Yesterday, I had the opportunity to debate John Scott of the University of North Carolina on tax policy, with all aspects on the table. He carried the “liberal” banner, while I was the “conservative.” To be more precise, however, I represented classical liberal and libertarian views, and the contrast was stark.
Introductions (two minutes):
[audio:http://bit.ly/vGD4xG]
My opening argument (15 minutes):
[audio:http://bit.ly/uKTfHM]
My desire was to bring to people’s minds the moral implications of voting to redistribute other people’s money, since that violates their right to property. I also sought to call their attention to the underlying force involved in taxation (and all government activity, for that matter)—that if you don’t pay, the guns will come out.
Unfortunately, the system of taxation we have today contains the traps of collectivist desires: social engineering, redistribution, industry privileges, and a maze of compliance costs. This clip, which I was unable to play during the debate due to no internet access, captures that burden. (The particular clips starts about seven minutes in and goes for about one minute.)
http://youtu.be/–Ciay4qivA?t=6m52s
John Scott’s opening argument (15 minutes):
[audio:http://bit.ly/uL9GMx]
My rebuttal (five minutes):
[audio:http://bit.ly/tBK3rR]
His rebuttal (five minutes):
[audio:http://bit.ly/t7xMyp]
The audience followed with many questions, going for about 45 minutes. Once I’ve had a chance to go through them, I’ll post the most interesting ones here on The Locker Room.
