英语论文网

on who earned it: the right of private property is innate in the very nature of man, so it is indubitable. If two of our neighbors want to take something of our property, could it be that the neighbors have this right? If not two, then how about a group of neighbors? The whole society?

What gives a group any right to act that an individual member of the group would not have? Rights are not additive; two persons who form a group have not more rights than a single person. It follows the obvious indisputable conclusion that I don’t have the right to take my property without your consent, no matter how many people are in the group.

After all, taxation is a form of forced payment, nobody is asked if he consents to pay tax or not. However, the objection is not against taxation as process, not against high versus low tax, but fair against unfair tax. The objection is against tax progressive. It is clearly unfair to require some persons to pay taxes more than the others. If we believe that all persons are created equal, and that we are all entitled to equal protection of the law, should not we all pay the same price for those rights and protections, “Social justice,” then, is no justice at all unless everyone is equal before the law. In free economic societies, where everyone has the opportunity to climb the social ladder through their own efforts, justice seems to be applied in different structure depending on the different scale position of people, not to society as a whole. This is what is meant by blind: universal justice.

The progressive tax rates inevitably put pressure not to work overtime upon the taxpayer or to withdraw his capital from productive business. If the rates were set more reasonably, taxpayers would have less incentive to avoid paying.

“ a very important social and economic question is also involved in high tax rates. That is the result taxation has upon national development. . . . If we had a tax whereby on the first working day the Government took 5 percent of your wages, on the second day 10 per- cent, on the third day 20 percent, on the fourth day 30 percent, on the fifth day 50 percent, and on the sixth day 60 per- cent, how many of you would continue to work on the last two days of the week?” [8]

Just as there cannot be one justice for the rich and another for the poor, it cannot be fair to charge more money the entrepreneurs who have earned through hard work and inventiveness, risking their own capital, compare to some others who have done nothing to earn it. The social dynamic of the market economy allows today’s poor to become tomorrow’s rich. In a market economy everyone is at least free to try, and at least some will experience the true satisfaction of having succeeded in life on their own merits. This means undertaking projects and initiatives [9] , taking risks, and by means of all of one’s intelligence and inventiveness to get ahead. Taking more money from the earnings especially from the successful beginning activity means to increase obstacles for further.

Wealth is only created through effort, savings, and personal dedication and it must be created every day. The healthiest and most rewarding approach for everyone is for people to create their own wealth with the means at their disposal. Wealth creation and capital investment only occur in those sectors of the economy that are capable of saving and investing. This is t