Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Problem is, I don't think you can present this as a moral question while acknowledging that you find some point along the continuum away from the zero-point to be acceptable. He's left with an "it's immoral if you want to spend more than I want to spend" position. If he wants to declaim that taxation with the explicit goal of taking from one to simply give to another in order to equalize resources is immoral, that's fine, but that's not the argument that I saw. He's still then left with the "we choose to spend on a common-good basis" argument, and all he can argue is that he has a better idea of what constitutes "common good".
|
Do you not see a distinction between taxes spent on the military versus welfare?
