Would people prefer to pay no tax under a pure capitalism system ?

[Swirlythingy2025]

Just wondering what others think due to a politics debate with collegues, if we lived in a society with pure capitalism and no state involvement, would people actually prefer to pay no tax at all?

Would there be any anti-monopoly regulations? I'd be worried that firms would establish monopolies and hike up the prices, so we'd have to pay huge subscription fees to get our bins collected, use local roads, etc. I'm quite happy with paying tax, and would favour more nationalisation.

I’d probably be better off under this system. I pay for my healthcare, children’s education, bin collections etc privately already!! I also donate a minimum 2.5% of any annual income after tax to charitable organisations as an unwritten rule so I’d probably still pay ‘tax’. I’ve never claimed benefits because the system is complex and sounds stressful even though at times been entitled to them. Instead, I’ve always used savings where necessary.

In theory I have no issue with tax but dislike the way in which it feels very disproportionate in the current system.

But how would you pay for things like the police and street lights?

I have no problem with tax if it's reasonable, simple to understand and spent responsibly. I don't think any of those things apply to the UK tax system.

No tax at all would be a nightmare. You'd be paying money for all sorts of things to be done such as bin collection, road maintenance etc.

So the government is sponsored by various donors? The country is completely privatised and you pay for services such as social workers, police,teachers, playgrounds etc

I've lived in countries where family is entirely responsible for each other so you pay for both your and your parent's healthcare and expenses.

Tax goes towards things like roads and schools.

Street lighting
Emergency services
Children's social care
Adult social care
Disability services
Food standards
Justice system inc prisons
Defence

Just a few things off the top of my head that taxes pay for

I just don't think it would be practical even if it were desirable (which I don't think it is).

So for national defence, say, there is no state army and no government to make international agreements. What happens if the state next door (which has an army) decides to invade? Everyone has to phone around the "army providers" to decide which one they want to defend their house? And what about air defences? Similarly you choose which plane should defend you but not your neighbour as they are with another firm...?

Or bin collections... everyone has an arrangement with a separate bin collector, perhaps each with their own colour of bin? Imagine the drama on bin day, or if someone has put their stuff in next door's bin?!

It just makes more sense in practical terms, if nothing else, for a lot of things to be provided collectively by the government (at whatever level) paid for by everyone collectively.

Also I do believe in providing things according to need and taking according to means (broadly). But even if you think the poor should starve in the gutters, who would take away the bodies if there were no taxes to pay for the clear-up?

I think the taxation has got out of control and is spent on things that are not 'for the common good'

I am happy to pay taxes for things that make sense to 'pool together for' - i.e. it would cost me a LOT on my own to pay for these things:

Defence & Police / courts
Healthcare
Benefits for people in dire need
Fire
Bins - street lighting
Roads & infrastructure
Education
Flood defences

That is all good - but crucially it SHOULD WORK!!. What is not good is that these services generally are badly managed and wasteful when that is literally the job of the government. They really should have no other influence on our lives and should also be laser focused on spending and managing these services. It's not that deep.

Things that get my goat are - excessive civil servants and the parasite consultants, overlapping services, quangos and 'Public Bodies', the obscene amount spent on PR and influencing, and the biggie - climate spending.

I'm also happy for my taxes to go towards things like public health measures and keeping waterways safe, monitoring emissions and run off from factories and so on, and I don't trust that would get done in a fully privatised system.

What you're describing is not "pure capitalism". Capitalism needs things like the rule of law, protection of property rights, etc. No taxes and no state would be closer to anarchism.

The more I think about this, the worse it seems. Private firms in an unregulated environment would have no incentives or obligations to pay well, treat their employees well, not create monopolies, provide value for money, not impose huge price hikes, etc. This is what happens in practice when companies aren't forced not to do this. Things like workers' rights were fought for, not given because employers were kind and wanted to do the right thing.

I'd be interested to learn if there are any countries that operate under this sort of arrangement, or indeed have very low taxes, and how it works for them. I think some Middle Eastern countries (possibly the UAE) work like this to some degree?

The climate crisis is an existential threat that could make vast swathes of land uninhabitable, cause the extinction of thousands of species, and destroy the world's economy. And you think that government spending on that is wrong?

That's a rather foolish position to take

No.

I can't see how we would manage without any public spending at all. Roads? Rubbish disposal? Parks? Flood defences? Disability benefits? To name but a few.

I'd rather pay for public services which need paying for. Problem is we're heavily taxed and nothing works anyway. That's when I begrudge it. Especially when you're financing illegal migrants and he lifestyles of freeloaders galore.

In terms of healthcare, most people would smugly feel that they'd be better off - until they are dying. The vast majority of spending is in the last two years of a person's life - so people should be feeling like they are paying in more than they are getting out, until they are "lucky enough" to be getting their money's worth by dying of a horrible disease.

This is a human thing, to only look at your life now. The same people who were showing off 20 years ago that their house had doubled in value are the same ones complaining their kids can't get a deposit together. A society needs to be making decisions with all the different viewpoints under consideration.

My initial thought would be to say yes, I’ve got very little from the government compared to what I’ve paid in taxes. However in reality I’d imagine it would break down into a very, very wealthy few plus the rest of us scrabbling in the dirt for scraps very quickly.

I grew up with viewing the government as benevolent and taxation being used to care for the masses and somewhat bridge the divide between rich and poor. That doesn’t exist anymore imo. However, a capitalist system with no taxation would likely mean more poverty, more unplanned pregnancies, more homelessness or several families sharing a home etc etc.
Basically the rich would get richer on the bones of the poor. As it ever was.
The post war years were probably our best when there was a drive to improve lives. Capitalism doesn’t care.

Exactly, I think this is the key point. Services would be in the hands of those doing it to make money, with far less or no accountability. Why would anyone want society to be run like that?

I guess if there were no public services then why should we pay? But it would be a shit show. Loads of poor people would starve to death, the sick would get sicker. Horrible.

The government would depend on charities. So we'd still be paying for food banks and shelters but it would be voluntary.

I know somebody who thinks all benefits should be paid by charities. And then people can contribute if they want to.

It's impossible. How can there be no state involvement? Who pays for the roads, police, streetlights, street-cleaning, etc? And that's just looking out my window? There's thousands of other services paid by the state that can't be replicated by other sources. Or do you really want private police forces and armies that answer to noone?