3 ms·
>It's not slavery because you could choose not to work at all and pay no taxes. It's conditional upon you choosing to work, but the demand made upon you is ill
by aminok 10y ago
>It's not slavery because you could choose not to work at all and pay no taxes.
It's conditional upon you choosing to work, but the demand made upon you is illegitimate nonetheless. You choosing to work and consequently earning income does not grant someone else a moral right to force you hand over a share of that income to them (to labour for them).
>You have the choice in these nations to live (albeit a modest life) without working at all. That's the opposite of slavery. It's closer to aristocracy!
Given it's a life dependent on income forcibly redistributed from others, it's similar to the life of a slave owner, but a very poor one that shares the loot with millions of other co-recipients.
- noonespecial 10y agoAll of that is true, and I nearly entirely agree. I hope we find a better system. But it's not slavery because you are not forced to produce on threat of death. My issue was the devaluation of the term "slavery", not the legitimacy of the confiscation. If you consider it entirely illegitimate, then what was described is armed robbery.
- aminok 10y agoI agree with you. It's not slavery, even while sharing some of its characteristics. It's certainly not as tyrannical or brutal.