3 ms·

Really? What if society consisted of 10 people on an island, and only one of them was great at catching fish. Would the others have the right to take his fish a

Really? What if society consisted of 10 people on an island, and only one of them was great at catching fish. Would the others have the right to take his fish and redistribute them?

jasonlotito 13y ago
You're leaving out what the other 9 castaways do. You don't mention the fact that 3 of these people are staying up at night guarding the camp from predators, ensuring the fish catcher gets a full nights rest. You are ignoring the person who knows how to properly filter and provide fresh water for drinking. You forget that someone else is always manning the fire, ensuring it's always going. He can easily set it again if it happens to go out for some reason. It also helps that his wife is injured so he can stay close to her. The fisher can't fish if he's not out in the water, so he has two people helping him. One to mend the nets or other materials needed to fish, and the second to bring the fish onto shore. They both also prepare the fish for cooking. And the final person the cook, doesn't just cook the fish. He prepare the fish, align with other food he is able to scrounge with whatever person has some free time, ensuring people get a better diet. So do they have the right to take his fish? Considering without them, he would have died that first night, I'm pretty sure their is some level of obligation.
- nathan_long 13y ago
  I'm not ignoring those people. I'm just assuming they trade net mending, fire, water, etc for fish, rather than taking them by force. Indeed, what's the point of catching lots of fish unless he can trade some for other things? He can't eat them all. "We'll mend your nets for 5 fish" is far different from "you have fish and we want them, so hand them over."
  - jasonlotito 13y ago
    You understand taxes aren't just taking money for nothing, right? It is an exchange.
    - nathan_long 13y ago
      That depends. Maybe the person being taxed is not a beneficiary of how the money is used. It's not nearly as clear an exchange as trade, although of course there are things (like roads) that we wouldn't have at all except via taxes.

Really? What if society consisted of 10 people on an island, and only one of them was great at catching fish. Would the others have the right to take his fish and redistribute them?

jasonlotito 13y ago

You're leaving out what the other 9 castaways do. You don't mention the fact that 3 of these people are staying up at night guarding the camp from predators, ensuring the fish catcher gets a full nights rest. You are ignoring the person who knows how to properly filter and provide fresh water for drinking. You forget that someone else is always manning the fire, ensuring it's always going. He can easily set it again if it happens to go out for some reason. It also helps that his wife is injured so he can stay close to her. The fisher can't fish if he's not out in the water, so he has two people helping him. One to mend the nets or other materials needed to fish, and the second to bring the fish onto shore. They both also prepare the fish for cooking. And the final person the cook, doesn't just cook the fish. He prepare the fish, align with other food he is able to scrounge with whatever person has some free time, ensuring people get a better diet. So do they have the right to take his fish? Considering without them, he would have died that first night, I'm pretty sure their is some level of obligation.

nathan_long 13y ago
I'm not ignoring those people. I'm just assuming they trade net mending, fire, water, etc for fish, rather than taking them by force. Indeed, what's the point of catching lots of fish unless he can trade some for other things? He can't eat them all. "We'll mend your nets for 5 fish" is far different from "you have fish and we want them, so hand them over."
- jasonlotito 13y ago
  You understand taxes aren't just taking money for nothing, right? It is an exchange.
  - nathan_long 13y ago
    That depends. Maybe the person being taxed is not a beneficiary of how the money is used. It's not nearly as clear an exchange as trade, although of course there are things (like roads) that we wouldn't have at all except via taxes.