[chefdave]

We all know the tale of Robin Hood: he's an outlaw who forms a gang in Sherwood Forest to fight the injustices of the Sheriff of Nottingham, who levies unpayable taxes upon the people. The central theme is that taxation is detrimental to working classes because they cannot afford to provide for themselves and carry a parasitic elite.

So why has the morality of taxation been turned on its head by the liberal-left?

Taxation is still inflationary, it still harms the poor disproportionately, its still unpayable and it still funds a parasitic elite who manage to squander the money on duck houses, moat cleaning, second houses and the like.

There are some benefits to taxation - the NHS would be one I suppose, but why do the left refuse to recognise all baggage that comes with our tax system?

[chefdave]

(Original post by eff01)
Okay, so how would you pay for free education, free healthcare etc without taxation? These things without taxation will not be accessible to everyone.

With the money I saved from not paying tax?

[Bellissima]

(Original post by chefdave)
We all know the tale of Robin Hood: he's an outlaw who forms a gang in Sherwood Forest to fight the injustices of the Sheriff of Nottingham, who levies unpayable taxes upon the people. The central theme is that taxation is detrimental to working classes because they cannot afford to provide for themselves and carry a parasitic elite.

So why has the morality of taxation been turned on its head by the liberal-left?

Taxation is still inflationary, it still harms the poor disproportionately, its still unpayable and it still funds a parasitic elite who manage to squander the money on duck houses, moat cleaning and the like.

There are some benefits to taxation - the NHS would be one I suppose, but why do the left refuse to recognise all baggage that comes with our tax system?

yes, because of course that's where all of our taxes go, to fraudulent MPs... nothing goes towards unecessary things like education, health care, protection, defense and many many more things we all take for granted.

[Bellissima]

(Original post by chefdave)
With the money I saved from not paying tax?

it's all very well and good to say that but the reality is these costs can suck the life out of people and cause them to lose everything, particularly health care.

[GR3YFOXXX]

(Original post by chefdave)
We all know the tale of Robin Hood: he's an outlaw who forms a gang in Sherwood Forest to fight the injustices of the Sheriff of Nottingham, who levies unpayable taxes upon the people. The central theme is that taxation is detrimental to working classes because they cannot afford to provide for themselves and carry a parasitic elite.

So why has the morality of taxation been turned on its head by the liberal-left?

Taxation is still inflationary, it still harms the poor disproportionately, its still unpayable and it still funds a parasitic elite who manage to squander the money on duck houses, moat cleaning, second houses and the like.

There are some benefits to taxation - the NHS would be one I suppose, but why do the left refuse to recognise all baggage that comes with our tax system?

Why do right-wingers not recognise the necessity of social services and the damage caused by an unregulated free market economy?

For the record taxes are not a lefty phenomenon.

[chefdave]

(Original post by Bellissima)
yes, because of course that's where all of our taxes go, to fraudulent MPs... nothing goes towards unecessary things like education, health care, protection, defense and many many more things we all take for granted.

Some of the money gets recycled into useful services, but in order to achieve this our tax system has to put a lot of strain on the economy. Do you not accept that income taxes and price rises in the shops -a result of taxation- both dispropionately harm the least well off in society? You do realise that the money has to come from somewhere?

[mimx]

Most people who hold any kind of left or right position hold it because of something other than actual economic wisdom.

Taxes are neither inherently bad nor inherently good.

[eff01]

(Original post by chefdave)
With the money I saved from not paying tax?

Nope, what each citizen pays towards the NHS is very small in comparison to how much using the NHS costs. It's not a simple I pay x amount thus if I don't use the NHS I can have it back argument.

[ThisIsTheLife]

(Original post by eff01)
Okay, so how would you pay for free education, free healthcare etc without taxation? These things without taxation will not be accessible to everyone.

The words "free education" and "free healthcare" are red herrings.

They're not free, they're paid for. And they're not paid for "by the government" to make it free for the rest of us - the government has no money of its own. Schools are paid for through tax - and tax is our money.

So it's not free, we already pay for it. The only difference is that, currently, we pay the government and they take care of acquiring the services. However, is that really an efficient way to do things? Absolutely not. The minute you introduce a middle-man to acquire your services, your efficiency goes down because:

A) The middle-man wants a cut.
B) Since the middle-man is acquiring the services on your behalf, he is less driven to find the best deal, achieve the highest quality for the best price - hence money is squandered on over-expensive low quality education and healthcare.

