Politics Are taxes theft?

[Dan26]

"Don't steal... the government hates competition" - Ron Paul

Simle question - are taxes theft? They take YOUR money. And you don't have a say in it. If you refuse to pay, you go to jail.

I say, yes. Taxes are theft.

 

[The Passenger]

disappointed daniel. most of your thread openers are usually quite long winded and entertaining. this one was straight to the point... a bit like "bam fork to the eye!!!"

anyway, if they are put to good use and not wasted, then i don't mind a part of my pay being taken from me.

unfortunately far too much is wasted and not put to good use. there are far too many people just riding the bureaucratic gravy train on everything from being overpaid, to doing nothing, to writing or agreeing to outrageous contracts, to inexplicable pension schemes and so on and so forth.

what is your alternative? to let the corporations look after us all.... that would be an interesting world :-/

"if i have three pepsi's, and i drink one pepsi, how much pepsi do i have left?"

 

[Admiral Byng]

Copy & paste what I wrote in the other thread:

Humans are the most successful creatures on the planet because of the social structures we developed: the strong looking after the weak is at the core of our evolutionary success. Translate that into a modern money-based social structure, taxation and government services are the equivalent measure of the strong looking after the weak. Taxation and government is not theft. It is not even a necessary evil, it is a necessary good.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Yes.

Taxes are personal property taken without consent at the end of the barrel of a gun.

 

[evo]

Copy & paste what I wrote in the other thread:

Humans are the most successful creatures on the planet because of the social structures we developed

That's right. And we were doing that long before governments came along.

: the strong looking after the weak is at the core of our evolutionary success.

Yeah except all the government ends up doing is looking after the strong. 1 trillion dollars of U.S taxpayer money given to the banks recently comes to mind.

Translate that into a modern money-based social structure, taxation and government services are the equivalent measure of the strong looking after the weak. Taxation and government is not theft. It is not even a necessary evil, it is a necessary good.

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help"

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Copy & paste what I wrote in the other thread:

Humans are the most successful creatures on the planet because of the social structures we developed: the strong looking after the weak is at the core of our evolutionary success. Translate that into a modern money-based social structure, taxation and government services are the equivalent measure of the strong looking after the weak. Taxation and government is not theft. It is not even a necessary evil, it is a necessary good.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHA....etc.

 

[nut]

Is profit stealing????

 

[Dan26]

Admiral Byng.

Are you aware that charity was far more prevalent before social security and welfare?

Humans like to help, yes, But why do governments need to do it? Governments aren't people.

If a large proportion of your taxes were returned to you, and you had more money do you accept that more people would help the poor? Would you?

Do you accept that if this happened, that the welfare trap, of people being reliant on government would stop and those same people would have more incentive to get a job, and be successful?

I don't give to the poor, because I don't feel I need to, since they are already on welfare from the government. I'd contribute to them through my own volition if I was getting taxed less. I think lots of people would.

 

[Admiral Byng]

That's right. And we were doing that long before governments came along.


Yeah except all the government ends up doing is looking after the strong. 1 trillion dollars of U.S taxpayer money given to the banks recently comes to mind.


"I'm from the government and I'm here to help"

There's plenty of positive examples where the social safety net works - take public health for example. You ever had a parent suffer cancer and need treatment? Ever had a work colleague have a son born with a deformed arm and need a dozen operations over four years to reconstruct it and give him a workable hand? I have, and I don't mind paying income tax to support such services. Wouldn't wish it on anyone, it might happen to someone you know next, and it might be my tax dollars helping them out.

 

[blackcat]

can I answer for Meds and Nosick?

 

[Admiral Byng]

Admiral Byng.

Are you aware that charity was far more prevalent before social security and welfare?

Humans like to help, yes, But why do governments need to do it? Governments aren't people.

If a large proportion of your taxes were returned to you, and you had more money do you accept that more people would help the poor? Would you?

Do you accept that if this happened, that the welfare trap, of people being reliant on government would stop and those same people would have more incentive to get a job, and be successful?

I don't give to the poor, because I don't feel I need to, since they are already on welfare from the government. I'd contribute to them through my own volition if I was getting taxed less. I think lots of people would.

No, I don't. I don't think charity is as reliable a system as taxation and welfare. It depends on which way you look at it and where the onus lies. I would rather look after everyone in need even if it means a few bludgers slip into the net, than have someone in genuine need miss out because there wasn't charity available or accessible to them in their time of need.

 

[Seeds]

"Don't steal... the government hates competition" - Ron Paul

Simle question - are taxes theft? They take YOUR money. And you don't have a say in it. If you refuse to pay, you go to jail.

I say, yes. Taxes are theft.

Yes it is theft. However the world and our standard of living would be much worse if they didn't take some tax. Admittedly they take the wrong type of tax and its questionable what the right amount is. But none the less with zero taxes life would be miserable.

