3 ms·
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 esse
by 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 agoI 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 agoGood 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 agoHeinlein 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.