The whole libertarian argument is that the government is just the most powerful gang who goes around extorting everyone to pay taxes. If we’re not morally obligated to pay up when it’s a small gang, why does morality change when it’s a large gang?
as a person coming from a totalitarian country, I would still prefer dealing with a single gang which also has its own welfare obligations can be corrected or overthrown when needed, than several mafia-like cartels which only care about extorting money from me providing nothing to both me and the society as a whole.
governments have responsibility, too, it’s just some don’t accept it
Oh definitely. That’s the argument from pragmatism which I wholeheartedly support. At the end of the day, we need to feed and shelter ourselves and keep ourselves safe from aggression and violence.
The moral argument is a much more difficult one to tackle. Much has been written on this topic: consent of the governed, responsibility of the individual towards society and vice versa.
morality and legality barely apply to billionaires of the world. If they don’t want to play by the rules then how long can we put up with them hoarding the wealth that could save millions?
tbh, in this interpretation, it sounds like extortion, sort of what gangs usually do to minor business owners
tax is tax, it’s a mandatory contribution to society you morally and legally obliged to do, not a payment for not being killed
The whole libertarian argument is that the government is just the most powerful gang who goes around extorting everyone to pay taxes. If we’re not morally obligated to pay up when it’s a small gang, why does morality change when it’s a large gang?
as a person coming from a totalitarian country, I would still prefer dealing with a single gang which also has its own welfare obligations can be corrected or overthrown when needed, than several mafia-like cartels which only care about extorting money from me providing nothing to both me and the society as a whole.
governments have responsibility, too, it’s just some don’t accept it
Oh definitely. That’s the argument from pragmatism which I wholeheartedly support. At the end of the day, we need to feed and shelter ourselves and keep ourselves safe from aggression and violence.
The moral argument is a much more difficult one to tackle. Much has been written on this topic: consent of the governed, responsibility of the individual towards society and vice versa.
morality and legality barely apply to billionaires of the world. If they don’t want to play by the rules then how long can we put up with them hoarding the wealth that could save millions?