The “Myth of Taxpayer Money”
January 16, 2021
By NZB3
Dr Jonathan Barrett, Victoria University is concerned to point out that you do not own your own life, the government does. When the government that owns you takes your money it’s not theft at all because…well, let’s let him explain it?
This should be good because Dr Barrett is the man responsible for guiding young minds at our capital city university. He’s a senior lecturer in the accounting and commercial law department and Editor in Chief of the Journal of the Australasian Law Academics Association¹.
“Fair reportage would not, for example, repeat the extreme libertarian claim that “tax is theft” – a baseless slogan incompatible with the rule of law.”
We Libertarians offer arguments as to why tax is theft. You own your own life, it’s your body, your mind, your efforts, your creativity. When you convert those things into wealth the wealth is yours too. If a flying parasite tries to suck your life blood out, even a little percentage of it, you’re the one in the right for swatting it. If a thief tries to make off with your life and property you’re entitled to defend yourself. There’s a base for you. And there’s an excellent basis for the rule of law, as opposed to basing a legal system on the premise of parasitism!
“If a man is compelled to work against his will for one minute or one second, for any cause, reason or purpose whatsoever- that is involuntary servitude.” – Ayn Rand
Actually, there is a huge body of economic and legal and philosophical resources to back up the Libertarian’s very legitimate perspective on taxation. Rather than consider it though people like Dr Barrett dismiss it all away by uttering the magic wishing words: “baseless slogans.”
“…media and politicians of every stripe invariably use the phrase “taxpayer money” to describe government funds, despite the phrase having no constitutional or legal basis….[but, properly speaking,..] “taxpayers’ money” is the money left in our pockets after we have paid taxes that are legally due. Money payable through taxes is the government’s property.”
A long-winded way of saying that taxpayers live in involuntary servitude to governments that farm them like so many sheep. If you’re taxed at 33% then 33% of your life is owned by government. Or, 120.45 days out of every year of your life. Or, 7.92 hours out of every day you live is claimed by government as theirs to take.
Barrett defines what is yours as whatever is left after you have paid up. Your life, you see, is not your own by inalienable right of birth. Freedom is not the right of every sentient being. “Liberty” and any money you may say is yours is simply the leavings of government after they have had a rummage in “your” pockets and taken what they want.
Note how easy it is to write dismissive lines, such as saying there is “no constitutional or legal basis” for disagreeing with me, Dr Barrett. He imagines he has won this intellectual debate the same way he wished away “baseless slogans.” He may as well just say “I’m right and nobody disagrees with what I say” but I guess these Jedi Mind Tricks require certain lingo for the academic spells to work or we might see through them.
“This is quite easy to prove – try not paying your income tax and see if the courts will enforce government property rights in that money.”
This legal genius is a philosopher as well! Lucky, the young students whose minds are being trained by this man. If this article is Barrett’s rehearsal for another job in a government Ministry then he’s going to make a great apologist. This sort of stuff must really help ease the conscience of politicians who might otherwise have qualms about picking our pockets and doing whatever they like with the proceeds.
Keep the logic of the argument but change it to ‘gang’ or ‘mafia’ and see if it still holds true. Try not paying your extortion fees to Al Capone. Try not paying your lunch money to the school bully. The test is- do the thieves hold court and send an enforcer to take the money? Do they kick in your door and shoot you if necessary, do they use force and do they prevail? If so, that is proof that they are the ones with property rights in that money. In short, might makes right.
If that doesn’t sound right to you, well, that’s why you and I don’t have a PhD in taxation and Dr Barrett does!
“Liberal democracies are based on some form of metaphorical social contract…groups that seek to control government expenditure outside the electoral process can be seen as bending, if not breaching, the social contract.”
Wop, not content with the might makes right blitzkrieg this article has been so far, Dr Barrett is now changing tack to provide a Rawlsian Social Contract argument. If you’re unwilling, too bad. He’s already said that’s what liberal democracies are based on and if you don’t accept social contract discourse then you’re bending/breaching the social contract!
What a silly circular mind trap! I expect he’ll have to project this onto people who disagree with him now by saying they’re the ones laying traps…
“truth-based media should avoid the phrase, [taxpayer money] and progressive politicians should recognise they fall into a conservative trap when they repeat it.”
In other words, people who disagree with Dr B have three problems now. They spout “baseless slogans,” lack “constitutional or legal basis,” and now are insidious layers of conservative pit-traps for unguarded language-users to fall into! These accusations are better applied to himself.
“A progressive government should reject the suggestion that its funds are not its own to use as it sees fit”
No thinker or government employee ever got anywhere saying anything but words like these. Praise the State, the Lion-headed Incubus, as a New Zealand poet James K Baxter called it, and your words will live. Fame, fortune, and career advancement await if only you will kowtow and, better still, preach the kowing of the tows to others.
“Kowtowing to a myth of “taxpayer money” may act as a handbrake on decisive action.”
I think we had better check in on this doc in a month or two and see what new government job he’s got. Like Chester Borrows and Ayesha Verrall and Dan Reddiex all had very public virtue signalling auditions before being given government promotions. Is that what this verbiage is?
“Media and progressive politicians should stop perpetuating the untruth that taxpayers retain some residual property interest in the taxes they pay. Taxpayer money is nothing more than their after-tax property, and the government’s money is its own.”
In short, the only thing that is yours is the merciful leavings of the government that owes you. In addition, anyone who disagrees with me is perpetuating untruth and should stop.
Lucky for you I’m not in this man’s class, not seeking my PhD through his department, so I’m free to say this. Apart from we Anarchists there aren’t many left who can. This tax apologist priest is one of the worst kinds of crooks. He’s the crook who whispers into the ear of the active crooks that they are good men. He’s the crook who plays priest and absolves the Big Mafia Men of their sins, quieting their conscience, allowing them to go even further and dig deeper into your pockets and treat New Zealanders as heard animals. He’s the modern Witchdoctor to the church of Statism.
—
Ref. wgtn.ac.nz
Like Comment Share
