0 sats \ 11 replies \ @BlokchainB 12 Mar \ parent \ on: Taxation is theft is too weak. It's much worse than that libertarian
Other factors are involved but I start from a place that on masse humans are generally greedy and man has unfettered ambitions. How else do you justify billionaires exploring space when children die of starvation every day. And people will justify this type of behavior saying “it’s their money they can spend it how they wish” but that is one critique the socialists have that the capitalist and libertarians have yet to find a solution for what to do with the excess production created by capitalism and how to divide it up fairly. Taxes is an attempt to do this but it’s easily corrupted
Before public schools the cost to provide education to the poor isn’t profitable. So why would the free market solve this? Expecting altruism to solve this problem is being naive and goes against human nature. Plus most humans are just of average intelligence anyways so expecting people to self learn on mass is unlikely.
Taxes was an attempt for humans to gather resources and do things for society for the greater good. But instead man has screwed it up to the points mentioned like forever wars and entitlements.
So, you are opposed to taxes on moral grounds but not on consequential grounds? You see it as a necessary evil? Am I understanding you?
humans are generally greedy
I agree with you. This is one of the key weaknesses in centralizing power. I do think that if you decentralized public schooling down to the local areas we'd have much better results and much less disagreement than we do today. I just reject the idea that taxes is the best way to do this. I even more strongly object to the idea that force and theft are the only affective methods to educate the population. But, I used to see things that way.
justify billionaires
I don't justify billionaires actions. I also don't justify state actions which cause much more harm. But when you mention billionaires and governments you repeat yourself. The billionaires control the governments of the word. That said, children die of starvation every day today mostly due to governments across the globe.
Before public schools the cost to provide education to the poor isn’t profitable. So why would the free market solve this? Expecting altruism to solve this problem is being naive and goes against human nature.
In the early history of the US schools were taught in a single room by a teacher paid by the community. This later evolved into a much more centralized system. The department of education was formed in order to maintain more tight control over the hearts and minds of the children of the US. The elite titans of industry were very interested in educating the masses.
If you are curious about this check out the influence of the Prussian education system on the US. I do not believe education would arise solely due to altruism. Although, if we live in a society that already has schools where children can attend for free largely funded and supported by industry then I have no doubt that without taxes we would have more of this.
reply
“That said, children die of starvation every day today mostly due to governments across the globe.”
But how many are fed because of government actions as well. All the subsidies farmers get. Feeding people is not that profitable on mass. If it was the farmers wouldn’t need subsidies,
“ I just reject the idea that taxes is the best way to do this“
I never said taxes are the best way it’s just what is done currently. I think people ignore the positive externalities that come with taxation and amplify the negative aspects of taxation.
Before western civilization things where chaotic in a sense. Now people make fake money and then bitch and complain about how much of that fake money is “stolen” from them while ignoring the fact they even have a chance of life because of taxation.