Alice's inheritance tax proposal (problem)

[pmaniati <pmaniati@bigpond.net.au>]

To reply to this message or start a new topic please email: BUPS-DIS@bups.org


First up I must apologise to Alice

My rushed, and therefore irrational, response to Daniel's contribution to
the discussion on inheritance tax was based on implied "hate the rich/love
the poor" premise of the argument of whether the inheritance tax is good.

Daniel wrote
Also, why does Pmaniati mention ethics? It might be relevant, but how is
left to the our assumed psychic abilities. In Philosophy, i'm interested in
argument - Pmaniati's response does not contain anything like an argument.
He might have a point, but he is yet to tell us about it.


My argument:

It is unethical or unjust to take away something that belongs to one person
and give it to another.

There are at least three things that all humans agree upon:
1. Freedom
2. Security
3. wealth
There are at least two main entities in human societies:
1. The individual
2. The State or Polis

The acquisition of wealth is the function of individuals -by wealth I mean
at least enough to provide shelter and sustenance. Since the individual is
part of the polis, the state,and the function of the state is not acquiring
wealth, part of the individual's efforts is directed to the state.

Freedom is to choose, without coercion, how much wealth to acquire - among
other things.

The state provides security. That is, it secures the basic needs of
individuals who are justly  not net contributors. It also provides personal
security.

I do not think that anybody will disagree with the above.

My point is that once an individual has contributed his/her fair share to
the state, it is reasonable to assume that what remains is his/her property.
And as such it is up to the owner of that property to do what he/she wishes
with it.

It goes without saying that property is a belonging. And as such it is
reasonable to believe that we do not wish for others to take our belongings
- even the Christian ethic stipulates giving willingly rather than taking.

Justice belongs to the discipline of ethics. It is unjust to take away that
which has been justly acquired and give it to someone else.

It is unjust because:
1. Of the consequences - kill entrepreneurial skills and most importantly
hardship to THE MAN WHO'S FATHER AND MOTHER DIED AND HE WAS LEFT TO CARE FOR
HIS SIBLINGS AT A VERY YOUNG AGE AND FOR WHOM THE PARENTS CHOSE TO
DISTRIBUTE THEIR BELONGINGS (WEALTH).
2. Of the imperative - it is a universal human condition to desire not
having your JUST belongings be taken away without your consent.

Therefore, inheritance tax is immoral and the belief by a philosopher that
"the poor is good and the rich is bad" is disgraceful to philosophy.
 
"CHAP"
PS In other English Speaking Countries calling someone a chap is derogative.

Cheers
Peter






Browse or search the BUPS-DIS archives, or unsubscribe from the mailing list at: http://www.bups.org/mailinglist.htm