Jesus Tax

[moralist]

moralist, on 15 January 2013 - 07:48 PM, said:

Buying gasoline is an earned merit, NOT an unearned entitlement.

Buying gasoline with my own money is an "unearned entitlement"?

(see above...)

Edited January 18, 2013 by moralist

[Leonid]

On this we agree.

As far as I'm concerned it's voluntary, because I freely choose to purchase gasoline knowing in advance that a portion of the money pays for my share of the use of roads. And since I use roads as a tool to make money, it becomes a business expense which is passed on to the end users of my products and services.

But since you perceive this as an injustice... what are you actually doing about it?

At least part of the gasoline price is not market related. It is money which has been arbitrary added to the price and which supposed to be used for the roads' maintenance . Even if it's true, it's still a robbery. You intention is to buy gasoline only, not to pay for roads. This payment is extracted from you by force, by the power of state which arbitrary connected these two payments in one package deal. Therefore it's not voluntary payment. It's similar to VAT ( value added tax) which you pay when you make any purchase. Nobody calls VAT voluntary payment on the ground that people have a choice not to engage in any economical activity.

[moralist]

Your intention is to buy gasoline only, not to pay for roads.

The intention you are describing does not apply to me because that is not my intention. I use the roads as a tool to make money, so the gas tax paid for the cost of maintanence is just another business expense which is passed on to the end users of my products and services. And not just me. Every businessman who uses the roads does exactly the same.

So if you feel unjustly robbed... the solution to your complaint is to become a Capitalist producer, and then the roads will become a useful money making asset.

[Leonid]

No, this payment has been forced on you as on everybody else. You have no choice about it, no matter whether or not you are using the roads. What if I buy fuel and don't use roads, just drive 4 by 4 in the bush? The real solution is to give to everybody freedom of choice to purchase the product he wants and to pay for it. That would be a voluntary payment.

[moralist]

No, this payment has been forced on you as on everybody else. You have no choice about it, no matter whether or not you are using the roads. What if I buy fuel and don't use roads, just drive 4 by 4 in the bush? The real solution is to give to everybody freedom of choice to purchase the product he wants and to pay for it. That would be a voluntary payment.

You'll just have to work out what you perceive as an injustice for yourself. For I am just as powerless to alter government public policy as you are... but we both have the power over how we each choose to respond to it. So, as an alternative to impotent complaining, my response was to learn how to turn a perceived injustice into a genuine blessing by becoming an American Capitalist producer who uses public roads to make money.

What you choose to do about it is completely up to you.

[Leonid]

You'll just have to work out what you perceive as an injustice for yourself. For I am just as powerless to alter government public policy as you are... but we both have the power over how we each choose to respond to it. So, as an alternative to impotent complaining, my response was to learn how to turn a perceived injustice into a genuine blessing by becoming an American Capitalist producer who uses public roads to make money.

What you choose to do about it is completely up to you.

And how you propose to do that? Since roads are public property which means they belong to everybody and to nobody in particular and therefore in fact controlled by government, the only way to make money is to get a government tender. That how you perceive an American capitalist? A sort of James Taggart? The real capitalist has to be a rightful owner of the property he uses to make profit. In the case when he has to get a government permission to do so, or uses government property created by tax money, he becomes an accomplice in robbery.

Edited January 25, 2013 by Leonid

[ruveyn1]

And how you propose to do that? Since roads are public property which means they belong to everybody and to nobody in particular and therefore in fact controlled by government, the only way to make money is to get a government tender. That how you perceive an American capitalist? A sort of James Taggart? The real capitalist has to be a rightful owner of the property he uses to make profit. In the case when he has to get a government permission to do so, or uses government property created by tax money, he becomes an accomplice in robbery.

One can make an honest profit using rented facilities.

Of course this raises the question: how good and reliable a Land Lord is the government?

ruveyn

[moralist]

And how you propose to do that?

I already resolved this issue decades ago.

Since roads are public property which means they belong to everybody and to nobody in particular and therefore in fact controlled by government, the only way to make money is to get a government tender.

Isn't there a free market Capitalist private sector where you live? It sounds like you haven't the slightest idea of how it works so I'll explain. I make money in the private sector by using public roads as a tool. The taxes I pay for my share of the use of those roads are all included in the price of products and services I sell. So I don't pay them... the cost is all passed on to the end users. They pay.

[tadmjones]

moralist said

I make money in the private sector by using public roads as a tool. The taxes I pay for my share of the use of those roads are all included in the price of products and services I sell. So I don't pay them... the cost is all passed on to the end users. They pay.

Which is all well and good , until you meet a competitor that has enough political pull to be relieved of having to pay the taxes in the first place and then undercuts your price.

Edited January 27, 2013 by tadmjones

[moralist]

moralist said

I make money in the private sector by using public roads as a tool. The taxes I pay for my share of the use of those roads are all included in the price of products and services I sell. So I don't pay them... the cost is all passed on to the end users. They pay.

Which is all well and good

...and fair.

Because when I'm an end user, I also pay just like everyone else. The trick is to operate on both sides of the ledger so that everything balances out and it is impossible to become a victim.

until you meet a competitor that has enough political pull to be relieved of having to pay the taxes in the first place and then undercuts your price.

