everyone benefits, everyone pays

Reader comment on: The Rattner-Tilson-Scaramucci Tax, or the Buffett Tax

Submitted by ben (United States), Nov 26, 2012 21:14

My main problem with your article is the final line in which you write that these guys are trying to "force others to pay." They are trying force themselves to pay as well. As I have written here before, the "voluntary tax" argument is nonsense. To make this point most clearly, imagine having NO compulsory taxes. The country would rely completely on raising an army, running the courts, paving the roads on voluntary contributions. The free riderism problem here is enormous. Why would I pay a dime if I think my neighbor will foot the bill? We decide as a citizenry by electing people to make decisions for the good of the whole, and then empower them to tax us. In calling for higher taxes, one is arguing that we all should support the services of government more. In arguing for lower taxes, one says that the services are not worth the pricetag. This is all fine and good, but it relies on everyone shouldering a fair burden. This system, no matter what you think the tax rate should be, cannot function if one billionaire can shirk his duty relative to the next billionaire, or one teacher compared to the next teacher. This "VAT" is an attractive argument (and clever acronym) until one actually thinks about it.

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.

Comment on this item