Taking 100% of someone's productive capacity is rightly called slavery, and it remains slavery even if you house, clothe, feed, and provide the slaves with healthcare.
The fact that you spend some of the money you stole from them keeping them alive so they can keep working in slavery doesn't make you less of a slave owner.
Everyone agrees on that.
So at what % is it no longer slavery?
Is taking 80% 'not slavery' as long as you spend it on the slaves?
What about 'only' taking 50%?
Historically 10% has been defined as 'slavery', see 1 Samuel 8 for one such example, although there are many more.
And revolutions have been started by taxes far lower than 10%.
Today, WE are the outliers, the anomalies. We accept as normal what our ancestors would have found absolutely outrageous.
Today a median Australian full time salary earner will fork out 55%-60% in taxes and government charges when you take EVERYTHING into account, meaning they only get the benefit of 40%-45% of their productivity.
It's not a whole lot better in the USA, and it's actually even worse in many parts of Europe.
I'm not impressed by the argument that 'they spend it on things we need'.
I would have done the same only I'm better and knowing what I need and far better at making sure my money is being well used.
Not everyone is ready to talk about full voluntaryism and getting the government completely out of our lives, but can we all agree that anything above 10% taxation is a form of slavery and work together to end slavery for good?