Morality of taxation

Only police. Roads are intentionally half assed as to squeeze dimes from tax payers and serve no grand purpose other than slightly faster transportation which is entirely unnecessary in regards to anything but medical emergencies.

I would definitely love to go deep into the woods and build a log cabin, but eventually the government will expand suburbs until they find and proceed to rape me with taxation.

You can deny its use to others because you have earned it as your property.

If you're a capitalist then you obviously believe in the concept that civilization is a good thing. Civilization requires taxation to function (to a certain extent) therefore taxation must also be a good thing (to a certain extent). If you take the view that civilization is itself a bad thing, then you can say that taxes are also bad because they are an aspect of civilization. However, once you go down that road, you're no long a capitalist, you're a primitivist like this guy.

I feel as though the people who lament the welfare state don't want the kind of enormous social reorganization & general upheaval of society that would be required to accommodate its dismantling. They just want to complain about how their taxes are spent.

Hahahahahahahaha How The Fuck Is Taxation Theft Hahahaha Nigga Just Walk Away From The Country Like Nigga Just Leave Haha

This. People forget that welfare came out the realization that it was actually cheaper to just give poor people small amounts of money every now and then than to have to deal with communist uprisings all the time.

if only there was some way to control the laws, some sort of organization that could change them...

You're ignoring the social contract part of society. By living in civilization you agree to civilization's rules. If the civilization you live in believes in taxation (and nearly all of them do) you either put up with it because you agreed to it, or you fucking leave and go eat berries in the woods or whatever the fuck uncivilized people do until they get conquered or stormed out by construction companies.

Roads can be private, there are many private or semi-private (property of the state, maintenance and control done by a private company, sometimes by using tolls) roads around the world where in certain parts you pay a toll of 1 to 5 € for going to point A to point B, this is very common in many countries. Also very common for tunnels.
Same with bridges. You want to pass a private bridge? Pay a toll to compensate for its construction and maintenance done by X private company.

The biggest problem here is that prices might be abusive if it's the only road/bridge/whatever. Hardly a place where competition drags the prices down.

Private security forces would still work only inside the legal framework, the amount of abuse and corruption wouldn't necessarily be bigger than today, mall cops are not usually more abusive or corrupt than police officers.

I'm not an Ancap but most of the arguments people use against it are pretty simplistic and easily refutable.

growth for the sake of growth, without regard for the health of the host, is the philosophy of a cancer cell.

The needs of the nation must be considered above ambitions of individual characters.

>what if I don't like where my tax money is going?

Too bad. People like you should be crucified as you have forfeit your right to live among other humans.

youtube.com/watch?v=H0mScGJtnB4

>slightly faster transportation which is entirely unnecessary in regards to anything but medical emergencies

Ah yes, I forgot how things like "getting to work" or "going to the store to obtain food" are unnecessary.

That's only your opinion that you have "earned" it. Why should others respect that claim? We could also start to fight over land/territory like wild animals which would happen anyway.

>mall cops are not usually more abusive or corrupt than police officers
Maybe, just maybe because they are still under state control (police). Remove it and you will see Stanford prison experiment-tier.

>Roads are so important to society that no one is willing to pay for them.

Really gets the noggin joggin

>Roads are so important to society that no one is willing to pay for them

I believe those are called "taxes". Although ancaps can call them "licensing fees" or "rental" if it'll curb their autism.

taxation is rape, not theft.

>>The needs of the nation must be considered above ambitions of individual characters.
says the betas indeed.

>The needs of the nation must be considered above ambitions of individual characters.
You've isolated the sentiment that allows countries to turn into oppressive hellholes.
>I guess we can rob and murder this rich guy. After all, the GREATER GOOD is more important than one man.
>sure, let's ban all of this dissenting speech. After all, it's dividing our people, and the GREATER GOOD is more important than the voice of a few malcontents.
>of course we should make these peasants into slaves of the state. Without them, the cost of defending against our enemies is unpayable. And isn't that what the GREATER GOOD demands?

Ultimately, the countries with people who think like you will be destroyed by countries with people who don't.

Nothing and no one can stop it.

