19

Arguably both individuals are utilizing comparable quantities of public resources from local, State, and Federal governments (roads, education, police and military protection, etc.) This is clearly untrue. Someone who can afford to own a car makes use of the roads, while someone who cannot, does not. A trucking company, of course, will make far greater ...


19

Your argument is weak, because it is false that a billionaire is using the same amount of public resources that a minimum wage worker is: First of all, the government will have to use more resources in protecting the billionaire's large number of assets (properties, funds, etc...), than it would in protecting the minimum wage worker and her/his family. ...


16

When it comes to many arguments like this, I like to remind people that "fair" is a 4 letter word and an "F word." In general "fairness" arguments can always be coached both ways. You specifically ask for an argument "for the rich paying more dollars in taxes than the poor," so that's the only side of the argument I will consider. I will, however, point ...


12

The country needs money to operate, so taxes are necessary. The government need to extract as much tax out of the people as it can without damaging their lives/livelihoods (they are there to serve the people, after all), or putting undue pressure on the people, and have them still earn a living and feel adequately rewarded for the work they do. Now, a ...


8

Any chance you're talking about The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich Hayek? I haven't read the above book in ages, but I did stumble across the following on an amazon review of a closely related book named Individualism and Economic Order, which is a collection of several essays: After dealing with the absurd notion of full information, Hayek turns to ...


6

Aristotle in the Politics wrote about the nature of money, and his views remained highly influential at least until the end of the 19th century. According to Aristotle the purpose (telos) of money is threefold: Money is essential for trade because of the inefficiency of barter. The primary purpose of money is therefore as a medium of exchange. Money is a ...


6

(This is a short unsourced answer for the time being, when I have the time later, I will update it with sources and details) From a Marxist point of view, UBI doesn't solve the problem of exploitation. Nor does free housing, universal health care, or food stamps for all, etc....all of these are corrections to capitalism, which aim at keeping capitalism in ...


5

A counter question may be the best answer: does the fact that a teacher makes half as much money as an engineer imply that a teacher is half as effective at improving the lives of others? This line of reasoning approaches the question of whether currency is a good measure of value. There are many situations where it is a good measure, then there are the ...


5

Let's say you and I engage in a voluntary trade where you give me A and I give you B in return. Moral "problem" A moral problem only arises out of the false assumption that the traded items have some objectively assignable values, like $10 or $20. Then if A has less value assigned to it than B then I lose and you win, and vice versa. Problem solved: ...


5

I don't quite see how one could have a priori knowledge of any truths about taxes. There is no consensual definition of a priori knowledge but suppose we try tthe following two approaches : (SC) S's belief that p is justified a priori iff S's belief that p is justified by a nonexperiential process and that justification cannot be defeated by ...


5

I suppose it's convenient to be able to label things you want to be true but can't come up with good arguments for as "a priori truths", but you do have to get other people to agree with you. An a priori truth is one that's true regardless of experience, so clearly it has to be true in all possible situations. Not all societies have had legal systems, so ...


3

I agree with Mauro ALLEGRANZA. You can either dive right into the last 100 years or so of the conversation since the participants speak your language and are talking about topics that you care about, or you can take a year or two to dive in and catch up on the conversation's beginning and middle. I would start with a smattering of books (say, 4 per year) ...


3

The traditional critique of marginalist economics is that it is "autistic" (although I find this language somewhat unfortunate) in the sense that its minimal empiricism can only discover how a constants in a set of mathematical data relate to each other. Within the discipline of economics, it is considered "good" and approaching a science when it discovers ...


3

The short answer is no, you have not really critiqued the Marxian theory of value here. One key thing to clarify is that all capital is also a form of labor. Here I will quote the earlier answer, "Ask yourself, where do the parts of the mechanized factory come from?" Here Marx makes a helpful distinction between "living" labor and "dead" labor. Machinery ...


3

My question is, have there been any critiques of Mises' praxeological theory? Sure. None have been successful though. 1 He who wants to attack a praxeological theorem has to trace it back, step by step, until he reaches a point in which, in the chain of reasoning that resulted in the theorem concerned, a logical error can be unmasked. But if this ...


