Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32524
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:39 |
Actually, one question...I'll post it in the Libertarian thread where it belongs since we've clogged this one up a bit.
|
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:37 |
|
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32524
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:36 |
The T wrote:
It's so difficult to be me here... I have to withstand all libertarians at once... | Now you know how I felt in the Atheist thread. I'll check out for now. I'm way behind on work, and millions of people on welfare depend on me!
|
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:27 |
thellama73 wrote:
The T wrote:
It all falls down to consent. You held the view that you haven't given your consent. i have always agree with the social contract view. You have given it.
Also, another thing: the only way to eliminate taxes is to eliminate all kinds of services altogether. If you have those services, you have to pay for them. You pay through taxes (like roads, etc). |
You can't give consent unknowingly. It goes against the definition of consent. That's why we have all these date rape cases where the girl gets super drunk and the guy is like "but she gave consent" and the judge is like "uh uh, you can't give consent if you're super drunk." If I believe that I have not given consent, I have not given consent, by definition.
Also, I am happy to pay for services that I use. I pay for the food I eat, the clothes I wear and the TV I watch. Why would eliminating taxes force me to give up these things? I would pay for roads I walked on (I don't have a car), or that were used to ship in the goods I buy. Why are taxes necessary for me to pay for these things?
|
Of course I'm talking about services provided by the government.
In a different issue, do you think consumption taxes are better? Maybe you "agree" to pay them when you agree to buy something? Or are they as bad as income taxes?
|
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:25 |
The T wrote:
It all falls down to consent. You held the view that you haven't given your consent. i have always agree with the social contract view. You have given it.
Also, another thing: the only way to eliminate taxes is to eliminate all kinds of services altogether. If you have those services, you have to pay for them. You pay through taxes (like roads, etc). |
You can't give consent unknowingly. It goes against the definition of consent. That's why we have all these date rape cases where the girl gets super drunk and the guy is like "but she gave consent" and the judge is like "uh uh, you can't give consent if you're super drunk." If I believe that I have not given consent, I have not given consent, by definition. Also, I am happy to pay for services that I use. I pay for the food I eat, the clothes I wear and the TV I watch. Why would eliminating taxes force me to give up these things? I would pay for roads I walked on (I don't have a car), or that were used to ship in the goods I buy. Why are taxes necessary for me to pay for these things?
|
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:21 |
It's so difficult to be me here... I have to withstand all libertarians at once...
|
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:16 |
It all falls down to consent. You held the view that you haven't given your consent. i have always agree with the social contract view. You have given it.
Also, another thing: the only way to eliminate taxes is to eliminate all kinds of services altogether. If you have those services, you have to pay for them. You pay through taxes (like roads, etc).
|
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:15 |
ExittheLemming wrote:
The T wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
I'm still waiting for that explanation of why taxes aren't theft. You keep saying why you think taxes are justified, but that's not the question I asked. You said they are not theft because 1) everyone does it and 2) our elected officials fail to discontinue them.
Then Rob pointed out that everyone committing a crime does not make it not a crime (to which you seemed to agree) and then you admitted that elected officials are in fact capable of committing injustice even though we voted for them. So I still have no idea where you idea that taxes are not theft comes from.
|
All property derives from mostly ill-gotten gains. Certainly in the past (and today) people acquired property and means of production by less than holy means. Taxes are only just to compensate for that.
Wealth cannot be acquired without the structure of a society. You don't acquire it by yourself. You acquire it thanks also to the structure and to other people's contributions. Society as a whole is then justified to collect a part of it in the benefit of everybody.