>By living in civilization you agree to civilization's rules.
that's false. When a human is born in your ''''''''''''çivilization'''''''''''''' people around will impose a nationality and an education and later on, the people belonging to the ''''''''''''çivilization'''''''''''''' can refuse the human to be nation-less or even to have another nationality

>you either put up with it because you agreed to it, or you fucking leave and go eat berries in the woods

yes, you are free to leave where I live and go construct your self proclaim ''''''''''''çivilization'''''''''''''' far away from me and leave me alone.

also, people who take the ''''''''''''çivilization'''''''''''''' seriously, like cops and other paper pushers, will not let a few humans gather and live on ''''''''public land'''''''''' for several month, and if they do let them live, they will demand a tax under the threat of putting those few humans in trials and some punishment.

Its called compromise, you don't always get what you want, and neither does the person opposite you. If you don't like the arrangement society has set up for you you have three options. Leave, change it (by vote or by force), or kill yourself, you unappreciative faggot.

>The needs of the nation must be considered above ambitions of individual characters.
only liberals care about nations

Society is based on the principle that a multitude of people band together to form lives which are safe and fulfilling. The collective is there to help the individuals and vice versa.

Thinking of going full individualist in the woods and making yourself independent of society, existing by your own means, is a funny thought-experiment and a freedom that might be enjoyable. Personally, however, I'd say it's a more rational route to enjoy the benefits (and endure the costs) of a collective.

Then, as others have pointed out, taxation is not only a necessary step towards maintaining societal function towards common goals, but is also a direct expansion of the collective ideal; for each individual to sacrifice so that other individuals in turn can sacrifice.

>Roads are intentionally half assed as to squeeze dimes from tax payers and serve no grand purpose other than slightly faster transportation which is entirely unnecessary in regards to anything but medical emergencies

Have you tried not living in a corrupt third world country?
Also have you ever driven off-road?

You can always go to some tax-haven micro-state, certain islamic theocracies, or Somalia, if you consider yourself so violated and raped by paying taxes.

The country is owned by voting citizens.

Rather like a corporation where shareholders can vote in members of the board, except "shares" can't be bought or sold, everyone can only have 1 "share" and "shares" are distributed to citizens turning 18.

>which is entirely unnecessary in regards to anything but medical emergencies.
Retard status: full throttle

You can't walk away from it because it's everywhere. It's like you im locked in a cage with rapist and you're telling me to just change the cage and a rapist, if i don't like the current one.

reminder that state kuks claim that taxes are important to have public services

reminder that policemen are regularly BTFO and you are left with damaged gods

This is a black swan event. When was the last time left wing extremists committed arson enmass?

You would be far more BTFO without them.

all of this because liberals refuse to think that non-policemen should watch and control people

A society that has private property needs taxation to survive.

If taxation is theft then so is private property

>The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said "This is mine," and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody.

You benefit far more from taxes than you lose.

But rent is also theft

Taxation at least is done by a government whose soverignty ostensibly comes from you and the people around you and not random bankers tho

Bitch please the fact that so few governments have fallen to such minor protests is due to the police.

no it is because liberals fear the most a coup d'état from a few plebs which they avoid by telling over 20 years the plebs that a dictator or tyrant or despot is bad for the ''human rights'' since those lolberals can produce en masse everything but not their fantasy of the enlightened despot.
The liberal police is just here to watch and scare the population which does not follow minor democratic rules, like driving rules and tax rules and assault of one individual by one individual. the liberal police is ineffective for anything else

do you check under your bed for liberals before you go to sleep?

also really funny that you think dictators and tyrants are good things

>classical liberalism
Yuck.

bump

>is able to see that taxation is theft
>is not able to see that property itself is theft

>it is another ancap thread
Post ancap memes

>Oh yeah I'm just gonna walk the 30km I need to drive every day sure

>I don't like where my tax money is going
Then become involved in your community, speak to your representative. Or take your money and move to one of those beautiful ancap paradises in Africa, they're doing so well for themselves.

>People argue taxation isn't theft since your tax money goes to the land you live on to get you all the things you like and need
They usually argue that it isn't theft when talking about democratically decided upon taxation.
>What if I don't support firefighters and Liberal arts colleges among other things?
Then vote for someone who represents that.
>Then it's theft/rape
No, it's majority rule.

That's hot. I have a fetish for taxes now.

It's more like, you're renting an apartment and he's telling you to go rent a different apartment if you don't like the current one. The fact that the entire planet is divided up into various "apartments" isn't the fault of your current "landlord". It's just how things developed historically. If you don't like it, you're free to try to challenge it by force - however, if you ever manage to conquer your own bit of land, in order to defend it you will almost certainly have to collect taxes (rent) from the people who live on your land in order to be able to afford a modern military. And it is because of this sort of logic that the entire planet is divided into "apartments" to begin with - everybody who tries to follow a different paradigm on their own land is forced to crate an organized taxing state simply in order to maintain sovereignty. However, this state of affairs cannot be blamed on your current "landlord", nor does it make "him" a rapist.

