| The question is simple. What do you think of taking someone's property without the rightful owner's consent, through violence or threat of such? That'd be what we call "theft". Indeed. And it's an aggression, thus unethical for most ethics, especially the libertarian one. With that said. Why do you still support taxation? Hypocrite. And a petty thief.  Mod Edit: Modified title for clarity and/or easier searching. |
ShockedJul 29, 2017 9:57 AM
 |
| i don't think i've stolen anything in my life unless you include the countless hearts and souls of anyone unfortunate enough to be lured in by my siren song which is visualized as the tilde~ so unless you can prove how i stole your heart <3 your title is false |
  Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet |
| Pardon, but what's the question again? |
| I once stole a manga book off a girl's desk in 8th grade. Looking back, I am not sure why. I was never like that. I had no regret til I remembered a few years ago. I guess kids make weird mistakes. |
 |
| No one is forced to pay taxes though, you are free to pack your bags, abandon society, and live in the woods. If you want to enjoy the benefits of society, you know education for your kids, a police force, criminal court system, and infrastructure you'll have to contribute. Perfectly explained by this quote: "Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society." The real thieves are people like you, expecting that public services should be handed to you for free. |
NudeBear said: This is a very fun post because you put like four or five conceptual mistakes together. Let's go through them one by one:No one is forced to pay taxes though, you are free to pack your bags, abandon society, and live in the woods. If you want to enjoy the benefits of society, you know education for your kids, a police force, criminal court system, and infrastructure you'll have to contribute. Perfectly explained by this quote: "Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society." The real thieves are people like you, expecting that public services should be handed to you for free. NudeBear said: No one is forced to pay taxes If you think this, then I invite you to stop paying for them. Soon enough a group of armed men will be by your door, seizing your property and goods. NudeBear said: You are free to pack your bags, abandon society, and live in the woods. This, too, is false, as the State will hunt you even if you live in the woods, happens a lot in the United States with people living in caves for example. It is also obvious that if a group of people started building their own village somewhere the government would promptly tax them. If you are suggesting leaving the country, you know very well that the government makes this task more difficult than it has to be, not to mention you can't go virtually anywhere since it's all State-owned, so you'd be forced to choose another country with taxes too. [quote=If you want these public services, you have to contribute.[/quote] I don't want them. I am fully against public education, healthcare and state-owned police forces and court systems. NudeBear said: Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society It is so civilized to seize someone's property and kidnap them for not giving you their goods. NudeBear said: The real thieves are people like you, expecting that public serves should be handed to you for free. I am against said services. Another problem with your "just leave the country" argument is that my house is my property. I am the rightful owner. No one has the legitimacy to force me to abandon it. |
|
kiss said: Well, do you support taxation? If you do, that's proof enoughi don't think i've stolen anything in my life unless you include the countless hearts and souls of anyone unfortunate enough to be lured in by my siren song which is visualized as the tilde~ so unless you can prove how i stole your heart <3 your title is false HoodWeeb said: If you agree with the definition of theft I gave earlier, why do you still support taxation?Pardon, but what's the question again? |
|
| Taxation is for long term things you can't get through theft. You can't steal things that people don't have private ownership of like roads. It's practical, not hypocritical and a very simple concept to understand. /thread |
IpreferEcchiJul 24, 2017 10:03 PM
 |
| I'll skip whole pointless argumentation and say: if it's how you see it, then I'll gladly call myself a thief. |
IpreferEcchi said: Taxation is for long term things you can't get through theft. You can't steal things that people don't have private ownership of like roads. It's practical, not hypocritical and a very simple concept to understand. Oh, I see now. Thanks. Well, I stole candy from the principal without getting caught, I think. +1 for thief attribute EDIT: I don't steal anymore though. |
| If people support taxation then they do consent to the seizing of their property and thus couldn't be considered thievery. |
| I Pay taxation. I pay and pay and i pay. I have paid all of my taxes since my first job in 1986. That is 31 friggin' years of taxation payments. 31 years of contributing. And now you call me a thief? |
| idk about you but the closer a girl gets to looking like ronald mcdonald, the more aroused i become. CAV where can we cast our eyes to @PoruMairu who thinks of himself a member of the true church. Helion. |
