I feel guilty for paying taxes

Great Debates
21

Wow, we’re really cranking out the “scare quotes” in full force today. “Morality” be damned, I’m being “debated.” :wink:

I’m not a fan of pretending that my dollar builds roads and yours shoots foreign civilians. It strikes me as an evasive denial of reality. I have considered going off grid, but that would necessitate a few things. First, I would have to find land to operate off of, and to own land in today’s real world, you have to purchase it from someone and have that ownership recognized by a government, which would sort of defeat the point.

Also, that would lead to less good than what I am currently hoping to accomplish by joining Nurses Without Borders.

That’s a good question. Government has its hand in everything, so it’s difficult to avoid completely, I know. I did go to public school, and I suppose my University is government subsidized as it’s a public institution. I use the roads and fly in airplanes (Airline industry bailouts are what I’m thinking of when I bring this up.) I have gone into debt to avoid public assistance and do not get any student loans or scholarships from the government, although I would be eligible.

There must be more, but these are the first to spring to mind.

  1. Not pay taxes in refusal of recognition of their validity. This is the option I am discussing, and its a very real possibility. It isn’t particularly pleasant, as it will get you put in jail or a bullet between your eyes, but it exists nonetheless.

The answers people bring to this issue are two-fold: firstly, there is the purely theoretical and physical, and a second is a real world solution, which necessitates a compromise to achieve an end. I believe you are trying to answer in the second manner while disregarding the first.

All good questions which do belong in the thread, but scenarios of “what if Bob opted out and shot everyone in your imaginary hippyland?” aren’t related to the topic.

===

OK everyone, logical progression time. This is all hypothetical, Mr. IRS, if you’re reading. If one were to stop paying taxes out of a sense of moral obligation, would he then be also obligated to not benefit in the slightest from that government? And what if it weren’t possible to avoid this help, such as buying food to survive?

22

Your option number 4 is the same as RickJay’s number 2. Either way, you are refusing to pay taxes legally required by the government you live under.

From an ethical stand point, if you object to the government’s activities enough to decline to pay for them, then you should not be reaping any of the benefits of that government. Itis impossible to live within the US without benefiting at all from the government: schools, roads, keeping the peace and public safety, environmental protection, clean water, public health, etc… Even if you live in a cabin on a mountain, you are affected by laws that prevent clear cutting, by the reduction in acid rain and by the military keeping the Canadians from overrunning the border.

By continuing to reside within the US borders, a person is agreeing to abide by US laws and pay taxes. If a person decides to change their side of the agreement between resident and government, the resident is fully able to move elsewhere. They can not hide behind the word “ethics” to pick and choose. Accept it, work to change it, or move on.

23

That’s precisely the same as my Option #2, “not paying taxes.” Your personal reason is interesting but it’s still “Not paying taxes as per the requirements of law.” You can either do that or not do that. Your personal rationale might provide the reason behind your choice, but you still have three choices: Live in your current country and pay your taxes, live there and don’t pay them, or leave and therefore remove yourself from the requirement to pay taxes.

I would agree that you are obligated to not benefit from such help, with the caveat noted below. It would be quite easy to avoid that help by simply leaving the country.

the caveat is that you might be a resident of a country that won’t let you leave, such as Cuba, in which case I’d say you aren’t obliged to assist your kidnappers. But in most countries, you do have the option to leave. Naturally, that might take some time, during which you’ll benefit from the results of taxation, but if you leave as soon as reasonably possible I’d argue that’s ethical.

24

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/040707F.shtml Amy Goodman says you can do this.

25

I think the only way a tax protest, or any other kind of civil disobedience can realistically work is if a large number of people agree to do it in unison. If a MILLION people all agreed to take to the streets and burn their W2s and demand an “opt out” for military spending on their tax returns then the chances of politicians actually listening would be likely (otherwise they’d have to fill the prisons beyond capacity, lose even more tax revenue from imprisoning all those people, etc).

But if I, acting soley as an individual, were to pull a stunt like that nobody would care. My “protest” would be buried in the back pages of my local newspaper (If I’m lucky enough to get any news coverage at all). If there’s zero chance of it doing any good, why put yourself in harms way?

26

That’s the only way I can justify it to myself. I wish I were brave enough to resist taxes, or countercultural enough to make too little to be taxed, but as it is I imagine my money going to welfare programs no one else likes, and not to war/“defense”/soldiers.

27

Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you were proposing the “off the grid” solution, which would be in full accordance with the law. That’s where the confusion came from.

Leaving a country is not an easy thing. It requires a considerable amount of resources and a loss of social support. Not only that, but it requires losing property that you own.

Not only will you reap the benefits of that government, but your attempt to leave the country will be made more difficult by the taxation. Were I trying to leave, and given a choice between a newly paved road or 30~ish percent of my income, I’d gladly take the extra income and get the hell out.

28

Well, there is one other thing that might spring to mind when thinking about “government benefits”: the country itself. We are a government of the people, by the people, even if in your opinion it’s not for the people.

A decision not to pay taxes is a decision to contribute to the collapse of the nation. Representative taxation is the foundation upon which this nation is built.

