An Aussie Objectivist's case for compulsory taxation

... the benefits of a good government are at once substantial, mainly indirect, and diffuse. Everyone gains from low crime rates, fraud-free commercial systems and keeping enemy nations out, whether or not they themselves are the victim of a crime or a war happens in their lifetime. Indeed, to the extent that they live out their lives in peace, the government is doing its job properly.

So I agree with the “user pays” principle: but when it comes to the proper role of government, everyone is a user. I therefore suggest that compulsory taxation is not the initiation of physical force (when it is to pay for governmental defence of individual rights only): any more than it is the initiation of physical force to insist on payment for any other service used voluntarily. Rand was right to say that what people are paying for are things they need and should be willing to pay for. But not only do they need them (objectively, for all the reasons that make governments necessary), but in choosing to live in a civilised society they are using them by choice, and not merely should be willing to pay for them, but in fact owe the money.

Note that an involuntary aspect of government is not limited to taxation, but is inherent in government itself. Because a government requires a legal monopoly on force within its jurisdiction (except in emergencies), all who live within its borders have to abide by that whether they think they should or not. That is what a monopoly means. People can always opt out by living in the wilderness and losing all the advantages of civilised society — but living outside of society (which includes, not preying on that society as a criminal) are the only terms on which they can consistently and justifiably live beyond its jurisdiction, taxation and protection.

http://www.thoughtware.com.au/philosophy/

Yeah, I know of those clowns...

See how bat-shit-insane and divorced from reality 'Objectivists' really are?

Oh man

CovOps wrote:: See how bat-shit-insane and divorced from reality these 'Objectivists' really are?

Ya don't say? Not to mention their almost religious faith in an "external" system...

People cannot live as free men and women as traders, free to deal with each other according to their own judgment without fear of physical coercion unless some external system is in place to protect that freedom and to remove that fear.

The disputes between people that arise from trade, whether disputes between honest men or disputes resulting from fraud, cannot be left to private settlement. That may be, and often should be, the first recourse. But if agreement cannot be reached (an agreement would include agreeing to disagree, i.e., calling it quits), then a just solution has to be imposed.... Whatever private means people use to resolve their disputes, they need a final court of appeal with the power to enforce its decisions when voluntary agreement cannot be reached.

For humans to live together according to our nature as rational beings, we need an external system to control the application of force.... That is, a society of free people requires that they give up force: but they cannot do that unless a system is set up to protect them from force initiated by others.

That external system is the government.

Quote :: That is, a society of free people requires that they give up force: but they cannot do that unless a system is set up to protect them from force initiated by others.

Without dropping any context, I'll just point out, that basically (despite some of their lukewarm objections, to what I'm about to say) the very first thing 'objectivists' do, is disarm the individual:

Quote :: ... a society of free people requires that they give up force

So much for their philosophy of individualism...

I'll never forgive them for this one, never! SCUM! This is one of the most important non-blank bullets to fire at 'objectivists' as a whole! Unforgivable! To tell a person to 'be an individual,' but then to deny him the use of force, according to his own judgment, is yet another recipe for slavery... See,you must now rely on strangers you have never met, don't know, etc... the statists... right... 'they'll protect ya...'

...

Quote :: but they cannot do that unless a system is set up to protect them from force initiated by others

Thing is, they can't deliver...

And they never did... it's fantasy material...

I could go out tonight, to any random place... bar, club, hotel, whatever... and I can guarantee in advance, that if I so much as say 'the wrong word' on a subject matter at hand, some stranger, or several, will attack me... 100% guaranteed!

Yet I live under statism!!!

Even 'objectivist statism' can't protect me... nobody can...

So...

Objectivism = Statism = FAIL!

So no motherfucking deal, ever!

An Aussie Objectivist's case for compulsory taxation

An Aussie Objectivist's case for compulsory taxation

Anarcho-Capitalist Categorical Imperatives

AnCaps' Laissez-faire Free Trade Zone