| "HEY MAN YOURE STEALING MY OXYGEN FUCKING STOOOOOOP" is what you sound like to me there are only 3 things for sure in life; death, taxes, and stupid threads on the internet |
イカロス --I K A R O S D E S U-- "Hai master" <3cruise   Becoming the bell of my heart dont click here, baka -->> https://soundcloud.com/franciscan-guitar |
IpreferEcchi said: You are stealing private property in order to build "public" things. And that's theft.Taxation is for long term things you can't get through theft. You can't steal things that people don't have private ownership of like roads. It's practical, not hypocritical and a very simple concept to understand. /thread |
|
jennicide said: That's true, but the problem is when you support taxation of others who don't consent. Like me. I'm not consenting.If people support taxation then they do consent to the seizing of their property and thus couldn't be considered thievery. PoruMairu said: Do you support it? Paying all your taxes just makes you a cuckold, by the way.I Pay taxation. I pay and pay and i pay. I have paid all of my taxes since my first job in 1986. That is 31 friggin' years of taxation payments. 31 years of contributing. And now you call me a thief? Ikaros_42oh said: Amazing post"HEY MAN YOURE STEALING MY OXYGEN FUCKING STOOOOOOP" is what you sound like to me there are only 3 things for sure in life; death, taxes, and stupid threads on the internet |
|
| I don't pay taxes. #free4ever But you don't have much of a choice in the US, huh... |
| So you're also a petty thief and a hypocrite? This is horrible bait. You don't even want a discussion, this is just inflammatory. |
| And here I was hoping you had left mal for better prospects, I guess the tide dragged you back in. Anyway if you don't want to pay taxes don't expect to live in a country that has paying taxes as laws. |
| I've been here way too long... |
| It's usually the people living in their parents' house for free that complain the most about taxes. |
| People who support Robin Hood aren't necessarily thieves themselves. |
 |
Deimler said: What?So you're also a petty thief and a hypocrite? This is horrible bait. You don't even want a discussion, this is just inflammatory. ituhata said: True. Robin Hood stole from thieves, people who earned the tax dosh.People who support Robin Hood aren't necessarily thieves themselves. |
|
| Who the fuck is that philosopher? Not fappable! |
| this question is based on the false premise that one can "rightfully own" something private property is a joke |
| If you don't want to pay taxes then you should stop using all the things taxes pay for. |
 |
yuridyce said: I can prove it exists. Let me just ask you this:this question is based on the false premise that one can "rightfully own" something private property is a joke Assume there is a tree somewhere in nature, and there is an apple. You pick it up the apple. Who owns the apple? a) Everyone; b) A specific group of people; c) The individual that picked the apple; |
|
Bobby2Hands said: Even if I stopped, I still have to pay them. Stop pretending taxation is like a purchase.If you don't want to pay taxes then you should stop using all the things taxes pay for. |
|
lupadim said: yuridyce said: I can prove it exists. Let me just ask you this:this question is based on the false premise that one can "rightfully own" something private property is a joke Assume there is a tree somewhere in nature, and there is an apple. You pick it up the apple. Who owns the apple? a) Everyone; b) A specific group of people; c) The individual that picked the apple; d) no one, why would anyone own the apple? |
| So if I am a Cuckold and not a thief anymore, then your argument is bunkum. You're welcome. |
| idk about you but the closer a girl gets to looking like ronald mcdonald, the more aroused i become. CAV where can we cast our eyes to @PoruMairu who thinks of himself a member of the true church. Helion. |
| What you call it doesn't really matter. If you want to call it theft, go ahead I guess. Allowing what normal people consider to be theft in a society would lead to an uncivilized and violent populous. It wouldn't work. Taxation doesn't lead to that, as shown here, so even if you want to argue semantics and call it theft, it doesn't matter because of these things that differentiate it from what your associating it with. did I do it? |
 I can see you |
| Yeah but you can nullify your contribution to the system through detatching yourself from it spirituall and mentally. Be in the world but not of the world. |
| I CELEBRATE myself, And what I assume you shall assume, For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. |
| Yes, it is theft but there ain't other ways to get the sweet civilization running Also "oi, man, why you pay the govt to do shit if you can pay these corporations to do it? it's totally different" |
 |
| Uh, we ain't the ones doing the taxing, dumbass. |
| Be thankful for the wisdom granted to you. |
| i will gladly be called a thief if the rich or 1% of the population will be taxed more in order to create more middle class people wealth inequality is getting worse, one major criticism of capitalism is that the rich getting more rich while the poor getting more poor is getting real |
MortalMelancholy said: Uh, we ain't the ones doing the taxing, dumbass. I think his point is that by complying with this law, you're upholding the system. Kind of a 'death before dishonor' type of argument. |
