How the fuck could anyone expect a first world country to operate if everyone had the option to pay taxes or not?
Of course no one would opt to not pay taxes, then everyone would be living in a shithole third world country.
So you don't consider whether a person has a right to do something or not, before you endorse it ?
How the fuck, if you don't have a right to do something, could you delegate that nonexistent right to somebody else to do ?
(you won't answer that, because...we know if you don't have a given right, it's impossible to delegate it)
Especially if the right you don't have and are trying to delegate would be asking somebody to take others money against their will.
I mean we at least agree if YOU or I did that, took money under threat of force from people, it would be wrong to do? How does something which is morally wrong for either of us to do, become somehow right for somebody else to do ? Is there like a magic "authority suit" that special people wear to be to able to do that ?
Your last statement is an erroneous assumption. If people retained their money and got to make their own choices how to spend it you would see a booming trade increase in actual goods and services that people want.
Not trying to be rude but your grasp of how actual free trade works seems a little uninformed People don't want to do business under oppressive taxation, it stifles trade. A no tax zone location would be thriving, not third world.
-