This is a very important point. Most "taxation = theft" people don't understand this.

You obviously have no idea of how horrible populist authoritarianism (whether the "leftist" or the "right-wing" variety) has been historically. The liberal fear of pleb revolution is well justified. Such revolutions have led to the deaths of millions of human beings.

>morality of theft

Theft is never moral. Taxation is theft.

There are cars burning every week around Europe. Namely in France, Belgium and Sweden.

Not a black swan event.

>Taxation is theft
>Hourly pay is freedom

#woke

Property rights are a prerequisite for theft you turbo nigger.

rent is a mutual agreemen between two parties though while taxation is something that is forced on you just because you are over a certain age and living in the place you were born in and might not even have the opportunity to move out from

i'm not supporting tax evasion, i'm just saying it's not the same at all

>rent is a mutual agreemen between two parties
Sure if you put the cost of living against the cost of being homeless. But does that make it reasonable? I'd say it's about equally as tenuous. The cost of not paying rent is constant struggle for survival, and the cost of not paying taxes is either a constant paranoia and evasion of law or making enough money to leave the country no strings attached.

it's true people agree to pay rent based on how needy they are for a house and they pay according to the value the market dictates but in the end they sign a legally binding contract. in taxation you don't even do that

also taxation only benefits you when the state is run by decent people. i doubt people in congo benefit from paying taxes

I see alot of stupid shit on here but whenever anyone tries to imply that voluntary exchange to fufill a mortal need, not enduced by one of the parties to the exchange, is exploitative I get violently angry. It's so fucking entitled and retarded that even when people meme about it my gears get grinded. Nobody has an obligation to fufil your needs you fucking peices of human garbage. If you want something from someone, then usually you have to compensate them. It's that fucking simple.

The state makes private property possible. It prevents other parties stronger than you from simply stealing your land by force.

The state needs tax to exist and function.

Therefore, tax is necessary for private property to exist. No tax = no private property.

in civilized socities in order to prevent abuse of power and to maintain stability and progress there is a limit to how much you can squeeze money from other people for certain services that are critical for society. water food electricity etc are all under some sort of regulation

> no one owes you water
and no half functioning state will let water be sold for one million dollars a bottle

More than that. Private property is the primary function of the state.

The struggle of being homeless is far more than the struggle to have a roof over your head.

You worry about getting raped/robbed/murdered without any possible recourse. You worry about being blamed for crimes you did not commit. You worry about the constant threat of violence from any and all human beings since nobody likes a homeless person near their house or business. Just being homeless means you are the lowest caste of creature. You are even treated worse than illegal immigrants by people who feel they are morally justified to do so.

You are a child who has never once struggled in his entire life.

I wasnt talking about taxation. I was talking about his example of rent. And your water bottle argument only makes sense if theres only one place to obtain water period

I'm an adult who's been homeless before you dumb motherfucker! Kill yourself. Unironically! Nobody owes you anything!

Whoa dude, I totally believe you on this Indonesian knitting circle. Especially when your entire argument sounds like it's based on middle school logic that doesn't even understand how market forces work.

>Nobody owes you anything!!!! >:(!!
Nobody in this entire thread is saying anybody owes anyone else, why are you so fixated on this idea? Do you even know how to formulate an independent thought?

>And your water bottle argument only makes sense if theres only one place to obtain water period

Where does one obtain productive land?

>ancaps can understand this but can't understand that employment is slavery under the exact same logic

Except signing a contract to work is mutual you dumb fucking marxist cuck. No one is forcing you to work.

without income you'll starve to death eventually dumb cunt

>want to live in peaceful and orderly society
>give money to maintain it because the alternative is shit
>everyone has to give so that people can't freeload

Seems fair to me.

>nature is slavery

>Wage slavery is natural

>getting everything for free from others is natural

> when you have billion and your children won't work a day in their entire lives and you pay your wageslaves a pennies for salary that will never leave them enough with to rise the social economical ladder because the market is "free" and no one owes you anything stop being entitled™

>Morality is... subjective
GOOD LORD THESE FAGGOTS ARE EVERYWHERE

If taxes are unethical because they're involuntary, surely all forms of work are unethical until a person's food, water, health, and shelter are provided for.

