Assertion: "Taxation is theft". How does the fallacy-free argument address the assertion.
Historical archive only. New interaction is disabled.
Original Question
The argument may start from any clear assumption. An assumption is an axiom imo, and is not itself assailable by logic, though it may not be factual.
I have proposed this elsewhere, and am aware of the usual counterarguments, so am asking here to see how logic/rhetoric interact in a forum dedicated to noting fallacies.
Comments on Question
Hi DrBill. Can you perhaps rephrase the question or expand on it a bit? I think I understand what you are asking, but rather be more confident before spending 20 minutes answering the wrong question :)
Answers
1One of the elements necessary for theft would be lack of consent, taxation lacks this element because consent is not required on the part of the taxpayer. I am speaking from the perspective of a Canadian resident, the right to tax is written into our constitution.
Whether or not it's written into law, one could also claim that it's part of the social contract, while "theft" of ones personal property is generally regarded as a violation of the social contract, ie, I agree to pay the government some of my earnings via tax but I don't agree that others should be allowed to take my property with impunity.
"Taxation is theft" is a weak analogy.
Master Logical Fallacies Online
Take the Virversity course and sharpen your reasoning skills with structured lessons.
View Online Course
Taxation may be viewed as "theft", but one is left wondering how well a large civilization on earth today would function without any public highways, national parks, schools, emergency, fire or police protection, various food, water and health regulations, air traffic control and, a host of other modern realities currently funded through taxation.
And then again, one is left wondering how well our own modern U.S. society would function without any public hospitals, Medicaid, Medicare and social security.
Just saying. . .