|
Although I wouldn't go this far re 'ill gotten gains' this is exactly what my (admittedly w**ky) little caveman story was banging on about in the Libertarian Friends thread. To make any tangible good with which you can then trade with others and create wealth, you need to use a social context (customers) and natural resources (like coal in my pathetic example) The questions the story was designed to ask was: who owns natural resources? Answer: everyone How do you compensate those people who have had their property appropriated in the production of goods? Answer (same as The T's): a tax system
Believe it or not I actually agree with Ayn Rand when she states an individual's ability, ingenuity or imagination in transforming natural resource to create goods should be rewarded with wealth (I have no problem with that) But as The T points out, those raw materials in the oceans, air and earth etc belong to the citizens of earth (dammit)
But I promise no more caveman stories (honest)
|
That's the first well reasoned argument I've ever seen you make. That's what I'm looking for, T. An actual explanation of your views, not just "GREED IS BAD, OMG!!!" That being said, I don't agree that natural resources are everyone's property. If that were the case, then I should be compensated for all the companies in China that use natural resources, not just American ones. I take it, Lemming, that you support a global tax system, rather than a series of national ones?
|
|
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Penal Colony
Status: Offline
Points: 11415
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:11 |
The T wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
I'm still waiting for that explanation of why taxes aren't theft. You keep saying why you think taxes are justified, but that's not the question I asked. You said they are not theft because 1) everyone does it and 2) our elected officials fail to discontinue them.
Then Rob pointed out that everyone committing a crime does not make it not a crime (to which you seemed to agree) and then you admitted that elected officials are in fact capable of committing injustice even though we voted for them. So I still have no idea where you idea that taxes are not theft comes from.
|
All property derives from mostly ill-gotten gains. Certainly in the past (and today) people acquired property and means of production by less than holy means. Taxes are only just to compensate for that.
Wealth cannot be acquired without the structure of a society. You don't acquire it by yourself. You acquire it thanks also to the structure and to other people's contributions. Society as a whole is then justified to collect a part of it in the benefit of everybody.
|
Although I wouldn't go this far re 'ill gotten gains' this is exactly what my (admittedly w**ky ) little caveman story was banging on about in the Libertarian Friends thread. To make any tangible good with which you can then trade with others and create wealth, you need to use a social context (customers) and natural resources (like coal in my pathetic example) The questions the story was designed to ask was: who owns natural resources? Answer: everyone How do you compensate those people who have had their property appropriated in the production of goods? Answer (same as The T's): a tax system Believe it or not I actually agree with Ayn Rand when she states an individual's ability, ingenuity or imagination in transforming natural resource to create goods should be rewarded with wealth (I have no problem with that) But as The T points out, those raw materials in the oceans, air and earth etc belong to the citizens of earth (dammit) But I promise no more caveman stories (honest)
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:08 |
The T wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
I'm still waiting for that explanation of why taxes aren't theft. You keep saying why you think taxes are justified, but that's not the question I asked. You said they are not theft because 1) everyone does it and 2) our elected officials fail to discontinue them.
Then Rob pointed out that everyone committing a crime does not make it not a crime (to which you seemed to agree) and then you admitted that elected officials are in fact capable of committing injustice even though we voted for them. So I still have no idea where you idea that taxes are not theft comes from.
|
All property derives from mostly ill-gotten gains. Certainly in the past (and today) people acquired property and means of production by less than holy means. Taxes are only just to compensate for that.
Wealth cannot be acquired without the structure of a society. You don't acquire it by yourself. You acquire it thanks also to the structure and to other people's contributions. Society as a whole is then justified to collect a part of it in the benefit of everybody.
|
Again, you are explaining why taxes are justified, not why they are not theft. All you're saying is that it's okay to steal from a thief. If that's your view, say so. Don't say "stealing from a dishonest person is not stealing."
|
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:03 |
All our differences fall on this: individualism vs collectivism. (I'm not saying one or the other is better right now).
I'll never agree with you Rob. Not on this at least. If that upsets you, fine. I know it's not me, you're upset at the government.
|
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 12:00 |
Epignosis wrote:
The T wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
I'm still waiting for that explanation of why taxes aren't theft. You keep saying why you think taxes are justified, but that's not the question I asked. You said they are not theft because 1) everyone does it and 2) our elected officials fail to discontinue them.
Then Rob pointed out that everyone committing a crime does not make it not a crime (to which you seemed to agree) and then you admitted that elected officials are in fact capable of committing injustice even though we voted for them. So I still have no idea where you idea that taxes are not theft comes from.
|
All property derives from mostly ill-gotten gains. Certainly in the past (and today) people acquired property and means of production by less than holy means. Taxes are only just to compensate for that.
