A Conversation with Tax

2 YEARS AGO

11min

Freeman was storing the remaining fruits and vegetables that he couldn’t sell in his van. When he finished with the last batch, he saw someone approaching him as he was about to enter his van and drive off. Expecting that it was someone who was coming to buy some of his products, Freeman decided to be accommodating and offer some of the remaining produce.

U.S. Individual Income Tax Return Papers

Freeman: Hello, I’m Freeman. Do you want to buy something? I have already packed up, but I can show you what I have. Tax: No. My name is Tax. Have you heard of me? Freeman: No… why? Should I have? Tax: What do you do for a living? Freeman: I sell the fruits and vegetables that I grow. Why is that even important if you are not looking to buy anything? Tax: Well, I need to know what you do so that I can tell you how much you owe—I assume you’re not paying your dues to Society, since you don’t know about me. I’m surprised you’re not already in prison, actually. Freeman: Why would I be in prison? I didn’t harm anyone. Tax: You are harming us by not contributing your fair share—you are not giving us that which belongs to us. We have to take what is ours. Freeman: I don’t know who “you” are, and I’m not sure what exactly is “yours”? Today I sold some pumpkins to a woman, which she bought for the price I offered. I gave her my product, and she gave me her money. As far as I can see, there is only something that belonged to her and something that belonged to me, and we exchanged it. What do you consider yours in this situation? Tax: “We” are Society. What is ours is what we, as a Society, agree is ours. Freeman: “You” have agreed that something that is actually mine is yours. I would say that you have serious issues when it comes to recognizing what is yours and what isn’t. Tax: You don’t understand. We made a decision such that you, like everyone who does any business, are obliged to give us a certain part of what you have. Freeman: You people are just thieves and bullies trying to extort me. People like you are my enemies. Tax: No, no. You don’t understand. You are also part of this Society. Freeman: Is that so? And what exactly makes me a part of this Society? Tax: The fact that you live on our territory. The people who live on this territory make up our Society. Freeman: Because I live on a piece of land near you, you consider me to be a part of your Society and thereby justify taking my belongings? Tax: This is not just a matter of taking, since we offer you various services. We build your roads, protect you, heal you, educate your children. Freeman: No thank you, I’ll find someone else. Tax: Well, that’s not how it works. You give us what is ours and we give you our services. Freeman: What if I refuse to pay for your services because I don’t want them? What are you going to do to me? Tax: At the end of the day, if you openly refuse to pay, my people will imprison you. Freeman: Okay, I will defend myself from those people of yours. Tax: There are too many of them, you wouldn’t really stand a chance. And if you tried that, we would keep you in jail longer. Freeman: You’re trying to convince me that this isn’t extortion, but in fact it’s essentially extortion with the caveat that I’ll get services I can’t refuse. Tax: I’m not an extortionist; I’m Tax. Freeman: I don’t care what your name is… as if that changes anything. I bet you get away with offering terrible services since people are forced to pay you anyway! Tax: This system has withstood the test of time and it works. Freeman: It “works” because you force others to participate. According to that logic, totalitarian regimes and slavery both work. Not that I expect anything particularly clever from you when you threaten to take innocent people’s freedom away if they do not comply with your wishes. Tax: I don’t threaten innocent people; those that do not pay me what I ask are guilty of not paying their dues to Society. I’ve already explained. Freeman: Those who don’t give you what you claim you need are guilty and deserve to be put in prison!? Call yourself Stalin from now on, please. Tax: How would we protect ourselves? You clearly don’t understand that we fund our protection from the money I collect—we pay people to protect us using that money. Those who protect us have to make a living somehow. Freeman: I can pay for that service just like any other if I need it. If I cannot refuse the protection you are offering me, then it is not protection at all. It is extortion. Tax: What about those that cannot pay for protection? You would just leave them unprotected. Freeman: I would rather everyone be protected, but not if it comes at the price of taking away innocent people’s choices. I would never threaten someone with imprisonment because he or she does not fund someone else’s protection. Tax: The thing is, I offer solutions, while you don’t offer any. What would you do with the hungry and the sick? You would just let them die. Freeman: I help whomever I can. Of course, helping others is kind and desirable, but that help should be voluntary—no one is a slave to another. Personal boundaries should be respected. Tax: You are telling me that I should respect personal boundaries, but you would let people die and suffer. You need to find me a solution that can work on a voluntary basis, and only then will I maybe let you go. I need to see results first. Freeman: You are actually telling me that you will continue to take my money, under threat of imprisonment, until I find a better solution to problems that I did not cause. You want to blame me for the consequences of other people’s choices. No matter how you put it, you’re imposing your will on me. What gives you the right? Tax: Maybe it’s not always fair, but I’m the best we have right now. You are not offering anything better. Freeman: I am not offering anything better? According to your reasoning, I should go around with some people and extort money from others, and then give that money to those whom we think need it more? You will see results starting tomorrow, everyone will be fed and protected. Tax: No, no. You have to go through me. If you just started doing that with some gang of yours, we’d put you in jail. The way to help others is through me! Freeman: You are openly hypocritical—if I did the same thing you did, which you claim is fair and necessary, you would support somebody locking me up. Tax: Yes, because otherwise everyone would just take from everyone else, and that would be chaotic. But there must be someone for whom it’s okay to do that, because someone has to solve the problems we have. And here we are, I’m doing it. I am the Authority. Freeman: This all feels like you are trying to sell me a cheap narrative in order to steal my money without any resistance. “Ordinary people” would be punished if they were to go and take money from others, while you as a so-called “authority” are special, and this action is justified for you. How do you explain that? Tax: I don’t have to explain myself to you at all; I am the Authority. I need you to explain exactly who you are and exactly what you do. Freeman: I don’t have to explain myself to you either. And what makes you consider yourself authority? Tax: Society has decided that I am! Freeman: People on this territory have decided that you are my authority? So the only thing I need to do is gather up some people to declare me an authority, and then I will be able to take your things with impunity? Tax: No, no. There are protocols. A group of people can’t just get together, declare leaders, and then take from those who don’t want to give to them. We do everything according to defined protocols. Freeman: Okay, then we will define protocols as well. Our protocols will be better than yours! Tax: This was defined by people a long time ago. You can’t just invent new protocols now. Freeman: So how were these people justified in inventing protocols that everyone is subject to, while I am not justified in doing the same? Tax: They conquered this territory and then defined the rules that must be obeyed on this territory, one of which is that you are obliged to make your contribution. Those people were leaders, and others chose them to be leaders. Freeman: This is contradictory to what you said above. You said that people can’t just get together, choose leaders, and then take other people’s things. Tax: Well, they conquered this country! This territory is now ours because of them! Freeman: Okay, so defining protocols to justify the seizure of your things is unjust… unless I conquer you? Do you even know what justice is? Tax: The world is not just. Freeman: Because of others like you. Tax: People need someone to lead them. Freeman: Choosing a leader for yourself is fine. The problem is when that leader takes away the choice of unconsenting people. Leadership without consent is rulership. Tax: None of what you are saying matters. Society isn’t going to question me, I’ve been here for a long time. Freeman: The members of that Society of yours possess poorly developed critical thinking skills, if they choose not to question you at all. Tax: Members of our Society know how to think. I funded their education! Freeman: That makes sense. Tax: You don’t understand. What you and others pay will also benefit you. I have already told you several times that this is an agreement. Freeman: How can an agreement be on my behalf without my consent? Agreement implies mutual consent. You are talking about imposing your will. Tax: I don’t see why anyone should need to ask you. Freeman: Because I get to decide what to do with my possessions!? And is that your attitude toward everyone—“nobody should need to ask you”? Tax: Well, toward everyone with whom I disagree, because you are in the minority at the moment. If the majority of people thought like you, I probably wouldn’t do what I do. Freeman: Your argument is “there are more of, us so I can get away with it”. Tax: You clearly don’t see the benefits you get from me. You forgot about all those services I told you I offered. Freeman: The benefit I gain from the fact that everyone is threatened with imprisonment if they do not obey? I certainly wouldn’t send anyone to jail for not paying for services they don’t want to use, nor would I support that. Then my stance would be unjust! Tax: But it’s like that for everyone in our Society—you’re no different. Freeman: You are trying to convince me to forget what’s right and what’s not so that you can steal things from me without resistance. Tax: I’m not unjust—there are more of us who think like me than those who think like you. The problem is with you. How can you claim that I am wrong with such certainty when the majority agrees with me? Freeman: You claim many things with certainty for which you have no good argument, even some contradictory and nonsensical things. I can put two and two together. How many of you there are doesn’t matter, I know what is right and what is not. Theft is theft. A million people robbing one innocent person is still wrong. Tax: That’s how things have worked for a long time, and you won’t change that. Freeman: The only thing that certainly won’t change is the fact that your position is unjustifiable and that you are advocating the confiscation of someone else’s property under threat of imprisonment. I will say what I know to be true, and the truth is that behind your pretense of justice lies a great fraud and injustice. Tax: You are just wrong, period. Freeman: You take away others' choices. You don’t even care about common sense. Tax: You are making things too complicated. Let’s understand each other. Join me and live comfortably—all the money I collect has to go somewhere. Open up a company, and we can give you some subsidies and some grant money. I will allow you to get that money. Freeman: You found the wrong man. I will not tell lies, and I would like everyone to receive back what belongs to them and have it stay that way. I won’t support you robbing innocent people. See you never! Original article at In Principia.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

READERS RATED THIS ARTICLE WITH AN AVERAGE RATING OF

SHARE THIS ARTICLE