Something to consider: How does one identify a "net taxpayer?"

Say Alice and Bob are each taxed $100. This $100 is spent on a bridge, costing $200.

Who's the net taxpayer in this hypothetical? Is it both of them, because neither received tax funds above $100? Is it whoever uses the bridge more? If so, is proportional use taken into account? What if Bob uses the bridge more, but didn't want it, and Alice did? What if the previous caveat holds, but Alice paid vastly more in taxes? What if in constructing the bridge, Bob was subject to eminent domain seizure? What if Bob was paid some sum? Etc.

There's a bit of a paradox baked in here, as well. Insofar that the state manages some property in accordance to some person's wishes, he is proportionally less infringed upon, making his claim to restitution—whatever its underlying validity or form—proportionally less valid.

"Net taxpayer" strikes me as state sorcery—ie: something that sounds intuitively simple at first glance, like "terrorists," "citizens," "regulation," etc, but is actually just a vague and tenebrous construct of the regime, which just muddles people's thinking as they debate all too confidently about exactly how the evil magic works. It's all just an illusion, though.

Expand full comment

Nice work, Ace.

Expand full comment