Where does the commonality between these two situations break down, or, on the
other hand, is there any difference? Is stealing through the political process any less morally reprehensible than stealing done individually? Finally, does regular political expropriation of another individual's income differ from slavery? Defend your answer using economic theory and ethical philosophy.

Well lets see, (Gotta try stay on topic here): Generally convicted felons are not allowed to vote where I am (UK) though for the sake of this I'll pretend they can, firstly I think that Sam shouldn't be supported by the government anymore then he already has, he basically got free bed and board for a few years during this time I believe they should teach prisoners a trade of some sorts (Lets say construction The physical side of things) whilst maintaining some freedom for them in their own time, he should be supported in the means of acquiring some form of job that suits his skills he learnt during his time in prison now he can comfrotably go into the construction industry, there he will have a relative living wage, and be able to live comfortably without any further aid, in other words reform / rehabilitate prisoners who are commit small scale crime for monetary benefits since generally its done out of desperation.

And now for the political part, $50 isn't that much (Considering I'd be earning £52,000 per annul but earn £45,000 after taxes most of which goes towards welfare which is why I use the NHS whenever >:) ) and in times such as these if were to be $50 scaled according to earnings (Higher for those earning more lowered for those earning less - that could be misinterpreted so yeah) and such then this likely would go unnoticed by the majority of people, so yeah appropriate scaling and it'd serve the wider community well.

Thanks for a thoughtful response and interesting discussion as always. I will now proceed to pass out as it is 6AM here.

~~~

It starts to break down, I believe, when the Government begins to get involved. When they begin to declare you a criminal is when you begin to lose your rights, whereas with Sam, he's innocent until proven otherwise. There is most certainly a difference. Though they are still somewhat similar in nature.

No, I don't think so. Actually to expand on that thought, I think stealing through the political process is worse than individually. At least with individuals you're being robbed of your money, not of your life and livelihood.

Political expropriation can be compared to, but is not entirely like, slavery. For one thing, with slavery you have no rights at all other than working for your life and getting (in rare cases very little to) no pay at all. On the other hand with political expropriation, you at least have some rights and are still entitled to monetary gains, for obvious reasons.

I'm not sure how the last remark is supposed to be taken so I'm going to leave it out.

Very good evaluation, I actually really like the part about it being "worse".

I had a crazy idea to write it like courtroom dialogue. I would have the entire paper be dialogue between myself and the judge giving my personal opinion (that's what he wants in the paper, personal opinion). But I think that might be a bit too... creative...

Thanks for the input bro, you're not as surprised by it as I thought you were going to be.

No problemo. It was a pleasure. :v

tax evasion is definitly a crime, but redistributing wealth is a horrible policy. this is why I don't like socialism or at least socialism to this extent