3

I did a data analysis project using the 1990 US census data PMUS which showed that if the public assistance and state support then given to the wealthy and rich categories of citizens was instead given to those below the poverty line, then 9.2% of the US population would be pulled out of poverty. There are strong social and ethical arguments why the rich ...


3

The tragedy of the commons arises out of equal and open usage of the commons which results, in brief, territorilisation of said commons to the advantage of a few, and it's spoiliation for the many. It strikes one that equal and open access which might on the face of it sounds democratic is perhaps not so democratic and one might even say anti-democratic if ...


3

On topics such as ethics and how a society should be structured, many "philosophers" (Objectivists, etc) propose a laisses-faire system with little to no government intervention and a largely free-market economy. Yes, they do. They have written books about this stuff. If you want to know about their ideas, you could read what they have to say. But this ...


3

The idea of obligations to future generations probably has no first originator in philosophy; it is likely to have emerged into focus from other ideas. But there is a clear sense of an obligation to future generations in Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790) : Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts for objects of ...


3

I recommend Rajani (Kannepalli) Kanth but with some caveats/reservations. But before that... The Universe is made of stories, not atoms. Throughout history one collective narrative after another has worn thin, then to be replaced by another. We’re humans; that’s what we do Muriel Rukeyser/George Monbiot Communism is a story, capitalism another. And ...


2

This is an old thread, but I happened upon it in a similar search. And in that search I found this paper that seems to apply to your question. I found this paper's contextualization of Mises' radical apriorism with other philosophers such as Wittgenstein, Frege, Kant, Popper, etc. quite illuminating. It's by Roderick T. Long. https://mises.org/journals/...


2

Four names, from the Austrian school itself, that come to mind as critics of Mises' Praxeology are Murray Rothbard, Izrael Kirzner, F.A. Hayek and Ludwig Lachmann. You should be able to find references to these four gentlemen (and others) in this PDF. critiques are mentioned and responded to in various footnotes.


2

The contrast between Smith's moral philosophy and economic sociology has been noted by many, most especially Marx. Smith's work arrived at a radical historical crossroads, prior to the French Revolution and Kant, which makes it especially precarious to deal with it retrospectively. As Smith's contemporary and friend Hume noted, you can't get an "ought" from ...


2

There's a paragraph that, if the book is to be summarized, seems to summarize it well (and is a favorite of Russ Roberts, who recently wrote a book about Adam Smith): Man naturally desires, not only to be loved, but to be lovely; or to be that thing which is the natural and proper object of love. He naturally dreads, not only to be hated, but to be ...


2

Let's examine the description of fixed capital more closely. First, no part of which enters into its net revenue This is important, because it means that fixed capital cannot be a part of final goods and services. So for example, if there is a machine that builds consumer goods, but that machine is bought and sold, then that machine is not a part of ...


2

This should be reduced to a comment, but I will say that I find Luxembourg very good in general, but sometimes bewildering in detail. This being Luxembourg, I suspect that we may be dealing here with questions of raw materials extracted through colonized labor and embedded in the material structure of a society, but not entering into values derived from "...


2

You might want to have a look at http://www.justiceharvard.org/.


2

Why do not start with an history of philosophy ? For example Anthony Kenny, A New History of Western Philosophy. A brief "classic" can be : Bertand Russell, The Problems of Philosophy Online, you can find Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy : from Abelard to Zhuangzi. All entries have bibliography.


2

Robert Nozick, I believe, was the first to propose an argument for something like this, in his book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, pg. 169-172. I quote from pg. 169: Taxation of earnings from labor is on a par with forced labor. Some persons find this claim obviously true: taking the earnings of n hours labor is like taking n hours from the person; it is ...


2

As a libertarian, let me clarify some things here. There are several different political philosophies that can be placed under the libertarian banner. These include classical liberalism, minarchism, anarcho-capitalism, and several others. The scope of government preferred in each philosophy ranges from a small regulatory state with a minimal social safety ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible