Actually, the cons ution clearly limits the power to tax.

Please give us your take on that.

The open revolt against the do ent has been waged and won by way of SC rulings on Commerce Clause and Nec and Proper Clause (as means of sidestepping limitations on the size/scope of fed govt.)

Please name the relevant decisions and explain their importance.

(it seems in my old age, me and Antonin are drawing closer by the day)

How'd you like his opinion in Raich?

[Winehole23]

two things I like:

1) cap tax rates at the actual rate paid by the top 1%. (16.6% according to http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/...400-taxpayers/)

And thats just on principle. It doesnt touch the moral aspect in question.

What principle?




("Be just and if you can't be just, be arbitrary." - Wm. S. Burroughs)

2) Consumption tax removes the link between one man's work-product and govt income. Sounds ideal really. Drawback: less predictable than income tax, and wont allow for the consistent operation of such a bloated en y as our fed gov. good thing IYAM

Drown the baby in the bathtub.

[Winehole23]

The open revolt against the do ent has been waged and won

What a relief. The war is finally over.

[Winehole23]

I didn't think I needed to support the contention that Washington is detached from the voting public these days.

You implied a bit more than that. You called taxation fraudulent per se, in the present context.

And I think the degree of detachment is more than enough to warrant the "immoral" tag.

Who argued against it?

And I am sure anyone reading can think of more than 4-5 great examples.

You cared so much you gave zero examples and I don't see any reinforcements yet.

[Winehole23]

didn't even know the war had started, much less that it was already over.

[Winehole23]

This oughta be a good one.

[LnGrrrR]

Fair enough. I'm all ears. Can you imagine an instance?

I already suggested the "people choose where their taxes go", but you seem to think that form of voting is improbable.

If you take the view that all citizens are born into a contract with government through birthright, and can then break that contract by renouncing citizenship, that certainly makes taxation more "moral" and is a viewpoint I didn't look at before.

Do you have any opinions on which forms of taxation are more morally amenable to you? Or does it not make a difference?

[RandomGuy]

honestly, I would be more sympathetic to your take RG if there was even one ounce of caution when it came to placing more power in the hands of fed govt. even some lip service would be nice.

The executive branch by-passing the wire-tap courts is one example that needs to stop.

The de facto death sentence versus the US citizen in Yemen who is recording rants for Al Qaeda is another.

The SC decision to open campaign spending by private groups scares the out of me.

There is a lot of stuff that I am concerned about to a good degree.

You just have a much lower "outrage" threshold.

[RandomGuy]

I already suggested the "people choose where their taxes go", but you seem to think that form of voting is improbable.

If you take the view that all citizens are born into a contract with government through birthright, and can then break that contract by renouncing citizenship, that certainly makes taxation more "moral" and is a viewpoint I didn't look at before.

Do you have any opinions on which forms of taxation are more morally amenable to you? Or does it not make a difference?

Argh. Lunch hour is up, but there is an interesting article in this weeks economist on just this topic (i.e. ideal tax system).

[LnGrrrR]

Argh. Lunch hour is up, but there is an interesting article in this weeks economist on just this topic (i.e. ideal tax system).

I'll take a look.

[Winehole23]

I already suggested the "people choose where their taxes go", but you seem to think that form of voting is improbable.

Don't let me stop you. Run with that if the path seems to lead somewhere.

If you take the view that all citizens are born into a contract with government through birthright, and can then break that contract by renouncing citizenship, that certainly makes taxation more "moral" and is a viewpoint I didn't look at before.

Not sure how it does. The responsibilities of citizenship go along with the rights/privileges. I see that as politically, not morally determined.

But I can see how the act of renouncing citizenship might have some moral element to it.

Do you have any opinions on which forms of taxation are more morally amenable to you? Or does it not make a difference?

I'm not sure how I'd rank <forms of taxation>, but I'm pretty sure morality wouldn't be my criterion.

Conformity with the political cons ution ranks way higher, but to be completely honest, I haven't done that analysis either nor do I consider myself very well suited to do it. I'm basically ignorant on the history/morphology of taxation.

To start with, a list of the <forms of taxation> to be evaluated, briefly defined, would be a help.

[LnGrrrR]

Don't let me stop you. Run with that if the path seems to lead somewhere.

I'm trying.

Not sure how it does. The responsibilities of citizenship go along with the rights/privileges. I see that as politically, not morally determined.

It certainly may be controlled by political bodies, but I think it does have some moral underpinnings, as many overtly political acts do (ie. going to war, wiretapping, etc etc).

I'm not sure how I'd rank <forms of taxation>, but I'm pretty sure morality wouldn't be my criterion.

Fair enough, but would you agree with the extremely generic statement that some taxation could be considered more moral than others?

To start with, a list of the <forms of taxation> to be evaluated, briefly defined, would be a help.

I think zosa gave a relatively good list to start from. (I'm no economist myself either; others who are better-versed can feel free to jump in!)

Income tax, inheritance tax, sales tax would be good starting points I guess.

Income tax - A tax on a citizen's work

Inheritance tax - A tax on money passed down through inheritance

Sales tax - A tax based on financial transactions/purchases

[Winehole23]

Fair enough, but would you agree with the extremely generic statement that some taxation could be considered more moral than others?

Sure, why not? I don't really see how that could be avoided.

[LnGrrrR]

Sure, why not? I don't really see how that could be avoided.

Thanks! That's pretty much the point of the thread; to determine which forms of taxation are more "moral" than others (while trying to acknowledge that they might be political impossibilities, but putting that off to the side. Take the discussion as a thought experiment if anything.)

[Winehole23]

Once you put the whole world and the history of the whole world off to one side in {brackets}, you basically drained the subject of any interest it may have held for me.

But hey, it's yer thread. Good luck with the more {philosophical} approach. I'll follow the thread and chime in if I have anything to say.

[Parker2112]

Thanks! That's pretty much the point of the thread; to determine which forms of taxation are more "moral" than others

you should have just asked. consumption taxes are best from a moral point of view. your welcome in advance

[Winehole23]

consumption taxes are best from a moral point of view.

Why?

You've shown neither that consumption taxes are moral in the first place, nor that they are morally superior to other schemes of taxation.

Instead you jumped to conclusions. Then you thanked yourself enthusiastically for being right.

[Winehole23]

Are you familiar with question-begging?

[Winehole23]

Or the basics of conversation?

[Winehole23]

BTW, did you ever Google the SC decisions that form the core of the "revolt" you said was already "waged and won" upstream, or was that more bull too?

[Parker2112]

Am I familiar with sarcasm?

I don't think so.