According to Merriam Webster, to tax means to make onerous and rigorous demands on the job, to charge, accuse or censure or to levy a tax on. Now, the word levy itself makes us think to conscription, collection and definitely imposition.
Consequently to tax means to constrain. Yet, we willingly pay it. Now, there is a catch. The willing part. How willing and free are we when the state (any state for that matter) makes us pay the taxes. We take pride in living in democratic and free countries, yet we cannot speak of freedom. Physical freedom does not exist as we are determined by biology. Have you tried to exercise free-will when you have a full bladder? Not much freedom to express, is there? Freedom to choose between evil and good, you say? Well, not exactly your choice, either. Empathy, and by extension morals, are determined by biology (think of the mirror neurons which play a key role in empathy and other conducts that we thought were exclusively moral). Moral reasoning is generated by emotion and not cognition and some studies have shown that the right temporo-parietal junction is the place of intentions, thoughts and beliefs. And that can be modified by applying a magnetic field to the scalp. Yes, there is a moral centre in the brain and we can fidget with it. Oh well, not very encouraging to know that we can send an innocent to jail or let a criminal walk free if we are under the influence (of a magnetic field, that is). But, let’s go back to taxation.
Let alone the lack of freedom at a physical level, we live in a society and that by itself implies a series of new restricted liberties: obey by the rules (social, political and so on) to be accepted. The key word here is obey. One cannot fully and justly claim that he is free when, at the end of each month, the state steps in and claims a part of his labor.
According to Nozick, when the state takes a dollar from Bill Gates (the example belongs to Michael Sandel from Harvard Uni), to give it to a poor one, it is as if the state forces Bill Gates to work for the poor person. I know, Bill Gates is rich and he can afford it. But we are not rich, and we are equally taxed. You too work for the poor and the unemployed. Is that fair, you might honestly ask? Not exactly, with all do respect for the poor and the unemployed. It is admirable indeed to freely give your money and your time to help the poor. But, what if you do not wish to give the money or the time?
We have to get used to the idea that some are more talented, others have more luck (meaning more chances and opportunities brought together at the right time), others work more or have a higher IQ. Why does the state oblige us to level these natural differences (let’s not kid ourselves, we are not equal) by setting up a false and badly understood equality? Communists tried to level people by force, based on the idea that we are all equal, so they graciously failed. Pretty much like all the communes based on Tommaso Campanella’s Civitas Solis, where goods, women and children were held in common. Communism did not fail because of the atrocities committed by its eventually corrupted rulers. It failed because it went against the very basic human law of property. Not everyone is willing to share and we tend to keep things for ourselves. Communism failed because it was too idealistic while humans are highly pragmatic.
The work imposed on another person without his consent is mere slavery and the taxation is theft. Continuing Sandel’s line of arguments let’s assume that Gates would have consented to voluntarily give away that dollar, and that would have been done based on his free will. I doubt anyone asks Bill Gates, Michael Jordan, Julia Roberts or us, as a matter of fact, if we are willing to donate that dollar to the state. Or maybe in your part of the work, there is a dedicated person that asks for your consent at the end of each month, when you get the pay check, if you freely want to contribute to the general welfare. But I doubt that again, so consequently, the state takes some 31% (in the USA), some 50% (in Sweden) and 16% (in my homeland).
Honestly, not speaking of Jon Haidt type of moral judgments here, if there were no laws to keep us within the legal frames, how many of us would be willing to pay their taxes? Moreover, why?
To be able to enjoy agorism, meaning a truly free market, based on the volunteer exchange among free citizens, we need an elevated degree of conscience. And we, as species, lack that. And if we can outwit someone, we will.
Nevertheless, the libertarians claim – and I fully agree- that the fundamental right of each individual is the right to freedom. Meaning, we are theoretically born free, and we are not at the disposal of the society or the state’s demands. In other words, we are free to live our lives as we please as long as we respect the other people’s rights. Now, here is the catch: my rights pretty much end where the nose of others begins, and my inner freedom so highly praised by optimists is just a chimera. Allow me to attempt an explanation: although I am not a smoker, I do believe that smokers should be free to smoke their brains off without additional taxes or penalties imposed by a state with paternalist ambitions.
Maybe the state should not compel us to pay taxes for a future retirement pension, as it is our free and aware choice to live right here and right now, in the present, spending our income as we wish. The state’s attitude to decide what is good and what is bad for me, by forcing me by law to pay a facultative pension is condescending and highly offensive, and it reduces me to the position of an ignorant child (not that children are ignorant we just treat them as if they were).
But if I am treated like an ignorant child, who has no clue what is good for him, and I am imposed firm limits by a fatherly like state, why am I then forced to work like an adult?
Why does the state think that it is smarter and knows better than me? Don’t I really know that seatbelts can save my life? Do I need to be reminded with a fine that I can die if I don’t buckle them? Question: how comes that most democratic and free countries are in fact paternalist type states, that are warmly appreciated by their citizens for their social support and laws, where I am obliged to wear a helmet when I ride the bike or the seatbelt when I drive? Where is my right to have an accident or end my own life? Where is my free-will and my freedom as tax paying citizen? That is right, pretty much to hell.
To redistribute my income towards unemployed and poor (meaning the unique taxation which I, a single working mother, equally pay along with some Nouveau riche politician) is unjust. As simple as that.
I am not absurd and I do understand and agree that a certain level of taxation is needed and greeted, to entertain services that we all equally benefit from, such as ambulance, police, fire squad, or road maintenance. But why should I pay from my income the plastic bags that the city hall buys for the dog owners to pick up their feces? I certainly want a clean city, but I should not be obliged to pay for other people’s pets maintenance, no?
Taxation literarily implies taking off my own income, meaning ripping off the fruit of my labor without my consent. Now, Nozick asks, if the state gets a portion of my work without my consent, isn’t taxation morally equivalent with forced labor? And what is forced labor if not slavery? So what is taxation if not slavery?
Consequently, to tax someone equals coercion and to use a person for the general welfare – so praised by utilitarianism- is morally wrong as it doubts the moral foundation of self-possession. How can I be my own master if I cannot decide upon my fundamental rights of disposing of my labor as I please, of my right to live or die (assisted suicide is another example of a paternalist state who claims to respect human rights), the right of conscience of raising and educating my child as I please, since the state insures religious education by law- as if was supposed to assure me of her future moral spine. How can I pursue happiness if I cannot pursue freedom?
No comments:
Post a Comment