NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION? Mark Steyn started it:

The top 5 percent of taxpayers contribute 60 percent of revenue. The top 10 percent provide 75 percent. Another 40-odd percent make up the rest. And half are exempt. This isn’t redistribution ... it isn’t even “spreading the wealth around” ... it’s an assault on the moral legitimacy of the system. If you accept the principle of a tax on income, it might seem reasonable to exclude the very poor from having to contribute to it. But in no meaningful sense of the term can half the country be considered “poor.” United States income tax is becoming the 21st-century equivalent of the “jizya” — the punitive tax levied by Muslim states on their non-Muslim citizens: In return for funding the Islamic imperium, the infidels were permitted to carry on practicing their faith. Likewise, under the American jizya, in return for funding Big Government, the non-believers are permitted to carry on practicing their faith in capitalism, small business, economic activity, and the other primitive belief systems to which they cling so touchingly.

Ed Morrissey, Doctor Zero, and CK MacLeod all jumped into the fray, arguing for, against, and around the idea of having every citizen pay at least some share of federal income taxes.

Their arguments – for, against, and around – are all well written and worthy of a careful read, but ... it seems to be that all are missing the point. It’s not a matter of fairness or unfairness; regressive taxation or progressive taxation, taxes or fees; it’s a matter of responsibility - of citizenship, if you will.