Anyone who has read my blog before should know that I am very critical of taxes and I consider them a robbery, yes, robbery because a robbery involves the use of force to get rid of a good for which you worked hard to get. While it doesn't currently work this way, it's because collective thinking has been unified to make people believe that by paying taxes society will improve.
For centuries, taxes were - and remain the same in the present - symbols of servitude. In the past, those who were defeated, the servants, the subjugated had to pay taxes. Today, this view of taxes has not changed its nuance but has been transformed, politicians call taxes the mere price needed to achieve freedom. Politicians talking about freedom? The biggest scam in history.
The thesis of these audacious liars is that: to guarantee economic freedom, a state of financing must be achieved by imposing tax burdens on the activity whose freedom is to be protected. They are based on the theory of the impossibility of relying solely on voluntary contributions, because according to these politicians, voluntariness privileges those who do not want to contribute, protecting the avaricious and unprotecting the marginalized and defenseless.
Without the imposition of a universal tax burden, the State would have to condescendingly request large fortunes to make large donations in exchange for privileges and favors. Therefore, freedom and individuality can only be safeguarded by the State if everyone contributes economically to the maintenance of its structures.
The benefits of the taxpayers, according to these politicians, are much greater than what they plan because they have benefits such as internal peace guaranteed by the state, they enjoy the right granted by the state for contracts to be made and enforced, the magnificent benefits of a currency guaranteed by the government, which because it is the government's "institutional backing", or the good and compulsory public education of future producers and consumers.
Because the demanders of such services are the members of the community themselves, any kind of tax on their income, on the fruit of their labor, is fully justified.
None of these lies that politicians vomit in their speeches is intended to respect the freedom or free will of people. On the contrary, through taxes the way in which we citizens will live our lives is controlled, modified and altered, and the moment anyone opposes this system, that same "order of inner peace" will be in charge of violating your freedoms and putting you in prison if you do not contribute to the collectivist plan of the politicians.
The second step to all those ideas is the mental experiment in which the state (dosed) is the basic form of human coexistence, that is, without the state, there can be no human coexistence, therefore, there is a need for it. This state (dosed), by means of its sovereignty, intervenes in the salaries, prices and the economy becoming allows the individuals to live a life according to the terms and conditions that it establishes. The (dosed) state has control of the nation's resources. Enterprises and the economy itself are in its hand. The total lack of freedom in the economy means the total nationalization of the means of production. The favorite experiment of intellectuals: socialism.
It is evident that the socialist utopia lacks pragmatics to be applied in society, because there is an economic impossibility of the (dosed) state as a basic form of human coexistence, at present the concept of "social democratic welfare state" has been advocated. In which the state renounces economic supremacy and grants its citizens the rights of private property and the freedom of professional exercise. The price to pay for these rights and their "guarantee" are the taxes on the income generated by individuals. The difference with the (dosed) state described above is not as important as it seems.
In the first case, the state forbids everything to the citizen, in order to be the only provider of the basic necessities of life for its citizens. In the case of social democracies, the individual is allowed to provide himself with whatever he deems necessary for his life, then extracting from him via taxes all that the state considers excessive in the name of social justice, in order to provide for those who for one reason or another are not productive and unable to provide for themselves. In both cases, the state has full power to transform any individual into a non-free, proscribed or delinquent. Property and freedom are granted by the State.
It is therefore that the matrix of the tax has not changed but if its raison d'être, taxes ceased to be the symbol of submission to become a symbol of justice and freedom since the state allows us citizens to vote. Citizens can decide for those people who will establish the nature and intensity of taxes for them. Is that freedom? No. We reduce the freedom to which the government of a state graciously allows us to participate politically in making certain decisions.
The starting point of any experiment in liberal thinking is not the (dosed) state, but the citizens voluntarily exchanging for their own benefit. The citizen can acquire and found property without state, can enter into contracts and engage in economic life. Freedom in the economic sphere is not guaranteed by the State, but already exists.
The state itself as a legal entity is not a miracle machine. It requires human activity. That is why it can do nothing more than what humans themselves do. Individual freedom finds its limits where the state is present or involved. Therefore, there can only be one answer to the morality of taxation: for centuries, taxation has been an expression of servitude. Today too.
And so much so that it became a form of pragmatic information for the brain, in which to speak of taxes is not to speak of robberies or violations of freedom, it is to speak of justice and equality. Politicians have impregnated this kind of thinking in people for decades: most people identify the business term with wealth, greed, exploitation, cruelty, and maximizing profits at the expense of others. And therefore, all agree that: entrepreneurs should naturally pay more taxes. And not only have politicians succeeded in turning the vast majority of their "subjects" into victims, but they have also made victimhood one of the great virtues of our time.
To want to be better and to pretend to obtain benefits from what is done from free competition is a mortal sin, the possibility of risking to win or lose from one's own entrepreneurial zeal is already part of the enormous and perverse list of heresies that do not deserve the wood that burns in the inquisitorial bonfires. And we, lemmings, do not realize that trained victimhood, the demonization of "others" and the fantasy of the elimination of uncertainty are but the pillars of any dictatorship. Of all dictatorships.
The result had already been predicted by Milton Friedman in his famous triple somersault: "From the public welfare to the financial crisis to the dictatorship".
The state's usurpation of what we call "life" is not free and I fear it is not fundable.
Posted from my blog with SteemPress : Here