Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not surprised that many of you lack the critical thinking skills to understand Dr. Williams point. Taxation through threat of force is theft; it is no different than extortion. You can claim that it's merely a fee that you pay for government services, but it's akin to being forced to pay the mob money for a protection fee, otherwise they'll come by and trash your business. If you don't pay the government the money it feels it is owed then they can imprison you and confiscate your property.
The main point is that you have no choice. There is no opt out. You pay the fees whether you benefit from them or not.
Taxes are NOT theft. They are dues for using the playpen.
Once they are used to redistribute wealth they are theft. Taxes used for defense of us all--not theft. Taxes used for subsidies, bailouts, welfare payments, etc. equals theft.
I'm not surprised that many of you lack the critical thinking skills to understand Dr. Williams point. Taxation through threat of force is theft; it is no different than extortion. You can claim that it's merely a fee that you pay for government services, but it's akin to being forced to pay the mob money for a protection fee, otherwise they'll come by and trash your business. If you don't pay the government the money it feels it is owed then they can imprison you and confiscate your property.
The main point is that you have no choice. There is no opt out. You pay the fees whether you benefit from them or not.
What do you mean, you "have no choice" ?
If you don't like taxes, string yourself together a raft and go live in international waters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo
Once they are used to redistribute wealth they are theft. Taxes used for defense of us all--not theft. Taxes used for subsidies, bailouts, welfare payments, etc. equals theft.
So if someone degrades my purchasing power, without my consent, via Fed loans, is that also theft?
Or it is only the degradation of my purchasing power via taxes that constitutes "theft" ?
Look, I hate paying taxes. However, I enjoy driving on nice paved roads. I am happy to have schools for our kids. I'm glad the police and fire departments are available to protect my family and property.
All you guys claiming "redistribution" need to take a second look, I honestly do not see it.
The main point is that you have no choice. There is no opt out. You pay the fees whether you benefit from them or not.
But you do. There are tons of 3rd-world nations that would gladly accept you. The one thing you cannot choose is living in a 1st-world country with all the advantages that confers on you, and then refuse to pay your membership fees.
Dr. Williams is disingenuous in that he's decided to put corporal crime in the same category as property crime, when of course there's a few millennia of cultural and judicial tradition putting those in different categories.
Yes, I get it - he's only doing so to make a point. But if the point only stands if you ignore all cultural context, it's not a particularly well-made one.
But you do. There are tons of 3rd-world nations that would gladly accept you. The one thing you cannot choose is living in a 1st-world country with all the advantages that confers on you, and then refuse to pay your membership fees.
Dr. Williams is disingenuous in that he's decided to put corporal crime in the same category as property crime, when of course there's a few millennia of cultural and judicial tradition putting those in different categories.
Yes, I get it - he's only doing so to make a point. But if the point only stands if you ignore all cultural context, it's not a particularly well-made one.
If you live on an island of three people and two vote to confiscate your property is that moral?
No, that's not a sound argument. All you've done is taken a couple of key words out of the OP's argument and re-arranged them. A law is punishment for a specific action, usually in which you've directly violated someone else's rights.
The only rebuttal I can think of to the OP's argument is that they can leave the country if they don't like it. Although that's not a very good one because it could be made for any law that was deemed unfair.
No it's not a sound argument, you're right. And yes the OP is correct in that just because congress approves an act doesn't make it moral, but likewise, neither does it make something immoral. We decide morality based on other criteria, and the morality of taxing those with the means in order to help out the impoverished is a moral debate regardless of laws passed.
Example: If one of your family members was about to die a painful death and your only option given time constraint was to steal from a wealthy household who would hardly notice, would it be more moral for you to watch the family member die?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