That's an assumed risk as there are no gaurantees in life except that the one who plays an honest game always enjoys the vantage point of the moral high ground.

[Nicky]

That's an assumed risk as there are no gaurantees in life except that the one who plays an honest game always enjoys the vantage point of the moral high ground.

I'm gonna shoot from the hip here, and declare war on some of these overused military metaphors. Let's drive them out of their foxholes, and mow them down with a rapid fire of literal sentences that express exact ideas. And, after that initial salvo, let's put some boots on the ground and aim for the overused metaphor's ideological ally, the cliché (phrases like "there are not guarantees in life", "play an honest game in life" are the foot-soldiers of the enemy known as intellectual laziness).

[moralist]

It's becoming clear how we are each able to hold a completly opposite view of the same issue.

It is because we each respond to it in opposite ways. The difference is caused by the fact that I convert what you regard as as immoral and unjust into a useful tool just by being productive. My suggestion offered for your consideration is that if you were to alter your own response, you would cease to be a victim of injustice.

It is our own behavior which grants our sanction to become a victim.

[dream_weaver]

It's becoming clear how we are each able to hold a completly opposite view of the same issue.

It is because we each respond to it in opposite ways. The difference is caused by the fact that I convert what you regard as as immoral and unjust into a useful tool just by being productive. My suggestion offered for your consideration is that if you were to alter your own response, you would cease to be a victim of injustice.

It is our own behavior which grants our sanction to become a victim.

How pragmatic.

[Leonid]

I already resolved this issue decades ago.

Isn't there a free market Capitalist private sector where you live? It sounds like you haven't the slightest idea of how it works so I'll explain. I make money in the private sector by using public roads as a tool. The taxes I pay for my share of the use of those roads are all included in the price of products and services I sell. So I don't pay them... the cost is all passed on to the end users. They pay.

In fact what you suggest is a crony capitalism- a private profit made from the government property via political manipulations. Since government owns these roads, you'd need a government's tender to make your scheme workable. In truly capitalist society all property including roads is privately owned. In the current situation the best you can do is to become a parastatal company that is- government could ( or could not) grant you a tender to operate its roads.. This all has nothing to do with the road taxes you pay. You can do this without buying a drop of gasoline, providing you have a political pull. That also would mean that you operate and live not by right but by government permission, like a slave, totally depended on government favor. What you'd do if government decide to take this tender from you and to give it to somebody with better political connections? In South Africa is very common way for BEE ( Black Economic Empowerment). Many people became instant millionaires via government tenders. We call them tender capitalists. The whole process is described in a great details in " Atlas Shrugged". If you were read the book you also would know the outcome- a total collapse of economy and society.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Leonid

[moralist]

In fact what you suggest is a crony capitalism- a private profit made from the government property via political manipulations.

I don't wield any political power. For if I did, the government would be small efficient and solvent. It obviously isn't, so there ends your fantasy.

The only real power anyone has is to do what's right.

[thenelli01]

Moralist thinks the gas tax is okay because it goes towards a service that he uses to be a Capitalist Producer. Putting aside what the proper role of government should be (i.e. to protect individual rights with a separation of state and economics), Moralist is neglecting the fact that the gas tax doesn't cover all the road expenses. Furthermore, moralist doesn't care about protecting the rights of the people who buy gas but don't use the roads. Because it is such a small percentage, according to moralist, their rights can be violated, spit on, and trampled on. And if they or we speak against the injustice (even on a philosophy forum), we are complainers.

Now that your position is clarified without the irritating cliches and empty statements - Objectivism holds that the proper role of government is soley to protect *every* individual's rights indiscriminately. There should be complete separation of state and economics. That is because individuals have the right to act and voluntarily interact with others in the marketplace without any coercion from the government. This means that the government doesn't have a role in the road system and it certainly doesn't have a right to place a tax on someone else's product. By doing so it is infringing on the rights of the producers and consumers because it is forcefully gouging our money and forcing us into a government service just for buying gas. It is an injustice to everyone involved and it isn't good economics. The gas tax eats at the profits of oil companies, raises the price of gas for consumers, and drives up the cost of living.

Edited January 29, 2013 by thenelli01

[moralist]

Moralist thinks the gas tax is okay because it goes towards a service that he uses to be a Capitalist Producer.

Yes.

But roads are not personally provided for my use. They are there impersonally for anyone to use.

Moralist is neglecting the fact that the gas tax doesn't cover all the road expenses.

No problem. I pay plenty of other taxes that do.

Furthermore, moralist doesn't care about protecting the rights of the people who buy gas but don't use the roads.

No. I don't care. I protect my own rights, so it's up to you be an adult enough to take care of yourself. I don't live my life for your sake.

Because it is such a small percentage, according to moralist, their rights can be violated, spit on, and trampled on.

Isn't that paying the victim routine just a little over dramatic? And here I thought only liberals did that.

And if they or we speak against the injustice (even on a philosophy forum), we are complainers.

What else can you do except to complain, when you have absolutely no power to implement public policy? I'm in the same boat, as I don't have any power over public policy either. But I do have the power over what I can do about it. Simply by being a productive Capitalist, I'm able to turn an injustice into a business asset.

