Nozick Argument Analysis

Nozick argued that taxation is a forced labor, and therefore, it is wrong and immoral. Next, I am going to constructs Nozick’s argument.

1. If a person is required by the law to pay federal income taxes every year, then his money is being given to someone else. For example, if a student worker is required to work 20 hours a week but he is only getting paid for 15 hours, then his income for 5 hours’ work is being taken away.

2. Making that person work extra hours without getting paid is something that will be accomplished unwillingly. In other words, no one would want to work 8 hours a day if he had the option to work less. It is usually the case that people would prefer to work less hours for more money.

3. If that person is doing a part

In his argument, Nozick argued that taxes money is collected from a certain person and is given to another person. However, to join and engage in any society, there is a set of obligations and duties. A certain community would provide essential resources and services (clean and fixed roads, highly maintained bridges, and efficient bus systems) that are compatible with the modern living. To use these services, everyone must provide a percentage of his income or provide work. Let’s imagine a professor at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia who lives in New jersey and wants to go to his work. He has to cross the Benjamin Franklin Bridge that must be regularly maintained and tested for safety. If he refused to pay his taxes because he thinks that his money is being given to someone else, then there would be no money to maintain the bridge. The tax money collected is spent on things and essentials the public use. The problem with Nozick’s first premise that he considers paying taxes collecting money from a person and give it to another person. But in fact, taxes act as a membership fee. If you want to participate and enjoy the features that a community has to offer, then you must willingly pay a