If you find that the collective representation governing how your taxes are spent insults your ethics to such a degree that you simply can’t participate, then the only practical ethical choice would be to go find a different country more in alignment with your principles. I am sure there will be someone else willing to take your place here. There is no such thing as living “off grid” without reaping the benefits of the taxes paid by everyone else.

Certainly “the government” would have my enthusiastic support in putting you in the Big House for evading income taxes instead of just leaving the country voluntarily. Especially so close to April 15. I hate paying taxes but I personally like the Nation, even when asses are in charge.

Best wishes. You might be surprised how few people jump up to make sure the door does not hit you on the way out, however noble your intentions seem to you right now.

As an aside, if you haven’t even finished your schooling, I’m not sure collecting your particular putative tax bill is #1 on the IRS’s radar. :wink:

29

So you accept that an entity has the right to rob me of my livelihood based on an accident of location of birth?

30

Paying taxes does not rob you of your livelihood.

If you think you got a raw deal because the accident of your birth placed you in the United States you need some expansion of your horizon. In any case you have been fortunate to be born where you have choices.

One of those choices is to not be bound by that birthplace, and to pack up and leave.

It is not a choice, at least as long as my viewpoint holds out within the citizenry at large, to let you freeload as a mechanism to assuage a very naive viewpoint.

31

This is patently false. 30% of my income represents 30% of my labor. 30% of my working life is taken from me and redistributed by the United States under threat of imprisonment or death. If that isn’t robbing me of my livelihood, I don’t know what is.

You’re right. It could be worse. I could have been born blind and deaf during the great depression. But you know what? “Could be worse” isn’t “the best there is.” There’s nothing wrong with wanting to improve your situation, no matter how good it is.

32

What about not paying only the portion of your taxes that you believe are being used for sinister purposes? There are shades of gray in every department, of course, but let’s say that I decided to protest by not paying the portion of my taxes which goes toward funding the Defense Department.

I would have to keep in mind that not only would I not be paying for weapons, I would not be paying for meals for the troops. I wouldn’t be paying for Guantanamo, but I wouldn’t be paying for medical supplies at Walter Reed either. I need to understand fully what I am protesting.

At any rate, at some point I determine only a portion of my taxes that I will not pay. Is that not sufficient ethically? I would still have to face the consequences with the IRS and they can hound a person into hell over small amounts.

It’s interesting to see that Chief Pedant is so crazy about this country that he wants to stifle any desent. Shut up, get out or we will gleefully put you in the slammer! America! America!

Actually, Thoreau’s protest worked out well. He was sent to jail for not paying taxes. He thought that more people ought to be in jail for not paying poll taxes. I don’t think there’s a poll tax there now. Maybe he helped make that change.

He certainly inspired Gandhi to free a nation from colonial rule. And Thoreau and Gandhi inspired Dr. King’s non-violent civil disobedience.

I envy those who have that kind of ethical courage. I pity those who don’t understand the principles of protest and how essentially American they are. Thomas Jefferson said it was our duty to protest when government gets off track. He wouldn’t have tucked his tail between his legs and whimpered off to another country.

Cite? Rosa Parks didn’t abide by the law. Dr. King didn’t abide by the laws. Freedom Riders didn’t abide by individual state laws. The President of the United States hasn’t abided by the laws. I didn’t sign any agreement or make any promises. I don’t belong to the state.

33

There is a careless habit on this board to paraphrase someone else’s comment, and a worse habit of then mocking the paraphrase. In this case the assertion that I want to “stifle any dissent” crosses the line into impropriety. I’m happy to be quoted for what I wrote, but please do not rephrase something and then attribute it to me.

I do love this country. It is full of faults. Dissent is an important mechanism to help correct those faults. Among the options for dissent is civil disobedience.

To date the Nation has created certain penalties for certain types of civil disobedience. Among those penalties is jail time for tax evaders. If enough citizens are persuaded that tax evasion is appropriate, the law will be changed or the government will collapse because there will be no source of revenue.

If this were the Pit I would feel free to more readily respond to your comments above, or to editorialize on ForumBot’s position. I am underwhelmed by ForumBot’s ethical dilemma over paying taxes while he enjoys the benefits of living here. There is no penalty for simply finding another nation more closely aligned with his sensitivities. Choosing to stay and improve the United States internally is an equally legitimate option. With it comes the consequence of whatever mechanism one chooses to express that dissent.

Those consequences are not my choices; they represent the collective net will of a freely-voting citizenry.

34

But you have the option to leave. I know I keep rehashing that, but it’s the most salient point there is in this debate.

As a child, you aren’t taxed in any meaningful way. As an adult, however, you now have the power and means to leave the jurisdiction in which you were born. You are not being forced to participate in American taxation law by virtue of having been born there; you are choosing to remain there and subject yourself to it. If you’re such a believer in individual choice, then you need to accept that individual choice is exactly that; your choice, something you must do. Individual choice doesn’t mean complaining that you’re hard done by because everyone else has made a different choice.

Leaving the country would, of course, be quite a laborious and difficult process. Campaigning to have the government abolished and replaced with individual, opt-in “Governments” would be hard too. But that’s the inevitable consequence of individual choice. Some choices are really, really hard. Some don’t have easy outcomes. That’s part of being a grownup, I’m afraid.