Objectivism holds that the proper role of government is soley to protect *every* individual's rights indiscriminately. There should be complete separation of state and economics. That is because individuals have the right to act and voluntarily interact with others in the marketplace without any coercion from the government. This means that the government doesn't have a role in the road system and it certainly doesn't have a right to place a tax on someone else's product. By doing so it is infringing on the rights of the producers and consumers because it is forcefully gouging our money and forcing us into a government service just for buying gas. It is an injustice to everyone involved and it isn't good economics. The gas tax eats at the profits of oil companies, raises the price of gas for consumers, and drives up the cost of living.

Now that I've already fully described how I resolved this... what are you actually doing about being the victim of this perceived injustice? How have you made your Objectivist ideals a reality in your own life?

Edited January 29, 2013 by moralist

[Nicky]

Yes.

But roads are not personally provided for my use. They are there impersonally for anyone to use.

So is almost everything American governments do. Barring religious interference, the Equal Protection Clause is being applied quite consistently through the US government. That doesn't make it any less immoral that they steal the money they do it with.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Nicky

[Leonid]

I don't wield any political power. For if I did, the government would be small efficient and solvent. It obviously isn't, so there ends your fantasy.

The only real power anyone has is to do what's right.

You don't. But government owns roads and it does. Without government permission your scheme becomes a fantasy. And government IS a political power.

[thenelli01]

No problem. I pay plenty of other taxes that do.

What an accomplishment.

No. I don't care. I protect my own rights, so it's up to you be an adult enough to take care of yourself. I don't live my life for your sake.

There is a difference between protecting your own rights and rationalizing why the violation of your own rights is acceptable.

Now that I've already fully described how I resolved this... what are you actually doing about being the victim of this perceived injustice? How have you made your Objectivist ideals a reality in your own life?

Do you care at all about Objectivism or are you gonna keep asking me "what are you doing about it in your own life"? Please let me know so I can quit wasting my time.

[moralist]

You don't. But government owns roads and it does. Without government permission your scheme becomes a fantasy. And government IS a political power.

Then it's totally up to me to withold my sanction so as not to become it's victim by using public roads to make money.

Your own direct personal experience of getting the government you deserve is wholly dependent on how you are living your life. While two people can be citizens of exactly the same nation's government... one is a helpless victim of the state... while another is an independent productive Capitalist.

That choice is solely your own.

Edited February 5, 2013 by moralist

[ruveyn1]

Then it's totally up to me to withold my sanction so as not to become it's victim by using public roads to make money.

How can anyone make a living without using the roads one way or another. If you wish to obtain goods and services, they will come to you by way of the roads. If you wish to go and deal with folks, there is only so much that can be done with telecommunications. Eventually one has to get up close and personal.

ruveyn1

[moralist]

How can anyone make a living without using the roads one way or another. If you wish to obtain goods and services, they will come to you by way of the roads. If you wish to go and deal with folks, there is only so much that can be done with telecommunications. Eventually one has to get up close and personal.

ruveyn1

I totally agree.

It's a fair deal for one of the few legitimately beneficial functions the government actually performs. You pay gas taxes proportional to your use of the roads, so you pay for your proportional share of building and maintaining them. Using them to make money turns them into a business asset. The taxes I pay are just another business expense included in the price of goods and services sold. As far as I'm concerned, they're a blessing.

If people want to be bitter about extorted taxes, there are plenty of other things get be upset about if that's their goal... but taking it out on roads just doesn't make any sense.

Edited February 6, 2013 by moralist

[Nicky]

I totally agree.

It's a fair deal for one of the few legitimately beneficial functions the government actually performs. You pay gas taxes proportional to your use of the roads, so you pay for your proportional share of building and maintaining them. Using them to make money turns them into a business asset. The taxes I pay are just another business expense included in the price of goods and services sold. As far as I'm concerned, they're a blessing.

If people want to be bitter about extorted taxes, there are plenty of other things get be upset about if that's their goal... but taking it out on roads just doesn't make any sense.

You haven't explained what "sense" is. Let's not forget that you think people are gay because they've been molested makes sense. By that standard, sure, it makes sense that the government would hold a gun to my head and force me to participate in their schemes. It even makes sense to arbitrarily pick and choose which schemes to like and which to dislike.

But, by a rational standard, you make about as much sense as a headless chicken.

[moralist]

(snip off topic )By that standard, sure, it makes sense that the government would hold a gun to my head and force me to participate in their schemes.

That's your own free choice to be a victim of the government, or to use public roads as a money making asset. I have no control over, nor responsibility for what you do, because you're the one who gets the consequences of your actions, and not me. I instead of being bitter over government lemons, I rather make and sell lemonade at a profit.

It even makes sense to arbitrarily pick and choose which schemes to like and which to dislike.

Choosing is a basic function of living, to assess one thing as being better than another. And if you haven't noticed, you are engaging in exactly the same process. We each pay similar government gasoline taxes for public roads, and whether that is a curse or a blessing all depends on how you respond to it.

Edited February 6, 2013 by moralist