The only feature of healthcare and education that's "free at the point of delivery" that you wouldn't get from going direct is that people who couldn't afford it from their own pocket get to have it paid for them.

Well, you might think that's a good thing, but I don't. I think it's a terrible thing. I think if you removed that, it would provide at least some incentive for people to try their hardest to earn their own money. I also think a large chunk of these people would probably be paid for by voluntary charity (if they are genuinely unable to earn to pay).

Plus, let's not forget that there's millions of people who can't afford their own healthcare and education NOW, but who COULD afford it if they didn't have to give so much money away in tax. Imagine how lucrative minimum wage would be without income tax, council tax, fuel duty tax, value added tax, TV licences, vehicle excise duty, insurance premium tax, etc... we're talking savings of tens of thousands of pounds per year which could easily fund private education and a private healthcare insurance policy, with some left over.

Not to mention the fact that if you did away with the NHS and state schools, more private companies would arise to fill the gap, and that would stimulate free market competition, which would drive prices DOWN, making healthcare and private education more affordable, and giving people more consumer choice over how to spend their money, where to spend their money, when to spend their money, and what to spend it on. It would also make it a lot easier for people to put together a deposit for their own home, meaning less reliance on council housing and less people trapped in a renting loop.

Most people would be a lot better off without tax. A large proportion of people who wouldn't be better off are parasites who could do with the motivation to go out and earn their own money. And the people left over - like the disabled, would almost certainly be covered by voluntary charity, or their loved ones (who now have a lot more expendable income now that there's no tax).

P.S. I don't count pensioners amongst the genuinely needy because they've had a whole life to prepare for retirement and old age, and they choose to squander their money rather than save it, invest it, or put it into pension schemes, etc. Although I do empathise with current pensioners who would have had a harder time to do such things because of the lifetime of tax that they endured - saving for retirement would be a lot easier without tax.

Private markets work for everything else. Why wouldn't they work for healthcare and education too?

[chefdave]

(Original post by mimx)
Most people who hold any kind of left or right position hold it because of something other than actual economic wisdom.

Taxes are neither inherently bad nor inherently good.

So if I came along to your workplace every week and demanded 30% of your income in exchange for 'protection' you'd view this state of affairs as neither "inherently bad or inherently good"?

[mimx]

(Original post by eff01)
Nope, what each citizen pays towards the NHS is very small in comparison to how much using the NHS costs.

Not on average, or else it wouldn't be very sustainable.

Private health insurance for most people is comparable to NI contributions.

[chefdave]

(Original post by Bellissima)
it's all very well and good to say that but the reality is these costs can suck the life out of people and cause them to lose everything, particularly health care.

The same can be said for taxation. Its not exactly uncommon for people to be dragged through the courts for unpaid taxes or harrassed by local councils for trivial motoring offences. The tax systen drains the life out of the economy, I urge the left to wake up and look at both sides of the balance sheet for a change.

[Melancholy]

(Original post by chefdave)
We all know the tale of Robin Hood: he's an outlaw who forms a gang in Sherwood Forest to fight the injustices of the Sheriff of Nottingham, who levies unpayable taxes upon the people. The central theme is that taxation is detrimental to working classes because they cannot afford to provide for themselves and carry a parasitic elite.

So why has the morality of taxation been turned on its head by the liberal-left.

The honest answer is simply that GDP per capita has increased and our nation has changed since the late twelfth century. The Liberal Left would look at the time of Robin Hood as a particularly unjust place to live, whether you're rich or poor. Taxes disproportionately hit the poor, there was no state-welfare system (it was usually the Church, taxed and exploited under John that provided education and healthcare). Indeed, you'll notice that the tax-collector was taxing the Church in the tale of Robin Hood. The system of taxation was criticised because it was unfair, not because tax itself is immoral - it's simply not the progressive taxation that the Liberal Left support today. This is why your point is incredibly weak. A Left-Liberal would support a progressively taxed welfare state to a non-taxed society in the twelfth century.