| I CELEBRATE myself, And what I assume you shall assume, For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. |
yuridyce said: That's dodging the question. The owner of the apple is whoever can use the apple. So the question is: Who can use the apple?d) no one, why would anyone own the apple? |
|
xrockxz89 said: MortalMelancholy said: Uh, we ain't the ones doing the taxing, dumbass. I think his point is that by complying with this law, you're upholding the system. Kind of a 'death before dishonor' type of argument. Not wanting jail time isn't the same thing as approving taxation. |
| Be thankful for the wisdom granted to you. |
PoruMairu said: I can't argue with this. You are so far the only person in the thread to have successfully justified taxation.So if I am a Cuckold and not a thief anymore, then your argument is bunkum. You're welcome. MasterGlyth said: No because of two reasons.What you call it doesn't really matter. If you want to call it theft, go ahead I guess. Allowing what normal people consider to be theft in a society would lead to an uncivilized and violent populous. It wouldn't work. Taxation doesn't lead to that, as shown here, so even if you want to argue semantics and call it theft, it doesn't matter because of these things that differentiate it from what your associating it with. did I do it? One, you are submitting the ethical value of an action to the general reaction of the majority of the population to it, as if the truth was democratic. Example: Islamic societies will execute gays. You, however, would say that such is not murder because "allowing what we call murder in a civilized society would lead to an uncivilized and violent populous". Second, you are assuming that taxation does not generate devastating effects in society. And wrong you are for it does, but that's another debate. Eight-Man said: Does not make it not theft. You can argue it is necessary or justified, but you can't argue it's not theft.Taxation is money taken from us to fund the government, protecting us and giving us order. It is a necessity for any thriving society. Not to mention, most of the taxes get returned to you in one way or the other. MortalMelancholy said: You are not only endorsing it but also likely using tax for your own benefit, dumbass. I say likely because maybe you are rich and you end up paying much more than you receive, which in case makes you the loser. As result you become a cuckold, not a thief, hope you are happy with the outcomeUh, we ain't the ones doing the taxing, dumbass. |
|
UnoPuntoCinco said: Valid argument, whether it is necessary for civilization or not is another debate, at least we both agree it's theft and that's what matters. I can respect someone that admits to their crime at least more than those who don't.Yes, it is theft but there ain't other ways to get the sweet civilization running UnoPuntoCinco said: It's different because the State can force you to pay for something you won't even use. Corporations can't force you to do that. As result you only pay for what you want to pay for.Also "oi, man, why you pay the govt to do shit if you can pay these corporations to do it? it's totally different" j0x said: Inequality is not a problem.i will gladly be called a thief if the rich or 1% of the population will be taxed more in order to create more middle class people wealth inequality is getting worse, one major criticism of capitalism is that the rich getting more rich while the poor getting more poor is getting real Venezuela is one of the countries with the least inequality in the world, but it has poverty. Poverty is the problem. And you fight poverty by generating wealth, not by taking wealth away from someone and giving it to someone else. |
|
lupadim said: j0x said: Inequality is not a problem.i will gladly be called a thief if the rich or 1% of the population will be taxed more in order to create more middle class people wealth inequality is getting worse, one major criticism of capitalism is that the rich getting more rich while the poor getting more poor is getting real Venezuela is one of the countries with the least inequality in the world, but it has poverty. Poverty is the problem. And you fight poverty by generating wealth, not by taking wealth away from someone and giving it to someone else. world wealth is limited since resources are limited other than human resources that is still growing to the point of overpopulation, heck capitalism destroys the environment (over pollution) so not much time for earth to replenish its resources too wealth inequality is a big problem and its shows that poverty is rising, you will hear news that the middle class is shrinking or that only 8 people holds the same wealth as the half of the human population |
lupadim said: UnoPuntoCinco said: It's different because the State can force you to pay for something you won't even use. Corporations can't force you to do that. As result you only pay for what you want to pay for.Also "oi, man, why you pay the govt to do shit if you can pay these corporations to do it? it's totally different" Well, they can't force me to pay for something in particular or to some corporation in particular but you will be always forced, by the mere fact that you are alive, to pay for something you need. I agree that there are some instances in which the state collects taxes for stupid shit and that most of this taxes get embezzled if you live in a shitty country. But I find that paying is paying regardless if it's a state institution or a corporation. |
