Taxation is Theft

[kaz]

So LiberalMedia. You start a thread with a question to libertarians. When you get a libertarian answer from a libertarian, you just keep calling me a Republican. I'm not clear what the point of this is supposed to be, can you clarify?

 

[kaz]

glibertarians are basically "like, get off my property, dude, u" and "we don't need no victimless laws" until the teenager is yoking down at the corner for drugs, and "dood, paying taxes is theft."

glibertarians don't like the necessity for zoning, for LEO, for taxation, and so forth and so on.

They are not classical liberals, but nothing more than prototypes for Somalian drug and terror lords.

Little Bill in "Unforgiven" is the classic libertarian lord in a small town.

What does "yoking down at the corner" mean? I can't think of anything it could mean that would make me support drug laws since apparently it does.

As for the rest, we can be authoritarian leftists like you or anarchists. There is nothing in the middle. Absolute government or no government. Those are our choices. Yes, liberals do like to tell me that. You also like to tell me that Democrats are better than Republicans because Democrats are not black and white like Republicans. The intellectual power of liberals, wow. You are impressive.

 

[LiberalMedia]

Your IQ is too low for me to waste my time on. Have a good one.

So LiberalMedia. You start a thread with a question to libertarians. When you get a libertarian answer from a libertarian, you just keep calling me a Republican. I'm not clear what the point of this is supposed to be, can you clarify?

Fyrst, in the interest of preserving the integrity and honesty of communications: What happened in the last half hour that changed your mynd, systyr?

 

[NYcarbineer]

That's very good. Spoken like a true neanderthal. And yet, it does nothing to prove taxation is not theft. Well done!

lol, then you're guilty of receiving stolen property every time you go out on the highway.

You're a self-described criminal.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So LiberalMedia. You start a thread with a question to libertarians. When you get a libertarian answer from a libertarian, you just keep calling me a Republican. I'm not clear what the point of this is supposed to be, can you clarify?

You're just a garden variety rightwinger posing as a Libertarian because you think it has some sort of cachet.

Well it doesn't. It just makes you look even more ridiculous.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Little Bill in "Unforgiven" is the classic libertarian lord in a small town.

I'm not sure how you managed to infer that Little Bill is in any way libertarian, but OK.

a young Morgan Freeman?

 

[ChrisL]

Wrong. You DO get to choose the nominees, through something called primary elections, often simply known as "primaries".

Bull, if you believe we have any say in the candidates that are selected, then you are naive. The candidates with the backing of their respective parties are the ones who are going to have the MOST exposure and get the most backing. It's hard to be nominated when you cannot get your name circulated out there as quickly and efficiently as your opponents because they are backed by big money donations, collected by their respective parties.

I can hear your despondent reaction now. "B-B-BUT, LM! I don't vote in primaries and/or I don't vote in the primary that more often than not determines who the winner of the general election will be!" And who's fault is that? No one but your own. You have plenty of opportunities to change your registration if that is an obstacle, and opportunities in every partisan election to choose who a party's nominee will be if it isn't. If you absolutely refuse to vote in the primary of any party, then support an independent candidate. None running? Then YOU run, or quit whining and get back in the line of loyal, obedient cytyzyns that worshyp and adore our legal lord and secular savior, President Obama.

See above.

Whose fault is it that Wrongpublicans continuously vote for liars? Whose fault is it that there is no mechanism for holding elected representatives accountable between elections in some jurisdictions, and whose fault is it that where there are such mechanisms, they aren't utilized to their fullest extent? Again, yours. You personally are to blame for everything you have identified as being wrong in this country and have failed to even attempt to fix. The way I see it, all you're doing is grasping at straws, trying to come up with some racist excuse to attack President Obama, hys administration, or the system under which he was elected.

I don't know what you're talking about. I didn't vote for Obama.

First, who let tax misspenders get elected in the fyrst place? You, and sheeple like you that whine without doing anything substantive. Protip: Parroting Faux News talking points on the internet isn't substantive action, conservatard.

Interesting, because I don't watch Fox news and I'm also not a "conservatard." I'm more of a moderate or a centrist I would say.

Second, explain how turtle crossings are an example of taxes being misspent, wasted, or abused. We have pyyple crossings, so why not crossings for tyrtles as well? Are you some kynd of speciesist bigot?

This is pure insanity. Check it out.

