Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site psuvax1.UUCP Path: utzoo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!cmu-cs-pt!cadre!psuvax1!berman From: berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman) Newsgroups: net.politics.theory Subject: Re: Newsflash! [JoSH on Socialists] Message-ID: <1751@psuvax1.UUCP> Date: Wed, 28-Aug-85 15:13:32 EDT Article-I.D.: psuvax1.1751 Posted: Wed Aug 28 15:13:32 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 30-Aug-85 01:35:15 EDT References: <955@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1110@umcp-cs.UUCP> Distribution: na Organization: Pennsylvania State Univ. Lines: 57 > Taxation is theft, and income redistribution is > the distribution of stolen goods. Never before have I heard that the receiver > of stolen property enjoys any property right in those goods, especially when, > as in this case, the receivers are in fact conspirators before and during the > act of theft. > > As a practical matter, you are correct: people who receive welfare, and those > who receive the non-welfare transfer payments which are subsidies to the middle > class (Social Security, Student Loans and subsidized services such as public > universities) perceive a property right therein and will not countenance > their removal. It is this obduracy and illusion which underlies many of our > current domestic problems, from the deficit through the various agonies of > public education. Informed discussions, however, require clear reasoning and > moral accuracy. One has no property right in goods stolen from others, it > is not social engineering to demand that the social engineers stop tinkering, > and it is hardly a radical reform to ask that those who engage in systematic > theft please stop. > > Now, if we demanded that the last socialist be hung from the entrails of the > last tax collector --- > > well, now that would be a radical, if beneficial, reform. > > -- Rick. Saying that taxation is theft has as much sence as saying that property s theft. Both statement state opposition to historically evolved social institutions. The notion of property is by no means absolute. The only absolute value is survival. All others are aquired by humans in the process of societal development (as opposed to biological evolution). Thus property, liberty, marriage, parental duties etc. are meaningful only in the context of a given society. Historically, taxation was earlier then property in capitalistic sence. Of course, earlier does not imply better. It does not imply worse either. I can listen to arguments that taxation should be minimal, as to maximize the scope of self-regulatory market mechanism. I do not agree with that, but this is a matter of some rational argument + rational value judgments. However a claim that taxation is theft is beyond the scope of rationality. Even "nigth watchman" state requires some taxes to supports its necessary functions. For some period the only federal taxes in USA were customs, which is a form of sales tax. Still, there were internal revenues supporting necessary functions of state and local goverments, plus public lands (like Central Park in NYC or Boston Commons). I do not know wheter the "taxation is theft" argument belongs to net.politics.invectives or net.politics.slogans, but surely not in net.politics.theory. If you want to have a minimal state, provide arguments (I could think of efficiency, soundness of checks and balances etc.) examples, case studies but do not call all others habitual thiefs. The purpose of your letter is to express your emotions. The purpose of theory is study facts, generalize and predict. *************************************************************** * * * In a fit of pessimism I envisioned Rick muttering: * * I found out that you sleal, I generalize that you are * * a thief and I predict that you will be a thief. * * * ***************************************************************