|
| This thread makes me want to turn myself in. |
╮ (. ❛ ᴗ ❛.) ╭ |
UnoPuntoCinco said: Let's go through this slowly:Well, they can't force me to pay for something in particular or to some corporation in particular but you will be always forced, by the mere fact that you are alive, to pay for something you need. I agree that there are some instances in which the state collects taxes for stupid shit and that most of this taxes get embezzled if you live in a shitty country. But I find that paying is paying regardless if it's a state institution or a corporation. a) Yes, you are still "forced" to pay for, say, food, since you will die if you stop eating food. But there is a huge difference between being forced by nature and being forced by another human. When you have a natural need, there is no coercion, but when someone threatens to assault you and destroy your body or your property if you don't comply to their wishes, you have coercion. Therefore, it's not the same thing. b) Point a) should suffice. Let me warn you before I continue that point b) is merely utilitarian. I despise it but most sophists adore it. Through taxation you end up paying for a lot of things you won't use, and also for things that are destined for other people, not you. Sure, this might seem beautiful at first glance, but it's just extortion. No one should be forced to practice self-immolation for the "greater good". c) State institutions are inefficient since market laws do not apply to them. Corporations need to be good if they want you to buy from them. They also need to deal with competition. The State can just force you to buy from it. |
|
MortalMelancholy said: xrockxz89 said: I think his point is that by complying with this law, you're upholding the system. Kind of a 'death before dishonor' type of argument. Not wanting jail time isn't the same thing as approving taxation. But it might come to the same end, if you really let that feeling motivate you. |
| I CELEBRATE myself, And what I assume you shall assume, For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you. |
j0x said: It is limited, but:world wealth is limited since resources are limited other than human resources that is still growing to the point of overpopulation, heck capitalism destroys the environment (over pollution) so not much time for earth to replenish its resources too a) Supply is still far from scarce, there is still a lot of room for wealth production; b) The market will regulate itself on this regard thanks to private property and families. I would elaborate on this but it's way too much to put in a MAL post so check what Hans-Hermann Hoppe says about the family and private property automatically regulating human population: http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn048.htm j0x said: Wealth inequality does not mean rising poverty. Singapore is one of the countries with the biggest inequality, if not outright the most, but that's because you have a bunch of millionaires sitting along with billionaires. While in Venezuela it's pretty equal but everyone is in poverty.wealth inequality is a big problem and its shows that poverty is rising, you will hear news that the middle class is shrinking or that only 8 people holds the same wealth as the half of the human population The middle class is shrinking because of the welfare state. We have been warning you it's been decades. "The situation appears hopeless, but it is not so. First, it must be recognized that the situation can hardly continue forever. The democratic age can hardly be "the end of history," as the neoconservatives want us to believe, for there is also an economic side to the process." - Hans-Hermann Hoppe Eight people holding most of the wealth in the world is a non-problem, but I'd argue this is only happening thanks to State interventions that facilitated their monopoly or oligopoly of strategic areas. |
|
lupadim said: I agree that the state has no legitimacy other than the force itself: police and army, but the "market" has, for me, no redeeming qualities either, it's primary purpose is profit, which is theft as well, also, the market needs the stateUnoPuntoCinco said: Let's go through this slowly:Well, they can't force me to pay for something in particular or to some corporation in particular but you will be always forced, by the mere fact that you are alive, to pay for something you need. I agree that there are some instances in which the state collects taxes for stupid shit and that most of this taxes get embezzled if you live in a shitty country. But I find that paying is paying regardless if it's a state institution or a corporation. a) Yes, you are still "forced" to pay for, say, food, since you will die if you stop eating food. But there is a huge difference between being forced by nature and being forced by another human. When you have a natural need, there is no coercion, but when someone threatens to assault you and destroy your body or your property if you don't comply to their wishes, you have coercion. Therefore, it's not the same thing. b) Point a) should suffice. Let me warn you before I continue that point b) is merely utilitarian. I despise it but most sophists adore it. Through taxation you end up paying for a lot of things you won't use, and also for things that are destined for other people, not you. Sure, this might seem beautiful at first glance, but it's just extortion. No one should be forced to practice self-immolation for the "greater good". c) State institutions are inefficient since market laws do not apply to them. Corporations need to be good if they want you to buy from them. They also need to deal with competition. The State can just force you to buy from it. |
