Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sejs" data-source="post: 1828661" data-attributes="member: 4910">Oh no I'm not saying that at all - history does have examples of taxation without recompense.&nbsp; It tended to lead to things like tea parties.&nbsp; When people caught on to the fact that they were paying taxes and not getting anything in return for it, they tended to stop paying and tell the tax-charger to go squat on a halberd, with the normal reactions following.&nbsp;That's because unless the land in question is actually incorporated by a seperate entity, then the land to be annexed doesn't actually belong to someone else.&nbsp; The government can annex it because it's their land, they just let other people build stuff on it in exchange for property taxes and the like.&nbsp; Give us X dollars per year and we'll let you build and maintain stuff on our land.And as for the wealthy individuals, of course they complained - wealthy people do that, particularly when they don't get treated to the deference they think their money entitles them to.&nbsp; To the point that sometimes they forget that no matter how much money they have, the government has more.&nbsp; So yeah, the govt annexes some land, and they still have to pay taxes on all manner of things - but they don't have to pay taxes for the land the govt annexed, because they (they wealthy folks) are no longer responsible for it.&nbsp; But yes, they do still have to pay taxes on other, unrelated issues.&nbsp; If the tax no longer applies, you no longer have to pay it, but you still do have to pay the taxes that continue to apply to you.&nbsp; True enough, though it comes down to validity of claim.&nbsp; A mugger could claim that he was charging his victim a &quot;Not Getting Stabbed&quot; tax, rather than just robbing him.&nbsp; The claim is false, though - the victim had all the Not Getting Stabbed he needed before the mugger came along; if the mugger never came along, there would be no danger of stabbing to speak of anyway.&nbsp; It's like a protection racket - give me money to keep your business safe from mishap.&nbsp; Particularly the mishap that I, myself, will inflict upon your business if you don't pay me.&nbsp; Not a valid justification.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sejs, post: 1828661, member: 4910"] Oh no I'm not saying that at all - history does have examples of taxation without recompense. It tended to lead to things like tea parties. When people caught on to the fact that they were paying taxes and not getting anything in return for it, they tended to stop paying and tell the tax-charger to go squat on a halberd, with the normal reactions following. That's because unless the land in question is actually incorporated by a seperate entity, then the land to be annexed doesn't actually belong to someone else. The government can annex it because it's [u]their[/u] land, they just let other people build stuff on it in exchange for property taxes and the like. Give us X dollars per year and we'll let you build and maintain stuff on our land. And as for the wealthy individuals, of course they complained - wealthy people do that, particularly when they don't get treated to the deference they think their money entitles them to. To the point that sometimes they forget that no matter how much money they have, the government has more. So yeah, the govt annexes some land, and they still have to pay taxes on all manner of things - but they don't have to pay taxes for the land the govt annexed, because they (they wealthy folks) are no longer responsible for it. But yes, they do still have to pay taxes on other, unrelated issues. If the tax no longer applies, you no longer have to pay it, but you still do have to pay the taxes that continue to apply to you. True enough, though it comes down to validity of claim. A mugger could claim that he was charging his victim a "Not Getting Stabbed" tax, rather than just robbing him. The claim is false, though - the victim had all the Not Getting Stabbed he needed before the mugger came along; if the mugger never came along, there would be no danger of stabbing to speak of anyway. It's like a protection racket - give me money to keep your business safe from mishap. Particularly the mishap that I, myself, will inflict upon your business if you don't pay me. Not a valid justification. [/QUOTE]

Verification