Indeed, where is the reversal in moral outlook? Robin Hood didn't just target the tax collector or State agents. He acted as a non-State-supported tax collector himself by redistributing wealth, not according to Libertarian entitlement, but according to need. You'll notice that the poor and sick receive more money than they probably earn through their talents and through working.

So Left-Liberal morality surrounding tax has not changed. You just have a purposefully less sophisticated reading of Robin Hood to suit your perspective.

edit: Further, Left-leaning Liberals did not exist, at least not as a label. They can simply bite the bullet and say that if Robin Hood would have been against all tax in the 21st century, then they do not support Robin Hood. It doesn't challenge the arguments for why taxation is a moral good.

[mimx]

(Original post by chefdave)
So if I came along to your workplace every week and demanded 30% of your income in exchange for 'protection' you'd view this state of affairs as neither "inherently bad or inherently good"?

You're shifting goalposts. Taxes on their own can be and are spent on things other than protection.

For instance you might take my income and spend it on exactly what I need whilst leveraging group buying power to get me a better deal than I would have had on my own. I would consider this a good outcome.

[lightburns]

Offer an alternative. No taxes = necessity to find alternative to nationwide government, emergency services, education, healthcare...

[chefdave]

(Original post by GR3YFOXXX)
Why do right-wingers not recognise the necessity of social services and the damage caused by an unregulated free market economy?

For the record taxes are not a lefty phenomenon.

When it comes to taxation the right are a lot more level headed than the left. UKIP for example describe themselves as "the party of the NHS" and drafted in a top NHS official this weekend to give a speech at their party conference on how they'd improve this valuable service.

We recognise the need for public services, we just don't blind ourselves to the costs. Unlike the left who believe there's a unlimited money fountain in the economy just waiting to be untapped. There isn't.

[GR3YFOXXX]

(Original post by chefdave)
When it comes to taxation the right are a lot more level headed than the left. UKIP for example describe themselves as "the party of the NHS" and drafted in a top NHS official this weekend to give a speech at their party conference on how they'd improve this valuable service.

We recognise the need for public services, we just don't blind ourselves to the costs. Unlike the left who believe there's a unlimited money fountain in the economy just waiting to be untapped. There isn't.

Theres more to taxation than the NHS. For example...

Road service
Civil service
Police
Emergency services
R&D
Education

If the right wing were more level headed about tax, they would recognise the over bloated elephant in the room which is 'defence' spending.

[chefdave]

(Original post by mimx)
You're shifting goalposts. Taxes on their own can be and are spent on things other than protection.

For instance you might take my income and spend it on exactly what I need whilst leveraging group buying power to get me a better deal than I would have had on my own. I would consider this a good outcome.

My intention isn't to shift the goalposts or deceive but to provide an example that clearly highlights the reality of the tax and spend economy. There's this misnomer that the state is able to santise actions that would be totally unacceptable if carried out by individuals, it needs to be dispelled imo. Taxation is bad in the same that theft is bad, even if the thief recycles some of the money into your pocket.

While economies of scale are possible within a statist system they rarely occur because state pen-pushers are protected from the competitive element that drives standards and prices in the private sector. Lefties recognise this because they often complain about private sector monopolies fleecing the consumer, but they're unable to relect on their own ideas with the same level of insight.

[eff01]

On a wider note, those advocating a tax free society, I ask you, do you use the NHS, have you benefited from a non private education, do you benefit from weekly bin collections? If you have/do, then your position is paramount to hypocrisy. You can not claim that you disagree with taxation and then use the NHS.

[mimx]

(Original post by chefdave)
My intention isn't to shift the goalposts or deceive but to provide an example that clearly highlights the reality of the tax and spend economy. There's this misnomer that the state is able to santise actions that would be totally unacceptable if carried out by individuals, it needs to be dispelled imo. Taxation is bad in the same that theft is bad, even if the thief recycles some of the money into your pocket.

While economies of scale are possible within a statist system they rarely occur because state pen-pushers are protected from the competitive element that drives standards and prices in the private sector. Lefties recognise this because they often complain about private sector monopolies fleecing the consumer, but they're unable to relect on their own ideas with the same level of insight.

Well, I'm not particularly keen on a large state or high taxes, I'm just saying that some degree of taxation can be useful or advantageous.