Are income taxes just?

[Ice_nine]

Just a question I want to throw out to the room

Edited August 27, 2015 by Ice_nine

[Gabriela]

Judging by the poll options, I presume you are distinguishing between the justice of income taxes per se versus the justice of income taxes collected according to various schemas.

Yes?

I'm not sure justice is the most important consideration to me when it comes to income taxes. Unless you consider the question of whether the government has the right to do something or not (e.g., collect income taxes) a question of "justice". I don't really. In a nation where people believe the government has the right, I think it's fine. But in the US, there's a long history of people asserting the government should not have such a right. So if one conflates government rights with "justice", then I don't think there's a universal standard. It depends on what people in a particular nation believe the role and rights of government should be.

In the US, I think it's just a bad idea. Though I wouldn't call it "unjust". The present schema of tax collection, however, could be called unjust, as it minimally taxes the wealthy (relatively speaking).

[Ice_nine]

 Unless you consider the question of whether the government has the right to do something or not (e.g., collect income taxes) a question of "justice".

 

I consider it a matter of justice. How come you don't? Is it morally OK for a government to take a certain percentage of a citizen's labor? That's what I'm asking.

I was going to post more in-depth but somehow I prematurely hit "submit topic" and whoops it was over, so I just went with it. I'm interested in those who know about what the church has said concerning man's rights to his labors and the state's right to tax its citizens but anyone with an opinion will do. 

[Nihil Obstat]

I think it is clearly just according to Catholic social teaching for a government to levy tax. The specific form that tax takes is a matter of both justice and economic prudence. I am not necessarily against income tax, nor am I necessarily in favour of it.

[Era Might]

Yes, but I'm a socialist and taxes are a necessary socialist principle.

[Ice_nine]

I accept the reality of taxes, but taxing the fruits of one's labor seems unfair to me. Esp how there are tax exemptions to benefit the rich. It bothers me. And the ridiculously convoluted tax code that takes a masters degree to begin to understand. And if you don't understand it you are penalized.

I think it is clearly just according to Catholic social teaching for a government to levy tax. The specific form that tax takes is a matter of both justice and economic prudence. I am not necessarily against income tax, nor am I necessarily in favour of it.

I hope you don't dodge taxes like you dodge questions har har har.

But as they say the devil is in the details eh?

 

[Gabriela]

I consider it a matter of justice. How come you don't? Is it morally OK for a government to take a certain percentage of a citizen's labor? That's what I'm asking.

I was going to post more in-depth but somehow I prematurely hit "submit topic" and whoops it was over, so I just went with it. I'm interested in those who know about what the church has said concerning man's rights to his labors and the state's right to tax its citizens but anyone with an opinion will do. 

I second Nihil's comment that, according to CST, there is nothing wrong with income tax in principle. It is, however, possible to structure the income tax schema unjustly.

That's why I don't necessarily consider it unjust to have an income tax. However, if there were a society where people felt strongly that it was unjust for the government to take any of their income, I think one would need to take that into consideration. In such a nation, 'twould be more prudent to tax purchases alone.

The more important question, then, is: How does one structure the income tax so that it is just?

I hope you don't dodge taxes like you dodge questions har har har.

But as they say the devil is in the details eh?

How did he dodge the question? He said the tax is just in principle, according to CST, but that economic prudence must also be considered. Which is also exactly what CST says. He just gave you the Church's answer.

[Ice_nine]

I second Nihil's comment that, according to CST, there is nothing wrong with income tax in principle. It is, however, possible to structure the income tax schema unjustly.

That's why I don't necessarily consider it unjust to have an income tax. However, if there were a society where people felt strongly that it was unjust for the government to take any of their income, I think one would need to take that into consideration. In such a nation, 'twould be more prudent to tax purchases alone.

The more important question, then, is: How does one structure the income tax so that it is just?

How did he dodge the question? He said the tax is just in principle, according to CST, but that economic prudence must also be considered. Which is also exactly what CST says. He just gave you the Church's answer.

Saying you are not against something but also aren't in favor of it, necessarily, could be seen as a dodge. But I thought the "har har har" made it evident I was mostly joking. Next time I will throw in a winky smiley at no extra charge.

 

Maybe I should have saved this thread when we get closer to election time, for the US of A.

[Nihil Obstat]

To put a finer point on it, no an income tax in and of itself is not unjust. Circumstances could make it variously unjust or imprudent.

[Peace]

Yes. But only if they are used to fund war.

[Gabriela]

Or "reproductive rights".

[Winchester]

Yes, but I'm a socialist and taxes are a necessary socialist principle.

Why would there need to be taxes for the workers to own the means of production? A socialist society would lack a state which could levy taxes. Only the fake socialists have states.

[Era Might]

Why would there need to be taxes for the workers to own the means of production? A socialist society would lack a state which could levy taxes. Only the fake socialists have states.

Democratic socialism can be achieved within a state framework. It doesn't have to work against capitalism, but work with it through taxation, labor laws, etc. The stateless socialism you have in mind seems closer to communism. 

[Winchester]

Democratic socialism can be achieved within a state framework. It doesn't have to work against capitalism, but work with it through taxation, labor laws, etc. The stateless socialism you have in mind seems closer to communism. 

If there's a state, it in fact exercises right of ownership. The means of production are then removed from the workers and placed in the hands of others. Even if a few workers end up with a portion of the say, others who do not produce get a say. Communism would mean all share ownership, regardless.

Capitalism doesn't fit with socialism or communism. They're distinct approaches to the rights of ownership of the means of production. The State is distinct from these, as well. In any set up with a state, the state enjoys final say in the matter. If there is a state, the state in fact owns everything--even if to maintain that ownership it must negotiate a bit, this is not a legal concern but a practical one. Legally, the state enjoys final word unless the courts are separate from the state. At least in the case of the US, the courts are just another arm of the state. Even if the courts disagree with the argument from one other arm of the state, the state enjoys final and total say in any dispute. Citizens have absolutely zero legal power. Socialism cannot truly exist in such a condition.

[Credo in Deum]

I would have voted but I hit the "view results" option and this voided my vote.  Anyway, I say No. Currently in the USA our country is run by corporations and my tax dollars are being used to fund a country who's government operates under ideals which are contrary to what our founding Fathers wanted: taxation without representation.  Sure we have the illusion of representation, however, the reality is if I'm not a corporation that can pay for lobbiests then my vote means absolutely nothing regarding laws and policies which will impact my life.  

Im being forced to pay income tax to support a foreign government, the United Corporations of America.