|
UnoPuntoCinco said: How can you say the market has no redeeming qualities while taking in account point a)? Surely the fact it is not putting a gun at your head and forcing you to do things you don't want to do should be a redeeming quality.lupadim said: I agree that the state has no legitimacy other than the force itself: police and army, but the "market" has, for me, no redeeming qualities either, it's primary purpose is profit, which is theft as well, also, the market needs the stateLet's go through this slowly: a) Yes, you are still "forced" to pay for, say, food, since you will die if you stop eating food. But there is a huge difference between being forced by nature and being forced by another human. When you have a natural need, there is no coercion, but when someone threatens to assault you and destroy your body or your property if you don't comply to their wishes, you have coercion. Therefore, it's not the same thing. b) Point a) should suffice. Let me warn you before I continue that point b) is merely utilitarian. I despise it but most sophists adore it. Through taxation you end up paying for a lot of things you won't use, and also for things that are destined for other people, not you. Sure, this might seem beautiful at first glance, but it's just extortion. No one should be forced to practice self-immolation for the "greater good". c) State institutions are inefficient since market laws do not apply to them. Corporations need to be good if they want you to buy from them. They also need to deal with competition. The State can just force you to buy from it. You said that profit is theft. Care to develop on that? Also do develop on how the market needs the state |
|
lupadim said: j0x said: It is limited, but:world wealth is limited since resources are limited other than human resources that is still growing to the point of overpopulation, heck capitalism destroys the environment (over pollution) so not much time for earth to replenish its resources too a) Supply is still far from scarce, there is still a lot of room for wealth production; b) The market will regulate itself on this regard thanks to private property and families. I would elaborate on this but it's way too much to put in a MAL post so check what Hans-Hermann Hoppe says about the family and private property automatically regulating human population: http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn048.htm j0x said: Wealth inequality does not mean rising poverty. Singapore is one of the countries with the biggest inequality, if not outright the most, but that's because you have a bunch of millionaires sitting along with billionaires. While in Venezuela it's pretty equal but everyone is in poverty.wealth inequality is a big problem and its shows that poverty is rising, you will hear news that the middle class is shrinking or that only 8 people holds the same wealth as the half of the human population The middle class is shrinking because of the welfare state. We have been warning you it's been decades. "The situation appears hopeless, but it is not so. First, it must be recognized that the situation can hardly continue forever. The democratic age can hardly be "the end of history," as the neoconservatives want us to believe, for there is also an economic side to the process." - Hans-Hermann Hoppe Eight people holding most of the wealth in the world is a non-problem, but I'd argue this is only happening thanks to State interventions that facilitated their monopoly or oligopoly of strategic areas. ever heard of this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Overshoot_Day or news like this We Need Three Planets to Keep the Human Race Alive, NASA Scientist Says https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/jp5m5y/we-need-three-planets-to-keep-the-human-race-alive-nasa-scientist-says poor people in rich countries are still considered poor base on the cost of living on there country im just saying that worsening wealth inequality is a sign that poverty is rising there is a reason the social class hierarchy is shaped like a pyramid where the top only has the fewest people on it and those are the rich or the 1% you cannot make the social class pyramid upside down but you can lessen the top size of the pyramid and with the help of lowering the human population and/or advancing technology more to make products and services cheaper to the point of being free then it can be achieve, there is also plenty of natural resources in space like asteroid mining so funding more technological breakthroughs are important |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Bluey is the most watched anime in the world nowtsukareru - Yesterday |
25 |
by Rhaelynne
»»
22 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Are you mentally ill?Ejrodiew - Yesterday |
21 |
by _Nette_
»»
34 minutes ago |
|
» Are you a slow or fast typier on a computer???DesuMaiden - Apr 19 |
43 |
by LordSozin
»»
1 hour ago |
|
» Do you enjoy nature?Kamikaze_404 - Apr 23 |
31 |
by Kushna
»»
1 hour ago |
|
Poll: » Worst social mediaIpreferEcchi - Mar 19 |
28 |
by hypergoob
»»
1 hour ago |