1 / 8

Taxation, Forced Labor, and Theft

Taxation, Forced Labor, and Theft. By Edward Feser. Robert Nozick. Taxation is on par with forced labor (slavery). If you work, part goes to government. NOT the same as the ‘taxation is theft’ argument. NOT a ‘property rights’ argument.

tara-tillman
Télécharger la présentation

Taxation, Forced Labor, and Theft

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Taxation, Forced Labor, and Theft By Edward Feser

  2. Robert Nozick • Taxation is on par with forced labor (slavery). • If you work, part goes to government. • NOT the same as the ‘taxation is theft’ argument. • NOT a ‘property rights’ argument. • Can one choose to not work (and thereby escape the labor and the tax)? • Does the fact that the actions of the government are predictable and governed by law make a difference? • Does it matter that the government gives some benefits to the taxpayer in ‘exchange’ for the tax? • What if a thief shines your shoes after robbing you?

  3. Self-Ownership Argument • A person owns his own body, and has a moral right to what he produces—unless he contracts otherwise. • Taxation presumes that the government has a right to the fruits of one’s labor, and this infers that the government owns part of the taxpayer. • No one can morally be even a partial owner of someone else. • Stronger than the forced-labor argument.

  4. Murray Rothbard • Stronger arguments than Nozick. • Taxation is no different than the action of a robber. • Does majority consent make a difference? • Does it matter that the taxpayer gets some benefit from the taxation?

  5. Does it matter that all property was not originally appropriated fairly? • If property was not acquired fairly, then taxation is perhaps necessary in order to rectify this problem. • Maybe true, but this does not justify continuous taxation, and taxation for uses unrelated to the rectification. • How much current taxation is justified by “correcting the erroneously appropriated property”?

  6. Homesteading as theory of initial acquisition. • Is it problematic? • No such thing as just or unjust initial acquisition. • Justice only comes into play after initial ownership has been established. • It is neither just nor unjust to acquire property that is un-owned. • Even if property was unjustly acquired by someone previously, the specific act of taxation is still not moral.

  7. With taxation, who initiates the force? • Is the government itself legitimate? • Does its “legal status” make it legitimate? • What % of government expenditures are legit? • Does majority rule have anything to do with its legitimacy? • Is there a ‘social contract’ of some kind? • Is taxation morally ok because people generally do not generally treat it as theft?

  8. Good afternoon, good evening, and good night.

More Related