Can there ever be any logical argument for government taking money from one to give to another?
Posted 17 July 2012 - 06:35 PM
Posted 17 July 2012 - 06:38 PM
Taxes are not immoral.
Taxes are used to provide for the good society
Taxes are used to raise a military for the common defense; everyone benefits from a secure nation
Taxes are used to pay for the post office; most people benefit from the communication ability created by the post office
Taxes are used to build infrastructure; even if a person doesn't use the, every person benefits from the added economic opportunities
Taxes are used to pay for children's education; having an entire population that can interact with a higher minimum educational proficiency provides direct and indirect economic gains for everyone
Taxes are used to pay for veterans healthcare; veterans remaining healthy is good for keeping an emergency defense force
Taxes are used to support the disabled; the disabled can contribute back to society in was they would otherwise be prohibited from
Taxes are used to pay WIC; the children can grow up strong and able-bodied so they may contribute to society and be available for national defense
Taxes are used to pay for food stamps; the poor don't die and continue to bag your groceries, or clean your office, or other low paying job that wouldn't get done by dead people
Taxes are used to for welfare; someone sits on the couch all day
Taxes are used to support the individual
Taxes are immoral.
It will always be a grey area exactly where taking from some people and giving to others becomes immoral. The military is money out of civilian's pockets, and money into individual military members pockets. Infrastructure is money out of people's pockets, and money into individual contractor's pockets. Education is money out of people's pockets, and used towards individuals. WIC is money out of people's pockets, and money into mother's and children's pockets. etc.
For every action the government makes, there is a transfer of wealth. One person loses, and another wins. That in it and of itself is immoral. It becomes immoral when the net benefit to society is less than the wealth that is taken. You can argue all day long about where that point is, but the transfer of wealth by government is not inherently immoral.
- ephantmon likes this
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users