33 ms·
"immorality " That is a strange moral system you have in the US. In other countries, it is morally acceptable to take from the rich and redistribute to the poo
by gutnor 14y ago
"immorality "
That is a strange moral system you have in the US. In other countries, it is morally acceptable to take from the rich and redistribute to the poor.
The reason is that in those countries, wealth and lack of wealth is thought to be a great part influenced by factor outside your control (chance). That is even backed by studies, if you are born in a poor families, you will have less opportunities than a rich kid in a rich family.
Taxing the rich to help poor people in those circumstances is not to punish hard work to reward lazyness(=immoral), it is perceived as balancing unfairness in nature.
On the other hand, there are other reason why a poor could be against taxing the rich that have nothing to do with some fluid concept like morality. It could be, for example, that they agree with the numbers and the theories presented by the party disagreeing with the taxes. After all, trickle down economic could work as described, why not, it is supported by important AND qualified people.
What is missing in US politics (and generally in politic) is a scientific approach to the proposition. The level of proof required to submit political proposition as important as tax level is much lower than what you need to convince your wife to let you buy an XBox. That is the problem, voters are provided with vague theories with nothing to back them.
- gadders 14y agoHow is it moral to take somebody else's propety?
- gutnor 14y agoBecause that somebody else has agreed ?
- gadders 14y agoSo taxes are voluntary? Awesome.
- gutnor 14y agoIndeed, US/EU allows you to voluntarily pay taxes above the legal minimum corresponding to your situation. I'm happy you find that awesome.
- malyk 14y agoYou live here. You agree. If you don't, move to somalia or something. (somalia is tongue in cheek, obviously).
- rdtsc 14y agoWell maybe not so tongue in cheek. You see, I have lived in US for more than a decade and noticed there is a disproportionate number of Randian type libertarians here. Mostly are just college kids who read Atlas Shrugged and now they want government to get out of their business. This is the immaturity and fantasy world that I was referring above. For all intended purpose, a place where FDA, SEC, tax authority (IRS) don't exist and are out of people "hair" exist -- many of those places are pretty scary to live in, Somalia is one of them, other poor countries are also there. You'd think those would be a libertarian paradise, no controls, no need to pay taxes, but reality the opposite is true.
- rdtsc 14y agoTaxes are part of the package deal. You get some things back for them. The package deal (the contract if you will) in theory is voluntary. You are free to get your ocean liner and set sail into the international waters where you don't have to pay anyone anything.
- summerdown2 14y agoTake a look at "your" money. Notice that it says "Federal Reserve Note." That's because it's a promise created, promoted, distributed and backed by the government. In a very real sense, it's their money. As the "property" you feel so strongly about, belongs to the government, it seems only fair that you should follow their rules in the use and disposition of it, don't you think? I have another question, too, which is on a completely different tack. Why don't you care about the poor and weak in your society? Don't you see you're all in it together? Doesn't common fellow feeling let you see that trying to lift up the disadvantaged is a genuinely human and humane thing to do?