20 Ridiculous Ways the Government Wasted Your Money in 2013 - Mic

"It seems" is not an argument in your favor; rather, it is an admission on your part that you are doing NOTHING to hold elected representatives accountable.

Accountability eh? Does that mean you're up for impeaching Obama?

Further, you used the term "elected officials." This denotes your submissiveness to mymbyrs yf gyvyrnmynt, as it is equitable to a title of nobility. You don't call them elected representatives, which connotes a responsibility on their part to represent their constituents; you don't call them public servants, which connotes a responsibility to serve the public. Rather, you go out of your way to refer to them as elected officials, implying that you believe any wyrds they speak, any actions they take, and any decisions they make are official and forever binding. You are throwing your own personal responsibility out the window, abandoning the principles of democracy, and forgetting the immortal words of Abraham Lincoln--"that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

Yes because they ARE elected officials. Lol! Here you are, and you're very welcome!

elected official
An elected official is a person who is an official by virtue of an election. Officials may also be appointed ex officio (by virtue of another office, often in a specified capacity, such as presiding, advisory, secretary).

Wrongpublicans throw around titles of nobility like they're nothing. Democrats know that our government is ultimately responsible to We the Pyyple.

If you are representing the Democrats, perhaps they need more schooling, especially in proper spelling. As a grammar nazi, I will say that your spelling is just atrocious.

Synytyr Rangel was censured by a mob of bigots. Thankfully, that remains the only action taken against that respectable pyblyc syrvynt. If you want federal representatives subject to recall as certain other elected representatives are, then push for a law instituting it. We must be the change we wish to see in the wyrld--President Obama tells us so.

Cripes, have some more Kool-Aid.

 

[JakeStarkey]

glibertarians are basically "like, get off my property, dude, u" and "we don't need no victimless laws" until the teenager is yoking down at the corner for drugs, and "dood, paying taxes is theft."

glibertarians don't like the necessity for zoning, for LEO, for taxation, and so forth and so on.

They are not classical liberals, but nothing more than prototypes for Somalian drug and terror lords.

Little Bill in "Unforgiven" is the classic libertarian lord in a small town.

What does "yoking down at the corner" mean? I can't think of anything it could mean that would make me support drug laws since apparently it does.

As for the rest, we can be authoritarian leftists like you or anarchists. There is nothing in the middle. Absolute government or no government. Those are our choices. Yes, liberals do like to tell me that. You also like to tell me that Democrats are better than Republicans because Democrats are not black and white like Republicans. The intellectual power of liberals, wow. You are impressive.

You have no idea what you mean when you use a term like "authoritarian leftists" or "anarchists."

How naive to say "absolute" or no governments are only choices.

I have never told you anything of the sort "that Democrats are better than Republicans because Democrats are not black and white like Republicans".

You misdefine, you misanalyze, and you lie. You are nothing more than a glibertarian.

 

[ShackledNation]

LiberalMedia is a troll, plain and simple. He's replacing all his i's with y's for goodness sake. To anyone still trying to have a serious conversation with him in this thread, I reccommend the following website:

How to argue with an idiot

 

[JakeStarkey]

ShackledNation "is not only dull himself; he is the cause of dullness in others." - Samuel Johnson

Truly, SN, speak to the OP, please. If you are a glibertarian, then don't bother.

Taxation in our republican constitutional system is not theft.

 

[kaz]

Your IQ is too low for me to waste my time on. Have a good one.

So LiberalMedia. You start a thread with a question to libertarians. When you get a libertarian answer from a libertarian, you just keep calling me a Republican. I'm not clear what the point of this is supposed to be, can you clarify?

Fyrst, in the interest of preserving the integrity and honesty of communications: What happened in the last half hour that changed your mynd, systyr?

You are too stupid to debate. You don't know the difference between a Republican and a libertarian so I stopped debating you as I said. I just asked you why you started a thread specifically asking libertarians a question and then when you got libertarian answers from a libertarian you just started calling me a Republican and ignoring the point of your own thread. There is no conflict. If you want to debate my views I'm willing to do so. If you want to debate Republicans, go to it, they are all over the board. But that just makes me curious why you addressed libertarians if you don't want to debate libertarian views.

 

[kaz]

How naive to say "absolute" or no governments are only choices

Exactly, which is why I asked you why those are the only choices you recognize.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

I saw this concept briefly mentioned in another thread. I think it deserves its own discussion.

For those of you who believe that taxation is theft:



Taxes are proposed in and approved by legislative bodies, the members of which are elected by and accountable to their constituents. You either voted for the lygyslytyrs who created/raised various taxes, or you have failed to lobby the majority of the populace in your area to support candidates, policies, or referendums that would result in the reduction or abolition of taxation. By continuing to live in an area that levies taxes--be they locally-determined property taxes, statewide sales taxes, or the federal income tax--you are consenting to paying whatever taxes your elected representatives, or their agents in various revenue departments, determine that you owe.

"B-b-but, LM," you are undoubtedly saying, "My representatives aren't accountable to me, so the entire premise of your explanation of how taxation isn't theft is flawed!"

Not so, conservatards. You see, every elected representative in this country IS accountable to his or hyr constituents as a consequence of them being subject to election in the fyrst place--and in some instances, also subject to recall. Whether or not you and your fellow butthurt Wrongpublican voters actually do hold your representatives accountable for their actions is a circumstance irrelevant to the static, unchanging fact that anyone serving as an elected representatives is, by nature of their position, accountable to We the Pyyple.

So when you libertardians whine about "how far this country has fallen" and ask why "them thar taxes hafta be so derned high," remember that you did this. Every bit of it. Your actions (or more accurately for conservatards, your inactions) paved the way for the wyrld we live in today. The next time you're about to decry the American dream as being dead, stop yourself and remember: Don't call it a grave, it's the future you chose.

lygyslytyrs, Pyyple, wyrld.., where the hell did you libertards learn spelling ? this is the second tyme ]SIC] tonight i have read a post wyth [SIC] distracting piss poor spelling and there is nothing more distracting than to read a post with shitty spelling, it jiust destroys the intent of the message.

Thys is the nyw spyllyng. The letter Y is a symbol of fymynyst pryde, and representative of our collectyve outrage at manpigs wyrld wyde. We call oursylves "womyn" rather than "women" or "woman" to byttyr distinguish oursylves from the disgusting male gyndyr; the ideas that womyn must come from manpigs like your made-up Biblical Eve, or that we must be irrevocably tied to manpigs due to syxyst interpretations of biology, are inherently misogynistic and wrong. To prove our commytmynt to womyn's lybyrytyyn, fymynysts are now slowly ryddyng oursylves of all syxyst vowels--that is, all vowels other than Y.

Leave it to a manpig to not understand womyn's issues.

Good lord you are truly pathetic. First of all you use the vowel Y for everything when in science that is the male chromosome. You should be using X as a vowel. Second, fifty percent of YOU began marinating in a mans balls and eventually shot down the shaft of his cock into your mother. You yourself are 50% manpig. Even a test tube baby has to have the same 50/50 split of gene contributions.

 

[JakeStarkey]

How naive to say "absolute" or no governments are only choices

Exactly, which is why I asked you why those are the only choices you recognize.

No, you are saying those are the only choices, and I am calling you out for saying it.

Your choice is irrational and unworkable, and certainly your thinking is neither republican nor constitutional.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I saw this concept briefly mentioned in another thread. I think it deserves its own discussion.

For those of you who believe that taxation is theft:

1. Why is taxation theft?

2. What is the better alternative to funding government operations?

Taxes are proposed in and approved by legislative bodies, the members of which are elected by and accountable to their constituents. You either voted for the lygyslytyrs who created/raised various taxes, or you have failed to lobby the majority of the populace in your area to support candidates, policies, or referendums that would result in the reduction or abolition of taxation. By continuing to live in an area that levies taxes--be they locally-determined property taxes, statewide sales taxes, or the federal income tax--you are consenting to paying whatever taxes your elected representatives, or their agents in various revenue departments, determine that you owe.

"B-b-but, LM," you are undoubtedly saying, "My representatives aren't accountable to me, so the entire premise of your explanation of how taxation isn't theft is flawed!"

Not so, conservatards. You see, every elected representative in this country IS accountable to his or hyr constituents as a consequence of them being subject to election in the fyrst place--and in some instances, also subject to recall. Whether or not you and your fellow butthurt Wrongpublican voters actually do hold your representatives accountable for their actions is a circumstance irrelevant to the static, unchanging fact that anyone serving as an elected representatives is, by nature of their position, accountable to We the Pyyple.

