3 ms·

Well, I wasn't exactly making the "argument", but yes that was my thought process. I disagree though that they shouldn't pay for it. Everyone should. However,

Well, I wasn't exactly making the "argument", but yes that was my thought process. I disagree though that they shouldn't pay for it. Everyone should. However, the most likely scenario is paying indirectly, in your case. Eg, if we increased road taxes and applied them only to those who actually use the roads directly, then shipping products will also require price increases to cover said increased road costs. So the end user is paying for the taxes whether they like it or not, in most cases.

mikeash 9y ago
Right, but then the end user is paying for it in proportion to how much they benefit. Someone who uses the roads more (directly or indirectly) pays more than someone who uses the roads less. Which is how it ought to be. The argument that you benefit indirectly could be applied to almost anything. You benefit from the computers used by the businesses you patronize, so should we levy a tax to pay for them? Probably not.