From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: Negative Income Tax (Was: Social programs)
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Distribution: can
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 00:52:27 GMT

In article <i4RPwB2w164w@ham.almanac.bc.ca> emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca writes:
>jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) writes:
>
>> In article <HJwgwB1w164w@ham.almanac.bc.ca> emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca writes:
>> >golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>> >
>> >> 
>> >> The general public is under that impression because of propaganda
>> >> from the left and from the rich.  The left is absolutely stupid...
>> >> they argue for a progressive tax system...but since they are never
>> >> in power, it is never imposed...and the rich who are in power,
>> >> institute a tax system which looks progressive, but is riddled
>> >> with loopholes...and creates unproductive and wasteful jobs for
>> >> bureaucrats, lawyers, and accountants.  The way to get the rich
>> >> to pay taxes is to have flat taxes.  The majority loses from
>> >> a progressive tax system...not gains.  
>> >> 
>> >> Gerald
>> >
>> >
>> >You mean that, because the left has never been in power (I presume you 
>> >mean federally) it's their fault that the rich have a tax system 
>> >advantageous to the rich?
>> >
>> >I agree with your assessment of the present tax system, but I'm more
>> >pessimistic than you about the ability of the rich to evade taxes, flat 
>> >rate or not.
>> 
>> The left has a notion that runs like this:
>> 'since you are more productive, better educated, more efficient, and
>> work harder, or have had some luck on your side, you are morally OBLIGATED
>> to hand over fistfulls of money over to governments who didn't earn that
>> money'
>> 
>Your characterization of the "left" (which, by the way, is certainly not
>...um.. monotheistic, for want of a better term) is childish. Goverments 
>of all stripes (and we have NEVER EVER had a "left" wing federal 
>government in Canada) are only too ready to take money from their 
>citizens. 

'Left', 'statist, centralised, natia\onalist' whatever. The Trudeau
Liberals graciously occupied this role as a LEFT, socialist government.
Maybe not your brand of socialism, but definitely just as harmful to
invidual libery and property.

>Taxation in general is not a matter of ideology, although the 
>right and left would probably have very different notions of what to 
>spend taxation money on.

in other words it IS a matter of ideology, since left & right disagree.
>> 
>No, you've got it wrong. People who try to avoid taxes fall into the 
>category you describe. It's perfectly legitimate to try to structure your 
>affairs in such a way as to pay the minumum in taxes. It's quite another 
>to try to evade taxes you are legally obligated to pay. Tax evasion is 
>criminal, it's wrong, and it's theft from your fellow citizens.

Legally obligated is one thing. That doesn't make it right. 
1. I pay tax money and recieve a service I want in return == right
2. I don't pay tax money, and recieve a service I want == wrong
3. I pay tax money and either recieve no service in return, or recieve one
   I don't want == wrong
4. I don't pay tax money, and I don't recieve a service in return = right

given 1, 2, 3, 4 tax evasion isn't always 'wrong', but it may be illegal.
Just because something is legal, doesn't make it right. Just because something
is illegal, doesn't make it wrong.

Suppose a Evil-greedy-imperialist-capitalist(TM) makes heaps of money,
and he withholds (evades) taxes. You say that's stealling. Perhaps
it would be stealling, if he weren't paying for the road maintenance for
his villa etc.

But what you are calling 'theft from your fellow citizens' is actually
just avoidance of having your fellow citizens vote en masse to 'legally'
steal from YOU! If you take money, goods, services away from someone
against there will and without compensation, it is theft. Just because
the government legitamises it, doesn't make it RIGHT in any objective or
moral sense.

>
>
>Personally, I'm glad we don't have to depend on the charity of others to 
>see that the less advantaged in our society are looked after. I'm not 
>anxious to go back to the workhouses of victorian England, for example.

well, with so many nice people like you, you won't mind providing for others
who don't DESERVE it. The capitalists, libertarians, objectivists et al.
will be happy to take care of charity for people who DO deserve it.
>
>
>emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca  (Robert Smits, Ladysmith B.C.)
>
-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
Newsgroups: can.politics