Tax evasion hurts society as a whole by reducing available resources for the programs that aid our country, and failure to provide child support harm the children and mothers that the child support was intended for in much the same way. Neither of these are victimless crimes. Victimless crimes are typically things that only harm the person/people involved in the crime, i.e. prostitution, recreational drug use, or gambling.

> Tax evasion hurts society as a whole by reducing available resources for the programs that aid our country

That argument only works if taxation provides a net benefit to society.

> That argument only works if taxation provides a net benefit to society.

How about this one then: At any given level of government spending and borrowing, tax evasion requires higher taxes to be imposed on those not engaged in tax evasion.

That is making the assumption that government spending is constant irrespective of tax revenue. If tax rates and public debt remain constant then tax avoidance will lead government spending to fall. This may mean fewer immoral actions conducted by the government such as wars or arresting people for victimless crimes. In this way, tax evasion can be not only harmless but a moral imperative.

Do you not see where this is going? You could make exactly the same argument in favor of stealing government property.

Tax evasion hurts society as a whole because you're free loading off the system and stealing from your fellow citizens who are paying their taxes.

This argument is valid regardless of whether taxes benefit society or not.

>stealing from your fellow citizens who are paying their taxes.

You are confusing who is stealing from whom.

No I'm really not; taxes are perfectly constitutional. Call it theft if you like but you're just being ridiculous.

Theft existed before the constitution, and the constitution didn't change what it means.

Property is a social construct, society decides what is or isn't theft, not you. Taxation is not theft, and I'm not interested in the least in debating this, it's childish. You don't believe in government, I get it, and I don't care.

I believe in government, I just don't approve of it, because I believe it has a net negative impact on society. My primary concern is not whether you or anyone else cares about my option, but rather what sort of societal organization might have the most positive impact on society.

Tax evasion and failure to provide child support are perfect examples of crimes with real victims. The perpetrator is victimizing society, and their own child in these cases.

Do you have some better examples you would like to use?

I was unclear, but I didn't necessarily agree with those examples, so I added scare quotes. My point was that there should be some crimes that result in fines but not jail time.

Better examples? Practicing medicine without a license (assuming good medicine otherwise). Trespassing (assuming no other damages). Criminal endangerment (assuming no actual harms). Production of controlled substances. Ownership (not use) of unlicensed firearms.

Again, I don't necessarily agree that those are all victimless. The point is that they are arguably benign crimes that shouldn't necessarily require jail time.

I said should never result in jail or criminal charges; civil courts should handle such issues. However, not paying support has a clear victim, the mother and child that have to do without what they legally have a right to. Ditto for tax evasion, you're robbing your fellow citizens.

There is a victim when child support is not provided: the child(ren).