>taxation is coercive because you will go to jail if you don't pay taxes.
>you agree to pay taxes, but that doesn't stop it from being involuntary

>working is coercive because you will die if you don't work
>you agree to give your labor for money, but that doesn't stop it from being involuntary

>your children wont work a day

And why is that a matter of mine, yours or anyone else?

>pennies for salary

If you feel like you can get paid more for your work then go look for another job that satisfies your wants and needs.

following your logic

>if you feel like you can live without taxes, then move somewhere without taxes

Blame (((Nietzsche)))

>you agree to pay taxes

You're forced to pay taxes or you are treated as a criminal, getting robbed of your freedom and sent to jail.

You agree to work for money because you want to be productive/would rather control your own economy rather than have the state do it for you/want to amount to something/have freedom.

No one is forcing you to work. You don't become a criminal if you don't work. No one punishes you if you don't work.

What does that have to do with some billionaires children?

> If you feel like you can get paid more for your work then go look for another job that satisfies your wants and needs.

you assume salary always reflects people's skills when in reality it has much much more to do with people bragining ability. some government bureaucrat can get crazy amount of money just by sitting on the right valves while other highly skilled workers won't get shit if all companies in that particular field join hands to keep wages down

unless you are some super special mathematical genius cyberhacker your employer has much more bargaining power than you do. it's easy for them to keep wages down even when they have craploads of money to pay with

Property rights are codified and enforced by the state. The state defines what is theft and what isn't.

>You agree to work for money because you want to be productive/would rather control your own economy rather than have the state do it for you/want to amount to something/have freedom.

No, you agree to work because in this society, you need work to continue living. Money is a requirement for most things.

>No one is forcing you to work. You don't become a criminal if you don't work. No one punishes you if you don't work.

You become dead, or imprisoned by your inability to do anything without money.

Face it, you have a choice in both matters.

You pay taxes or lose your freedoms to jail
You work or you lose your freedoms to death

It completely depends on your job. Some jobs, salesmen for example, earn their money mostly through their own skill.

Others, say cashiers or fast wood chefs earn what the company can afford to pay them since their jobs require no skill what so ever.

If you feel like you should earn $15/hour for flipping hamburgers at Burger King then go find a Burger King that is willing to pay you $15/hour, or even better, start your own fast food joint and pay your hamburger flippers $15/hour.

Your employer has more bargaining power over you in the case of the Burger King scenario because literally anyone else can do your job, and if you don't accept whatever they pay you, there are a thousand other people ready to accept their offer. Whereas as a skillful salesmen, not everyone can replicate what you do, hence you become worth more to your employer and they also have less bargaining power, finding someone that performs at least as good as you do and for equal or lower pay is very hard and certainly not worth the time.

>you need to work

And yet all western countries waste endless of tax money on welfare :thinking:

You pay taxes because you're threatened by violence and imprisonment. You work because you agree to work, after all this isn't communist Russia or todays North Korea, no gulags in sight.

without regulation there is nothing that stops companies to combine hands and hold wages down together

you can have PHD in compsci and if all big tech companies decide to keep wages down you won't be able to bargain with them for shit. these abusive tactics are not imaginary scenarios

So you don't support the internet, the roads, the cheap food, the electricity, the government, the elections, etc?

>there is nothing that stops blablabla

Except you know, the very people these companies need to employ. Regulations more often than not help corporations rather than workers, the very thing you mongoloids claim you are trying to help.

Stop with the "what if" scenario bullshit arguments.

There are a hundred reasons why these companies aren't going to hold down wages, the first one is competition.

Yes, 10 big companies can keep their wages low and then the 11th company will not, and this talent of yours (the PHD holder) will go work there.

> Yes, 10 big companies can keep their wages low and then the 11th company will not, and this talent of yours (the PHD holder) will go work there.

the american telecommunications market is owned by a very small amount of gigantic companies, this fucks both consumers and workers in the ass. not every market even has that much variety of competition to begin with dumbass. regulations are stopping huge companies from being complete monopolies that rape your ass for their service because they can

the wealth doesn't trickle down when the game is rigged, people today are more educated and skilled than in any other time in human history yet purchasing power is weaker than it was 50-60 years ago. big sharks are replacing you with chinks,pajeets and soon artificial intelligence while the rest of us will cannibalize each other for the scraps that remain

Yes, but the need of the country is the greater good, and those countries in your examples will be more successful because they thought about the whole.