Wealth cannot be acquired without the structure of a society. You don't acquire it by yourself. You acquire it thanks also to the structure and to other people's contributions. Society as a whole is then justified to collect a part of it in the benefit of everybody.
|
?
The first reason is one I have read about but I'm still getting into it. the second one I've expressed it previously and is the basis for my entire view of taxes. I don't produce wealth alone. You don't either. You get rich or wealthy or even just well-off because you live in a structure that allows you to do so. You don't generate wealth by your own breathing, in a way of saying.
Also, funny how much of our money is squandered (like bailing out big businesses). that's terrible. Awfully terrible. Again, I never said I agree with bailing out wall street. I agree with UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE through taxation if necessary, or through a different way if it was shown to me.
|
|
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32524
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 11:54 |
The T wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
I'm still waiting for that explanation of why taxes aren't theft. You keep saying why you think taxes are justified, but that's not the question I asked. You said they are not theft because 1) everyone does it and 2) our elected officials fail to discontinue them.
Then Rob pointed out that everyone committing a crime does not make it not a crime (to which you seemed to agree) and then you admitted that elected officials are in fact capable of committing injustice even though we voted for them. So I still have no idea where you idea that taxes are not theft comes from.
|
All property derives from mostly ill-gotten gains. Certainly in the past (and today) people acquired property and means of production by less than holy means. Taxes are only just to compensate for that.
Wealth cannot be acquired without the structure of a society. You don't acquire it by yourself. You acquire it thanks also to the structure and to other people's contributions. Society as a whole is then justified to collect a part of it in the benefit of everybody.
| Also, funny how much of our money is squandered (like bailing out big businesses).
|
|
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Penal Colony
Status: Offline
Points: 11415
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 11:50 |
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 11:50 |
thellama73 wrote:
I'm still waiting for that explanation of why taxes aren't theft. You keep saying why you think taxes are justified, but that's not the question I asked. You said they are not theft because 1) everyone does it and 2) our elected officials fail to discontinue them.
Then Rob pointed out that everyone committing a crime does not make it not a crime (to which you seemed to agree) and then you admitted that elected officials are in fact capable of committing injustice even though we voted for them. So I still have no idea where you idea that taxes are not theft comes from.
|
All property derives from mostly ill-gotten gains. Certainly in the past (and today) people acquired property and means of production by less than holy means. Taxes are only just to compensate for that.
Wealth cannot be acquired without the structure of a society. You don't acquire it by yourself. You acquire it thanks also to the structure and to other people's contributions. Society as a whole is then justified to collect a part of it in the benefit of everybody.
|
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 11:46 |
|
|
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007
Location: Penal Colony
Status: Offline
Points: 11415
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 11:45 |
thellama73 wrote:
ExittheLemming wrote:
^ Emigrate to a country with a more efficient government that actually insures its citizens against hardship and sickness
|
No thanks. I don't want other people to be forced to pay for any hardship or sickness that might befall me.
|
This post wasn't directed at you Thellama, just I wasn't quick enough to use ^ to point to Rob's list of things his country does that upsets him.
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 11:38 |
ExittheLemming wrote:
^ Emigrate to a country with a more efficient government that actually insures its citizens against hardship and sickness
|
No thanks. I don't want other people to be forced to pay for any hardship or sickness that might befall me.
Edited by thellama73 - September 27 2010 at 11:39
|
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32524
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 11:36 |
Taxes are not theft because everyone is paying them (when everyone is in fact not), yet if everyone robbed his neighbor, it is theft?
Social security and Medicare are not Ponzi schemes (i.e., fraud) because it isn't intentional deception?
That's some impressive redefining, right there. Kind of reminds me of how you insisted I was a murderer because I wouldn't force a doctor to save my dying child.
|
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32524
|
Posted: September 27 2010 at 11:34 |
The T wrote:
.The ad hominem part I don't get where from...
|
The T wrote:
Great
conclusion. Now you can go to tea party rallies to convince people that
liberals are for theft and slavery. Most of them will buy it, too.
|
|
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.