3 ms·

Both of these are immoral. Therefore, not paying your fair share (note that I didn't say "legal share") is immoral. Fairness is subjective. Morality is subject

Both of these are immoral. Therefore, not paying your fair share (note that I didn't say "legal share") is immoral. Fairness is subjective. Morality is subjective. Legality is objective. It's not "fair" that 51% of people get to decide which services to provide, how much to pay for them, under which conditions to provide them, then use force and the threat of force to compel the other 49% of people to pay for it. I didn't ask for these services. I have no moral obligation to pay anything for them and I have no legal obligation to pay anything more than the law requires. We don't legislate morality. It's basically hacking the system. Agreed and it's not immoral to hack the system. The state has every advantage. The state can write the laws. The state can interpret the laws. The state has men with guns to enforce the laws. Even with all of these advantages over the individual, sometimes the state doesn't come out on top. That's a failure of the state, not the individual. If you write the rules in your favor, interpret the rules in your favor and enforce the rules in your favor, it rings hollow when you cry that it wasn't fair that the little guy beat you using the rules that you wrote, interpreted and enforced.

enraged_camel 11y ago
>>Fairness is subjective. Morality is subjective. There isn't much that is subjective about paying the appropriate amount for the services and programs you benefit from. If you disagree that you should pay $5 for a cup of coffee that costs $5, then we have some very fundamental differences and can't come to any agreements in this debate. >>We don't legislate morality. On the contrary. Murder is illegal because we have decided as a society that killing people without just cause is immoral. >>I didn't ask for these services. But you still benefit from them, either directly or indirectly. A homeless shelter benefits you even if you aren't homeless, because it takes care of the homeless and makes it a lot less likely for them to commit crimes for survival. A fire department benefits you even if your house isn't on fire, because they put out fires in neighboring buildings and prevent them from spreading to and burning down yours. You are part of a society, and taxes are required to maintain the proper operation of that society, whether you have asked for it or not.
- LordKano 11y ago
  There isn't much that is subjective about paying the appropriate amount for the services and programs you benefit from. Again, you used a subjective term "Appropriate". You are attempting to present subjective opinions as objective facts. They are not. If you disagree that you should pay $5 for a cup of coffee that costs $5, then we have some very fundamental differences and can't come to any agreements in this debate. If I feel that $5 is too much for a cup of coffee, I am free to not buy it. To adopt the statist's mentality and apply it to commerce, one could argue that since people need jobs and Starbucks pays their employees well, it is a societal good for Starbucks locations to be profitable and therefore, everyone should have to pay for Starbucks coffee, whether they drink it or not. I reject this notion. On the contrary. Murder is illegal because we have decided as a society that killing people without just cause is immoral. The state regulates homicide, not for moral reasons but for reasons of social stability. No prohibition on homicide would lead to mass scale killings and retaliations. A fire department benefits you even if your house isn't on fire, because they put out fires in neighboring buildings and prevent them from spreading to and burning down yours. Where I live, fire departments are volunteer organizations that are funded by donations. I donate to them because I believe that the service they provide is worth my money. You are part of a society, and taxes are required to maintain the proper operation of that society, whether you have asked for it or not. My obligation to supply those funds is determined by the law and I'm only obliged to pay the minimum required by law. I pay my taxes, not because I have a moral obligation to do so. I pay my taxes because I have a legal obligation to do so. In other words, if I don't the state will send men with guns to take me away. All of the homeless shelters, fire departments and police officers in the world are worth less to me than my freedom.
TeMPOraL 11y ago
As I mentioned upthread, I think not everyone shares your view of state. You seem to view the state mostly as an enemy, a higher power you need to fight to extract some goods for yourself. Others, like me, tend to view the state as their friend, or at least a helpful entity with occasional personality problems, but generally friendly. I don't understand what's wrong with this generation. I look around and see people hell bent on destroying the system that brought them up. If you really don't like state that much, move to Somalia, and let those of us who like it enjoy civilization.
- LordKano 11y ago
  As I mentioned upthread, I think not everyone shares your view of state. That's alright. Not everyone has to share my view. You seem to view the state mostly as an enemy, a higher power you need to fight to extract some goods for yourself. I have to take exception to two of the terms used here. The state isn't a higher power, it does have greater power. I do not wish to extract anything from the state, I wish to maintain what is already mine. Others, like me, tend to view the state as their friend, or at least a helpful entity with occasional personality problems, but generally friendly. Like fire, the state can be a powerful servant or a terrifying master. I don't understand what's wrong with this generation. With all due respect, you do not know to which generation I belong. I look around and see people hell bent on destroying the system that brought them up. The system didn't bring me up, my family did. If you really don't like state that much, move to Somalia, and let those of us who like it enjoy civilization. I do not leave for the same reason that your love of overbearing government hasn't lead you to move to North Korea. I like it here. I'm doing my level best to keep statists from destroying this republic the way they did Somalia. I'd suggest that you learn how Somalia got to be in the condition that it now finds itself. Here's an abridged version of the events... https://www.facebook.com/bruce.fenton.page/photos/a.372809748000.157606.195676678000/10153300446048001/?type=3 https://www.facebook.com/bruce.fenton.page/photos/a.37280974...

