Are taxes good or bad? Since workers deserve the full right to their work...

Are taxes good or bad? Since workers deserve the full right to their work, aren't taxes just taking away from the already paltry sum the workers are getting?
Should they only be on the rich?

Or at they good because people get things in return?

Other urls found in this thread:

blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/04/15/fake-quote-files-v-i-lenin-on-inflation-and-taxation/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

tax is theft, like all property

Are the taxes returning to workers or nonworkers? Are they appeasing the masses? Are they slowing the contradictions of capitalism?

In capitalism, they can be justified as a method of returning to workers some of the surplus that has been taken from them, even with government being a blunt tool.

Depends on your view. If you agree with labour value theory sort of would be I guess.

I think the social contract is fair enough, and you shouldn't expect theoretical ethics to work the same as practical ethics anyway. IMO taxes are a necessary thing.

I can see the point of people who say they are theft so long as they also admit property is theft =)

Imo, only people who make millions should be taxed by the goverment and it's wealth distributed to homeless people or something like that. That's how I'd run things.

Good in the short term if they tax the rich more. But of course they would be unnecessary in a communist society. Many anarchists support taxes in the short term, but I don't know of any that think taxes are a good solution in the long-term

no, they aren't. taxes only end up directly in the pockets of corporations as we've seen with the bailouts. fortunately, communsim will eradicate both the state and taxes.

ITT: Socdems masquerading as leftists

SAGE
HIDE

They're only an instrument. They can't be said to be "good" in general. Since all wealth is a social creation and property is theft, then it can't be "bad" either. It's just an instrument, depending on the type of tax and the context it's implemented.

ITT: fags who call everything they don't like social democracy

We can't ever achieve communism without taxes because communism is doing what you can and getting what you need. To go from socialism to communism you need to do taxes until we can abolish money.

I disagree with Lenin on this front. Taxing the bourgeoisie enables the bourgeois state to cool down and ease class struggle while still allowing them to amass wealth.

...

Democratic distribution does not require taxation

Taxation serves the function of taking money or labour away from total produce produced for a body of government to utilize, be it a state or otherwise, to provide for things such as infrastructure, logistics, sanitation, etc. Its usefulnes is entirely dependent on which mode of production and method of distribution exists.

I am personally in favor of a proletarian state, so I would naturally favor a taxation or something similar to cushion whatever decentralized production doesn't sufficiently provide for, such as roads or public services like libraries and education.

Af for nowadays, I think taxation and public spending is one of the only things keeping capitalism bearable, so I would also favor higher taxation on enterprises.

blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/04/15/fake-quote-files-v-i-lenin-on-inflation-and-taxation/

Even right lolbertarians are more distrusting of bullshit.

Schumpeter approves

Benefits received by wage and salary earners (defined here as excluding top man-
agement such as CEOs) consist of social expenditures on health, education, welfare,
housing, transportation, parks and recreation, and transfer payments, while taxes con-
sist of those directly paid by this group in the form of income, social security, property,
and other direct taxes. The difference between social expenditures and taxes is called
the net social wage. The surprising finding is that across major OECD countries the
net social wage is between 3% and 5% of GDP in almost every year from 1960 to
1987, with the United Kingdom averaging 5.4%, Canada 4.8%, Germany 3.9%, and
Australia 3.7% . Sweden, that paradigm of the welfare state, averages a mere 1.20%,
while that paradigm of the anti-welfare state the United States comes in at –0.16%.
For the group of six countries, the average was only 1.8% of GDP and only 2.2% of
Employee Compensation. '''These surprising results tell us that even in the best welfare
states, social expenditures and taxes serve more to redistribute the living standard of
labor than to change its average level. As a whole, labor largely pays for its own social
benefits (Shaikh 2003b)'''

No one on this board has a problem with tax evasion by regular workers, right?

Yeah, that's a problem I've heard that's happening in the Scandinavian SocDem countries that the Berntards jack themselves off about.

See


I actually enjoy Marx. I take both Marx and anarchist writers into consideration when it comes to my beliefs. I didn't realize the quote was fake, so thanks for showing me that.

The thing is though that taxes aren't exploitative. If a democratic government taxes the workers in order to pay for services that the workers have decided that they want, then there is no exploitation going on. The whole point of taxes is that they are supposed to be used to fund projects that society has decided they want to see pursued.

...

...

Your point being?