6 ms·

> If you own a landlocked property, which many people do, what exactly do you pay taxes for? School districts, fire departments, police departments, libraries,

> If you own a landlocked property, which many people do, what exactly do you pay taxes for? School districts, fire departments, police departments, libraries, local parks, roads to get around my city (not just off my property), bike trails, walking paths, and a government to manage it all.

trutannus 5y ago
Then charge individual levies for the use of those specific services, should the individual use them, as I mentioned in the comment you replied to. You've essentially just enumerated individual utilities I suggested charging levies for, then framed it as if I was suggesting people not pay for them at all. Your point does nothing to explain away the taxes for a landlocked property which makes use of no services at all. Consider wilderness properties, or hunting land where people have to charter private aircraft into. There's no services used to charge the owner for. Why charge them levies on top of the sales tax?
- dave5104 5y ago
  I think it's an agree to disagree situation, then. I just think society is better off when everyone chips in. Not when you nickel and dime everyone for specific services they use. You sound anti-tax in general, so I don't think I really have any good arguments to address your wilderness property edge case.
  - trutannus 5y ago
    Good assessment. I'd disagree that it being an edge-case isn't illustrative also, but that's a moot point. Appreciate you not trying to hammer me into agreement! If you, or anyone else for that matter, is ever interested in at least understanding this sort of position I highly recommend Robert Nozick's work in response to John Rawls A Theory of Justice entitled Anarchy State and Utopia.
  - sneak 5y ago
    Heinlein once wrote: > There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.

trutannus 5y ago

Then charge individual levies for the use of those specific services, should the individual use them, as I mentioned in the comment you replied to. You've essentially just enumerated individual utilities I suggested charging levies for, then framed it as if I was suggesting people not pay for them at all. Your point does nothing to explain away the taxes for a landlocked property which makes use of no services at all. Consider wilderness properties, or hunting land where people have to charter private aircraft into. There's no services used to charge the owner for. Why charge them levies on top of the sales tax?

dave5104 5y ago
I think it's an agree to disagree situation, then. I just think society is better off when everyone chips in. Not when you nickel and dime everyone for specific services they use. You sound anti-tax in general, so I don't think I really have any good arguments to address your wilderness property edge case.
- trutannus 5y ago
  Good assessment. I'd disagree that it being an edge-case isn't illustrative also, but that's a moot point. Appreciate you not trying to hammer me into agreement! If you, or anyone else for that matter, is ever interested in at least understanding this sort of position I highly recommend Robert Nozick's work in response to John Rawls A Theory of Justice entitled Anarchy State and Utopia.
- sneak 5y ago
  Heinlein once wrote: > There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.