 

[Seeds]

No, I don't. I don't think charity is as reliable a system as taxation and welfare. It depends on which way you look at it and where the onus lies. I would rather look after everyone in need even if it means a few bludgers slip into the net, than have someone in genuine need miss out because there wasn't charity available or accessible to them in their time of need.

Who gave you the right, or any other person, to decide how much other people should give to charity?

 

[Seeds]

Is profit stealing????

Um no. Go read a book.

 

[Seeds]

Copy & paste what I wrote in the other thread:

Humans are the most successful creatures on the planet because of the social structures we developed: the strong looking after the weak is at the core of our evolutionary success. Translate that into a modern money-based social structure, taxation and government services are the equivalent measure of the strong looking after the weak. Taxation and government is not theft. It is not even a necessary evil, it is a necessary good.

Taxation does however violate a humans individual right to use the resources he gains through effort for his own desires. Yes or no?

 

[Admiral Byng]

Who gave you the right, or any other person, to decide how much other people should give to charity?

Huh? I'm not claiming rights, just reflecting on human nature. Charity would have to be one of the most volatile components of discretionary spending. As soon as time get tough, giving to charity would be the first and most easily justifiable expenditure to cut back on. For people that have fallen on hard times, or need special assistance I'd rather a guaranteed social welfare safety net than leaving them to the fickle nature of charity, which may or may not be there for them when they need it.

 

[Admiral Byng]

Taxation does however violate a humans individual right to use the resources he gains through effort for his own desires. Yes or no?

Does this right even exist?

Is there not an unwritten social contract that paying tax is the price you pay for living in a civilised society?

 

[mantis]

Admiral Byng.

Are you aware that charity was far more prevalent before social security and welfare?

Humans like to help, yes, But why do governments need to do it? Governments aren't people.

If a large proportion of your taxes were returned to you, and you had more money do you accept that more people would help the poor? Would you?

Do you accept that if this happened, that the welfare trap, of people being reliant on government would stop and those same people would have more incentive to get a job, and be successful?

I don't give to the poor, because I don't feel I need to, since they are already on welfare from the government. I'd contribute to them through my own volition if I was getting taxed less. I think lots of people would.

No you wouldn't.

 

[skilts]

Huh? I'm not claiming rights, just reflecting on human nature. Charity would have to be one of the most volatile components of discretionary spending. As soon as time get tough, giving to charity would be the first and most easily justifiable expenditure to cut back on. For people that have fallen on hard times, or need special assistance I'd rather a guaranteed social welfare safety net than leaving them to the fickle nature of charity, which may or may not be there for them when they need it.

At my stage of life, I'm in favour of people paying more taxes. Pure self-interest. No different to the OP's position.

 

[Seeds]

Huh? I'm not claiming rights, just reflecting on human nature. Charity would have to be one of the most volatile components of discretionary spending. As soon as time get tough, giving to charity would be the first and most easily justifiable expenditure to cut back on. For people that have fallen on hard times, or need special assistance I'd rather a guaranteed social welfare safety net than leaving them to the fickle nature of charity, which may or may not be there for them when they need it.

Yes but you're forcing other people to spend a certain amount of their income on charity. Who gives someone the right to take money off another for charity? In a perfect world charity is something that should be voluntary. The governments role is to inform the public about the need for charity and set up the most efficient distribution channels so charity can be provided. Although I do admit we don't live in a perfect world - which undoes my previous 3 sentences.

 

[Seeds]

At my stage of life, I'm in favour of people paying more taxes. Pure self-interest. No different to the OP's position.

How do you know its the OP's position? He may be from a working class family and simply views the world from a libertarian perspective which places freedom above all other wants and morals. Although he probably isn't and is just a rich boy who inherited a lot of money from daddy. But how do we know?

 

[Seeds]

Does this right even exist?

Is there not an unwritten social contract that paying tax is the price you pay for living in a civilised society?

Yes rights don't really exist in an other worldly sense and are determined by society. However if we reject this basic right, who are we to claim that any other rights should exist? A world without basic invididual rights is a scary nightmarish hell that I don't ever want to experiance.

 

[matwt73]

My personal view is that tax is a social responsibility. Schools, hospitals, roads, a social safety net are all things I am happy to fund through taxes.

I decided long ago that I would never vote for a personal tax cut, my employment is secure enough and lucrative enough that I am reasonably comfortable. I am happy to give a proportion of my income to support the society I live in.

 

[skilts]

How do you know its the OP's position? He may be from a working class family and simply views the world from a libertarian perspective which places freedom above all other wants and morals. Although he probably isn't and is just a rich boy who inherited a lot of money from daddy. But how do we know?

I have considerable exposure to the OP's views over many years. Since his annual 'Essendon Premiership team of 2000 were the best ever' thread has fallen onto disrepair, due to lack of interest, it has all been downhill for him, which is quite an achievement.

 

[Seeds]

I have considerable exposure to the OP's views over many years. Since his annual 'Essendon Premiership team of 2000 were the best ever' has fallen onto disrepair, through lack of interest, it has all been downhill for him, which is quite an achievement.

Well carry on then.