zlacker

>>WaitWa+(OP)
My wife got flagged as an extremist and started getting notices from Facebook yesterday every time she logged in.

Which I mean, my wife believes that the government using the threat of violence to collect taxes is immoral, unethical, and that all transactions between all individuals should be voluntary and nonviolent. Which in terms of popular discourse, is very "extreme". She was thinking about running for local public office an a platform of "the government will not take away your propery for failure to pay taxes" which a surprising number of local people on Facebook supported. She's been going to Meetups and having people say "oh yeah I saw your meme, the government sucks, keep it up!" She bugs local politicans on Facebook, their ads keep popping up in her feed, so she'll ask them things like "do you think it's moral to seize someone's property when they can't pay their taxes?" which of course gets bullshit nonanswers from politicians. Nobody wants to say "I think it's moral to seize someone's house because they're behind on taxes".

An authoritarian government wouldn't like someone like my wife, and they certainly wouldn't want her getting likes on Facebook. After all, what if she DOES run for office? What if she wins? What if other people like her win?

>>wincy+n7
Total off-topic: out of curiosity, what levers does she think are moral to pull to encourage folks to pay taxes?

>>zucked+Md
Same as what happens when you don't pay your utility bills, your services stop.

>>Wincys+Vr
How do you enforce that? Taxes pay for roads, parks, local goverment offices, etc. Is somebody who is behind on taxes prohibited from using public roads? Are they prohibited from entering the courthouse?

>>jdlsho+at
We don't tax tourists to use any of those services. In most jurisdictions public roads are funded through fuel and registration levies.

>>FreeSp+QA
We more than make up for the cost of tourists using public services with the money they spend on tourism. Also they pay sales tax where that's applicable.

>>krapp+5S
Just as we more than make up for the cost of residents using public services with the money they spend on living costs.

>>FreeSp+HT
The money residents spend on living costs is spent and circulates within the local economy, it doesn't go to the government (excepting sales tax, maybe.) How would a government fund infrastructure and services with that?

>>krapp+2W
Personal income taxes are only a recent phenomena, introduced to bolster war efforts. Nothing prevents a nation funding itself through corporate and consumption taxes alone.

>>FreeSp+rY
But we're discussing voluntary taxation here - corporations (already masters at tax avoidance under coercive taxation) would never opt in, nor would consumers volunteer to pay more for goods and services when they could simply pay less.

And since neither involves paying directly for a government service, there's nothing the government could deny in the absence of payment.

>>krapp+G11
> But we're discussing voluntary taxation here

Income taxes are no more voluntary than consumption taxes.

> corporations (already masters at tax avoidance under coercive taxation) would never opt in

130 countries have already backed a global corporation tax rate.

> nor would consumers volunteer to pay more for goods and services when they could simply pay less.

They already do. A gallon of gas is $1.8 in Malaysia, $3.5 in America, and over $8 in the Netherlands.

> And since neither involves paying directly for a government service, there's nothing the government could deny in the absence of payment.

The good/service one is purchasing is the incentive itself.