Taxation is morally literally not justifiable

Taxation is morally literally not justifiable

Thank God I finally have the opportunity to post this first

>muh roads

Okay. What are you going to do about it?

shitpost

>its another "No you guys we can totally have a functioning modern industrial society without any taxation at all and -NO NO FUCK YOU TARRIFS ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM TAXES BECAUSE...UH..." episode

You got it wrong, pal.

Property is what is not justifiable. Especially land ownership is a great evil who only leads to social stratification and exploitation.

that is a pretty utilitarian argument tbqh

The concept of theft is a spook.

Not necessarily.

And?

>choose to be a citizen and/or live and/or work within a nation's borders
>have to pay a membership fee to support the institutions that allow this

literally nothing wrong with it

Property rights are not objective - property rights depend on some _system_ of property rights.
Saying that something is theft depends on a _system_ of property rights in which that thing is theft.
Saying that taxation of theft depends on a _system_ of property rights in which taxation is theft.

Taxation is theft according to ancap property rights
Taxation is not theft according to statist property rights

>Retard response: "But obviously shoplifting is theft"
colloquially, when someone says that something 'is theft' they still have some system of property rights in mind
eg.
- what they FEEL is just
- what the law is according to the government

also morality isn't real kiddo

but watch me "justify" it

taxation produces a more desirable outcome for me
therefore I want taxation

Isn't Trump a protectionist though?

>morality isn't real
>this easily observable sociological phenomenon that is present in literally all human cultures, and even species of animal, regardless of time or place isn't real

your fucking mum mate

'not real' in the sense that it doesn't exist outside of your head

>DUDE ITS JUST CHEMICALS LMAO

Take this entry-level "philosophy" elsewhere

>choose

what is this clown even saying?
MUH FEELS EXIST OUTSIDE OF MY HEAD AND THEY MATTER, OKAY?!

>choose

There is nowhere in the world where one can live where they will not be a citizen of a country.

You DO realize that Reductionism is probably the most autistic category of philosophy, right?
Not even like Veeky Forums "I'm insulting you" but I mean like actual medical autism.

But he's absolutely right. Morals are just a collective fiction.

>You're autistic, k? Thanks.
how about hopping in the bin, you little trash person

>Can be observed in all human cultures without exception, and even some species of animals
>Its just fiction

Why do people do this

Because they can't actually be observed. It can be observed that all human cultures believe in them, but the morals themselves have never actually been observed. Further, they tend to vary pretty wildly between cultures, and any attempt to "objectively" ground them meets with absolute miserable failure. They have no direct physical impact on the world (an action being immoral does not impede it in any fashion, only people that believe it to be immoral in a position to do so will impede it). Gee, I fucking wonder?

Them being a fiction doesn't make them invalid, but they are all entirely arbitrary. So if you want to justify something like "hey, let's stop all forms of taxation" you're going to need something more substantial than "it's immoral" because someone with a different moral system will respond with "no it's not" and be on equal footing with you due to their inherent subjectivity.

Property is theft.

Oh geez am I talking to another spook-master?

OP, you're fucking adorable. What makes the moral system you've decided that taxation is utterly indefensible under axiomatic?

>Oh geez am I talking to another spook-master?
Little bin man here is incapable of thinking in anything other then his SICK MAYMAYS.

The ocean

Ah, so far you've engaged in an argument from popularity and an argument from ridicule. Do you have anything of actual substance to back up your position, or are you just retarded?

>WE COULD HAVE HAD A SERIOUS DISCUSSION GUYS

I mean I was only half-joking before but you actually are autistic aren't you?

>Taxation is morally literally not justifiable

Of course it is. There are several theories of law and ethics that justifies it.

What you meant to say is "Morality isn't justified based on my own personal deontological ethical rule", which is quite different.

Whose fucking problem is that?

Taxation isn't justified based on*

I meant to say.

>STOP BEING MEAN I WAS ONLY JOKING

I never said it was anyone's problem. I'm just making the point that no one today can really choose to not live somewhere where they have a legal obligation to pay taxes.

Wait are you seriously saying that sociological and behavioral phenomenon don't real because you can't "see" or "touch" them?

They're about as real as captain Ahab and his whale.

Saying morality isn't objective is not the same as saying its not important dumbasses. It means morality is a construct of the mind, a collection of subjective beliefs which manifest in reality through the people that believe them. But they themselves don't exist in any "meta" way beyond that belief. Or if it does, it doesn't seem to be within the scope of humanities epistemic limits.

So morality as something beyond its manifestation, which is a sort of "collective tuning" of a society's individuals- as "objective" in any capacity- is probably impossible. Its possible that there is an objective morality in the same way that its possible there is an intelligent creator of the universe, but both are equally hidden from us.

>numbers aren't real because I can't touch them or feel them

I mean holy shit does the word "abstract" mean anything to you?

Numbers aren't real. They're just an abstraction we use to understand the world around us. The universe has no concept of them, only the mind does.

>fiction-reality dichotomy

>I'm going to use an abstract concept to say that abstract concepts are meaningless

I didn't say they were without meaning. I said they are without objective existence. Don't put words in my mouth.

Now stop pretending as though you've figured out the problem of universals.

>he fell for the objective/subjective dichotomy meme

So, are you just going to shitpost endlessly, allowing the serious discussion to become a joke?

>he thinks infinite regression is impossible

I mean yeah why not

does the fascist who made this image not know about negative utilitarianism?

How the fuck would a government work without taxes you faggot?
>inb4 edgy anarchist says we shouldn't have government

You don't have to pay taxes though.

>wants to be taken seriously
>posts a Trump quote

Go shill somewhere else. You fucking niggers show up everywhere.

So you want free shit huh?