To pay for someone's education someone else must be taxed. Why is it better to tax a working person for every student's education instead of just having that person pay for the exact education they received?
People with university education tend to have higher incomes and in countries with sane laws therefore pay more in taxes. On average they will pay more than they get from government.
Apart from that I feel much more comfortable going to a doctor, knowing that she has gained that position by skill and not because her parents could afford it.
Some graduates go on to pay more tax, others don't. The question is do we want our doctors/bankers be taxed more to pay for the education of our sport scientists/elementary school teachers?
Because we all benefit by living in a well-educated society. It's the same argument with public schools at lower levels. Would you advocate that these also be made exclusively private?
To pay for infrastructure repairs someone else must be taxed. Why is it better to tax a working person in order to repair roads instead of just having drivers pay for the proportion of roads that they use?
From a moral point of view, this is actually how it should be done. But the thing is, for one it is easier to get money from someone who has it than from someone who has not. Then there is also a nasty political debate hidden in there, about how you as a community should take care of each other in order to prosper. That poor driver may really depend on that road paid by others to make a living on his own, and you as a government will gladly bend the rules a little bit off from what's equitable for everyone, otherwise those poor bastards (becoming jobless and having too much time on their hands) will make unpleasant noise, unlike the quiet (wealthy and mostly happy) payers. After all, you wish to keep your political seat AND appear as a good caretaker which governs for the people, right? And finally, the reality is not always in harmony with our sense of justice, and if the you're not going to pay for infrastructure of remote areas that have poor economical prospective (...or corruption, or what not), the infrastructure in those areas will most likely collapse, for not having enough means of self-sustenance. The country is like an organism that should take care of its organs to prevent falling apart, no mater what.
Okay, you contact a construction crew (and other associated contractors, civil engineers, etc), and you make sure they're doing their job. And if they don't, you take on the liability for any damages done by potholes, broken guard rails on bridges, etc.
Because taxing is low on low incomes while high on high incomes. And that you do not know before starting to work which king of income, if any, you will have. that's the big equity advantage of redistribution.
Nonsense. Those who invest a lot into education (and yes, I would say this requires having a lot to invest---but people unwisely taking out student loans in the US prove that this isn't necessary) in an appropriate field will typically have higher incomes. So by taxing them more too, society is double-dipping.