enraged_camel 11y ago

>>Fairness is subjective. Morality is subjective. There isn't much that is subjective about paying the appropriate amount for the services and programs you benefit from. If you disagree that you should pay $5 for a cup of coffee that costs $5, then we have some very fundamental differences and can't come to any agreements in this debate. >>We don't legislate morality. On the contrary. Murder is illegal because we have decided as a society that killing people without just cause is immoral. >>I didn't ask for these services. But you still benefit from them, either directly or indirectly. A homeless shelter benefits you even if you aren't homeless, because it takes care of the homeless and makes it a lot less likely for them to commit crimes for survival. A fire department benefits you even if your house isn't on fire, because they put out fires in neighboring buildings and prevent them from spreading to and burning down yours. You are part of a society, and taxes are required to maintain the proper operation of that society, whether you have asked for it or not.

LordKano 11y ago
There isn't much that is subjective about paying the appropriate amount for the services and programs you benefit from. Again, you used a subjective term "Appropriate". You are attempting to present subjective opinions as objective facts. They are not. If you disagree that you should pay $5 for a cup of coffee that costs $5, then we have some very fundamental differences and can't come to any agreements in this debate. If I feel that $5 is too much for a cup of coffee, I am free to not buy it. To adopt the statist's mentality and apply it to commerce, one could argue that since people need jobs and Starbucks pays their employees well, it is a societal good for Starbucks locations to be profitable and therefore, everyone should have to pay for Starbucks coffee, whether they drink it or not. I reject this notion. On the contrary. Murder is illegal because we have decided as a society that killing people without just cause is immoral. The state regulates homicide, not for moral reasons but for reasons of social stability. No prohibition on homicide would lead to mass scale killings and retaliations. A fire department benefits you even if your house isn't on fire, because they put out fires in neighboring buildings and prevent them from spreading to and burning down yours. Where I live, fire departments are volunteer organizations that are funded by donations. I donate to them because I believe that the service they provide is worth my money. You are part of a society, and taxes are required to maintain the proper operation of that society, whether you have asked for it or not. My obligation to supply those funds is determined by the law and I'm only obliged to pay the minimum required by law. I pay my taxes, not because I have a moral obligation to do so. I pay my taxes because I have a legal obligation to do so. In other words, if I don't the state will send men with guns to take me away. All of the homeless shelters, fire departments and police officers in the world are worth less to me than my freedom.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

As I mentioned upthread, I think not everyone shares your view of state. You seem to view the state mostly as an enemy, a higher power you need to fight to extract some goods for yourself. Others, like me, tend to view the state as their friend, or at least a helpful entity with occasional personality problems, but generally friendly. I don't understand what's wrong with this generation. I look around and see people hell bent on destroying the system that brought them up. If you really don't like state that much, move to Somalia, and let those of us who like it enjoy civilization.

LordKano 11y ago
As I mentioned upthread, I think not everyone shares your view of state. That's alright. Not everyone has to share my view. You seem to view the state mostly as an enemy, a higher power you need to fight to extract some goods for yourself. I have to take exception to two of the terms used here. The state isn't a higher power, it does have greater power. I do not wish to extract anything from the state, I wish to maintain what is already mine. Others, like me, tend to view the state as their friend, or at least a helpful entity with occasional personality problems, but generally friendly. Like fire, the state can be a powerful servant or a terrifying master. I don't understand what's wrong with this generation. With all due respect, you do not know to which generation I belong. I look around and see people hell bent on destroying the system that brought them up. The system didn't bring me up, my family did. If you really don't like state that much, move to Somalia, and let those of us who like it enjoy civilization. I do not leave for the same reason that your love of overbearing government hasn't lead you to move to North Korea. I like it here. I'm doing my level best to keep statists from destroying this republic the way they did Somalia. I'd suggest that you learn how Somalia got to be in the condition that it now finds itself. Here's an abridged version of the events... https://www.facebook.com/bruce.fenton.page/photos/a.372809748000.157606.195676678000/10153300446048001/?type=3 https://www.facebook.com/bruce.fenton.page/photos/a.37280974...