Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!decvax!bellcore!petrus!scherzo!allegra!ulysses!ucbvax!mcgeer
From: mcgeer@ucbvax.ARPA (Rick McGeer)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Newsflash! [JoSH on Socialists]
Message-ID: <10235@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 30-Aug-85 01:49:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.10235
Posted: Fri Aug 30 01:49:05 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 31-Aug-85 00:41:16 EDT
References: <955@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1110@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: mcgeer@ucbvax.UUCP (Rick McGeer)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 85

In article <1751@psuvax1.UUCP> berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman) writes:
>   Saying that taxation is theft has as much sence as saying that property
>s theft.

A man walks up to you with a loaded gun and demands that you give him some
large percentage of your paycheque, after first revealing to him as many details
of your life as he cares to know.  If you refuse, he locks you in a cell for
a long time.

Is this theft?  No, of course not.

It's extortion.

>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.

This is the usual blather of a statist justifying outrages upon any or all
of the institutions of property, marriage or liberty, or at least upon
the enjoyment of those institutions by somebody else.  Bull.  "Man is endowed
with certain Rights by his Creator..."  Some of us still believe that.

>   Historically, taxation was earlier then property in capitalistic sence.
>Of course, earlier does not imply better.  It does not imply worse either.

Come off it.  When our mutual ancient ancestor first swacked a peer over
the antelope he'd bagged, that was property.  If you're claiming that the
state's right to tax precedes a human's right to property, well, I'm not
really prepared to accept that.

>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.

Uh-uh, that it is not.  I have yet to see any example in history where the state
outperformed the market in any field save the destruction of wealth.

>   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).  

Fortunately for your argument, both the Boston Common and Central Park are
well-policed, wholesome, clean, crime-free areas.

More seriously, the great thing about local and state taxes is that you don't
have to put up with them.  You can leave.  Market forces then nail the
localities that insist upon gouging their citizens for nitwit federal programs.
Southeastern Pennsylvania is now crowded with people that work in Delaware.
New York City paid for its high-tax socialist folly by going bankrupt in the
'70s.  But Washington?  They can gouge us forever.


>   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.

If the socialists ever looked at the facts, socialism would have died its
well-deserved death 30 years ago, after Atlee's Labour government had succeeded
in impoverishing Britain despite the Marshall Plan.  Instead, my daily
newspaper and this newgroup are filled with the mindless rantings of those who 
crucify the fact of socialism's abysmal failings on the same cross they have
reserved for human liberty.

				Socialism delenda est,
				      -- Rick.
>***************************************************************
>*                                                             *
>*  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.            *
>*                                                             *
>***************************************************************

No.  I found out that you believe in socialism, I generalize that you believe
in other fantasies as well and I predict that I can sell you a bridge.