Abstract: . . .  Now, any economist will tell you that money is fungible and that there is no distinction between taxes and fees, but there are other views. Some think that property not as a creation of the state, but as a priori to the state. As shown in earlier panels, benefit theory is no cognitive error. User fees rest on a different moral ground than taxes.  . . .
. . .  Page 10 10 contain a thin account of human rationality. They leave out a lot. They reveal pervasive bias against the income tax, but provide no account of why we originally enacted that tax. Generating normative conclusions from political psychology requires a deeper account of human rationality than that contained in the paper. We need to map the cognitive shortcuts that underlie the errors. One possibility is the use of idealized cognitive models, as described by George Lackoff. These . . .
. . .  Page 10 10 contain a thin account of human rationality. They leave out a lot. They reveal pervasive bias against the income tax, but provide no account of why we originally enacted that tax. Generating normative conclusions from political psychology requires a deeper account of human rationality than that contained in the paper. We need to map the cognitive shortcuts that underlie the errors. One possibility is the use of idealized cognitive models, as described by George Lackoff. These are relatively . . .
. . .  Page 8 8 preferences. He states that tax system is not as progressive as "people would want in the abstract." He describes the Republican strategy of shrinking government without making distributional adjustments as leading to less redistribution than "the people wanted." These statements, if meant as claims about popular preferences, exceed his evidence. The experiments only show inconsistent answers when posed in different contexts. People react differently depending on whether the issue . . .
--2289,4,286,2398,11445