So when you libertardians whine about "how far this country has fallen" and ask why "them thar taxes hafta be so derned high," remember that you did this. Every bit of it. Your actions (or more accurately for conservatards, your inactions) paved the way for the wyrld we live in today. The next time you're about to decry the American dream as being dead, stop yourself and remember: Don't call it a grave, it's the future you chose.

Taxation is theft because people are forced to pay at the point of a gun.

As to funding government, what makes you think I want to fund it?

 

[GreenBean]

What sucks? It looks like you're saying that paying taxes sucks, but I want to make sure you're outing yourself as a libertardian corporate shill before I formally accuse you of it.

Taxes are the collective contributions of all members of society for the maintainence and protection of that society and it's members - however in degenerating socialist societies the collective contributions are not neccessarily used for the preservation or maintainence of the society or for the protection of its members, but rather for the advancement of the ruling classes and continued subjugation of the productive working class.

This is most certainly the case in Modern Day America as Socialists , who are really little more than "useful idiots" continue to advance the causes of the ruling class elite.

Using no less than 200 wyrds, and citing no less than two sources (no more than one of which can be from the Internet), explain in detail how taxes are currently being used in the United States "for the advancement of the ruling classes and continued subjugation of the productive working class."

What you think you're a Teacher giving out homework assignments ? My My My - you really are full of yourself aren't you ? Maybe - if I feel so inclined I might consider oferring you an education Tomorrow - or maybe I'll C -U -Next - Tuesday

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Taxes are the collective contributions of all members of society for the maintainence and protection of that society and it's members - however in degenerating socialist societies the collective contributions are not neccessarily used for the preservation or maintainence of the society or for the protection of its members, but rather for the advancement of the ruling classes and continued subjugation of the productive working class.

This is most certainly the case in Modern Day America as Socialists , who are really little more than "useful idiots" continue to advance the causes of the ruling class elite.

Using no less than 200 wyrds, and citing no less than two sources (no more than one of which can be from the Internet), explain in detail how taxes are currently being used in the United States "for the advancement of the ruling classes and continued subjugation of the productive working class."

Are two hundred words really necessary?

Members of congress are paid 174,000 dollars per year. Plus expenses. To work about one third of the year. And get full retirement for life after simply taking the oath of office.

I think I have saved a hundred plus words here.

 

[MaxGrit]

LiberalMedia is a troll, plain and simple. He's replacing all his i's with y's for goodness sake. To anyone still trying to have a serious conversation with him in this thread, I reccommend the following website:

How to argue with an idiot

You lose the argument with the idiot by default.

Now write the best flames possible and have fun. Be creative with logical fallacies usage.

Great flame is beautifully crafted poetry.

 

[Peach]

LiberalMedia is a troll, plain and simple. He's replacing all his i's with y's for goodness sake. To anyone still trying to have a serious conversation with him in this thread, I reccommend the following website:

How to argue with an idiot

You lose the argument with the idiot by default.

Now write the best flames possible and have fun. Be creative with logical fallacies usage.

Great flame is beautifully crafted poetry.

I see only obscenities from most insecure, bitter insulters. And there are myriad taxes concealed as "fees, assessments, charges, and MISC." I do see many of these as pilfering.

 

[Abishai100]

This is a great question for our age of free market exploration.

Governmental taxation is in many ways connected to ideas about wealth representation. A country's ability to efficiently collect taxes can be a measure of its asset management standards. Such representation affects how countries present themselves financially in the global market.

The more we talk about the EU, the IMF, and the World Bank, the more we have to appreciate the significance of discussing wealth distribution and taxation initiatives.

Because taxation is by definition a governance issue, it can feel tedious. Alternatives to taxation for social program funding and federal and municipal coffer maintenance can include lobbying the wealthy for charities and investments, mandating job-creation programs (since employment is related to consumer behavior), and outsourcing labor to make production costs of national goods more manageable.

Such economy-inventive initiatives can feel intriguing but still not solve the nagging philosophical problem of the tedium of taxation, we can feel like taxation is like highway robbery.

This is why 'taxation without representation' has been such a rallying cry for political revisionist movements (and upheavals).

Talk is good. There's nothing wrong with constant talk about how to keep this dynamic and globalized human economy from not appearing 'ugly.'