Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Texan
If the tax were an additional 20 percent of my gross income, then no. If it were two or three percent, then yes.
|
My question was aimed at Nod, since from memory he opposes taxation on ethical grounds, not practical ones.
The point is that "right" Libertarians (to me) seem to say that they oppose taxation/welfare systems on moral/ethical gorunds - that it is wrong to curb freedom and so even if taxation did lead to economic benefits it should still be opposed. But with patents all ethical grounds (to me at least) seem to be dropped and we're back to pragmatism. I'm interested in the (apparent) contradiction.
A cynic would note that welfare systems might be seen to benefit the poor, and patent systems might seem to benefit the rich, but I'm sure that's entirely coincidental.
If there is some sort of ethical defence of patents then I honestly don't see what difference the cost of invention makes. If I invent a cure for cancer in my garage somehow (costing me practically nothing) are we saying that I "deserve" no legal protection because I incurred no costs?