Situation A) A man approaches me on the street and says that based on my appearance I'm obviously well to do and will I please give him all the money in my wallet? He knows I have more in the bank, and he's hungry, and his wife is sick. I tell him no, so he pulls a gun and takes it by force.
Situation B) The government tells me that I'm obviously well to do, and they want a percentage of my income, but they'll let me keep some of it in the bank for myself. They want to give it to people that are hungry, or sick. They obviously need it. I tell them no, and they threaten to come take it by force and throw me in prison.
Is there any difference between the two situations above? Either way my property is being forcibly taken because somebody else decides that they NEED it more than I do, and I can do nothing to stop them. Is that right, or just?
2007-06-08 10:08:33 · 11 answers · asked by Bigsky_52 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
You are right, but you sound pretty selfish on both accounts.
2007-06-08 10:15:25 · answer #1 · answered by zoeboxcat 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes there is a difference. First of all, your money goes to more then just the hungry and the sick. It funds everything from your children's schooling, the ecology of your city, mass/public transit, public works, social engineering, wars, health care, and legal infrastrucure.
I guess the bare grits of this answer is that giving your money to the government is for the greater good and how they spend it is, or should, be managed and voted on by the people. However, it doesn't always end up this way. Nonetheless, the social and economic infrastructures of this country are supported by the taxes of the people.
Also if they obviously need like you said and you were well-to-do, you may as well just contribute to the greater good :P
2007-06-08 17:19:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
In order to have a fairly smooth running country we do need a government. In order for the government to run it needs money to do so. Since government is not involved in producing a product in the sense that we do in the private sector we have to supply them the money they need in the form of taxes. Which is all well and good until government over steps it's bounds and starts meddling in things it wasn't designed to be involved with. I think as you do that government has indeed over stepped it's bounds and have gotten to big for our own good. But who's fault is this? It's ours as a whole for allowing this to happen. the majority of people don't even vote. So what can we do about it? Nothing more then try to vote the right people in, and as some of us did to help stop the recent Amnesty bill from becoming law at such a fast pace flood your representatives with emails and calls until they start doing the things we ask of them. I mean who is serving whom here? If we stay quiet they will do what they want to do. Politicians by nature are very good at giving everything away that doesn't belong to them. We can't continue to allow them to micro manage our lives by higher and higher taxes.But it will take a big united effort to change things. Don't get me wrong I think we are very fortunate to live in the greatest country on earth. But that greatness is in jeopardy if we let government sufficate and take away that desire most of us have to work hard for the rewards hard work brings if government has the power to just take it away because they think they can better run our lives then we can. So will we ever get to the point when enough is enough? I sure hope so and hope it comes soon.
2007-06-08 17:44:42 · answer #3 · answered by crusinthru 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Situation A is illegal.
Situation B is what happens when you live in a free country and is legal.
Your behavior in situation A was correct - but you just didn't run fast enough.
Your behavior in situation B is against the law and will get your butt locked up.
2007-06-08 17:51:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
When you live in a country that has legal taxation, the government has every right to take according to the tax rate. It may feel as though you are being robbed, but it is legal.
What I would be more concerned about is how your tax money is being spent. That, I believe, is the REAL crime in America today.
2007-06-08 17:29:54 · answer #5 · answered by Super Ruper 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Situation A is clearly a criminal act (robbery).
Situation B is a different story because it is the government that is taking part of your income. This is usually done through legal means such as in the form of Federal income tax and state income tax which all of us are under obligation to pay. Paying taxes is one of our duties as citizens of this country and as members of our respective communities. Such taxes are collected to finance government projects for public use and to meet other expenses for public purposes.
2007-06-08 17:21:30 · answer #6 · answered by Belen 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, there is a difference. The difference is that in situation B, a government, elected by the people, representative of the people, and in accordance with our laws and constitution, took your money from you.
It doesn't make it any better, but yes, it is more just.
2007-06-08 17:14:00 · answer #7 · answered by Uncle Pennybags 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In Situation B, you have elected representatives who collect taxes to help provide for the common good.
In Situation A, you're being robbed by one person who is taking your money for himself and only himself.
2007-06-08 17:16:52 · answer #8 · answered by BOOM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In Situation B, the government is providing you with services, and you want to use them without paying. Or do you think some magical fairy provides with you military protection, police, fire department, roads, water, sewage, schools, justice system, ...
2007-06-08 17:14:13 · answer #9 · answered by x2000 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
SITUATION C: SELL DRUG DON'T PAY THE GOVERNMENT A DIME SHOOT THE GUY THAT TRIES TO ROB YOU. ALL YOUR PROBLEMS ARE SOLVED. SILLY ISN'T IT.
2007-06-08 17:17:31 · answer #10 · answered by strike_eagle29 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