| There is an interesting and economically well-motivated argument that income tax should be eliminated everywhere. The argument agrees (as do I) that it is right for the government to collect taxes, and that many individuals (including myself) should pay taxes; believe me, I like having a stable society!! -- but "income" is not a good basis. It comes down to two things: ownership and also what government should encourage (taxes are a way of "discouraging" things by adding an additional cost). Labor. I and only I own my labor, else I am a slave. On what basis does the government have rights to the fruits of this? Why discourage me from employing my labor to the benefit of my countrymen? Capital. If I deploy my capital, hopefully to make other's labor more efficient, I am taking the risk. Why should the government also charge me for this? Why discourage me from investing? Land. Ahhh, here we have something. My ownership of my land is a right granted by the government (unlike my ownership of my labor). And land is only (economically) good for rent-seeking, which is economically harmful. Taxes on land could fully fund the government, provide the wealth redistribution which is necessary to keep capitalist economies functioning for more than a few generations, and aligns with the foundational principles of democratic governments (natural law, rights of man vs government, etc). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism |