Why the idea that fiscal conservatives hate poor people?

[Rand_Rover]

@Polycarp

If you say something outrageous – and you do regularly, Rand Rover, for reasons I am obliged not to speculate on in GD – you can exect to get called on it.

What do you mean “get called on it”? You were wrong about my position. You didn’t “call” me on anthing.

Also, this post is just a blatant attempt to deflect attention away from the fact that your last post completely and obviously mischaracterized my position–so obviously that you were corrected by a poster other than me.

In view of the points Shodan has raised, would you be so kind as to say what you believe are valid purposes for levying taxes, and which are improper?

As I’ve already said, I think the only legitimate activites of government are those things with a more-or-less equal benefit for everyone that can really only be done by a government (i.e., because society would run into the collective action problem otherwise). Examples include police, military, roads, certain limited health and safety regulatory agencies, etc.

If you lived in an area devastated by a natural disaster, would you object to Federal disaster-relief aid? If the health care reform compromise ends up with a program specifically targeting catastrphic illness, and you contracted a casastrophic illness, would you refuse coverage under it? And if your answer is that you would accept Federal aid under those condtiions, do you feel it appropriate to deny it to others?

These are odd-ball examples, but, in general, if the government wants to give me something, I will take it, even if I don’t think the government should be giving it in the first place. I don’t see anything inconsistent between this and the idea that the government should confine its activities to those legitimate government activities as discussed above.

If someone has taken proper financial care for their future but found their savings wiped out through one of the notorious recent episodes of financial chicanery (Enron, AIG, etc.), so that they cannot recover from the offenders, do you feel that they are deserving of help? Or should they suffer as being to stupid to not be the victims of crooks?

Your example is impossible. One cannot “take proper financial care for their future” and then get “wiped out” through “one episode.” Can’t happen.

If all taxation is not violence, at what point does it become violence? Where do you draw the line?

You are still confused. All taxation is violence, I never said otherwise. But you were wrong to say that I believe the government should not levy any taxes. Rather, the government is justified in levying taxes only when the money will be used to support a legitimate state activity (as I’ve outlined above).