Is taxation theft?

Is it theft? yes or no. I say it is robbery.

If no, then explain exactly why not.

Everybody should be able to answer the question !

idk, i think the concept of taxation is a good idea, when it goes to the actual needs of the community that pays them. so on a local level definitely. As far as the national level, i think it has gotten to the point were it is robbery. When the taxpayers money goes to wars we don't want or for redundant government agencies that sole purpose is to find ways to take away our rights, something needs to change. I also think that if you don't want to pay taxes you shouldn't have to, but you also wouldn't be able to take part in any of the Programs that taxes help fund. Sort of a opt in kinda thing, but definitely nothing mandatory.

I think that's sort of making my point in a way If it wasn't mandatory, then would it still be a tax? I don't think so.

RC wrote:I think that's sort of making my point in a way If it wasn't mandatory, then would it still be a tax? I don't think so.

well like i said, the "concept" of it. name it whatever you want, call it a " non obligatory pool of community money"

I think you can clearly see how on the national level tax money goes to waste or is used for evil purposes..

The higher up in government the more waste. Yet, on a local level their is just as much waste and corruption going on depending on the town....

Either way...If something is taken from you by force then it is robbery...so regardless of whether the money is used for good or evil, it is still robbery so it shouldn't be condoned in my opinion. But since the money is stolen by force, it will inevitability used for evil. People tend to spend their own money more wisely then they do other people's money. When politicians spend tax money, they're spending other people's money.

Any supposed service that the government provides can easily be provided on the voluntary market more efficiently and humanly.

yeah but if you don't have a tax system, then how do pay for services for the community, like roads and infrastructure?


yes, the way the tax bracket is set up, is plain robbery., they take away money from you, use it and abuse it, and they create this mega tax code library so that you can't challenge it in any way., and when they over tax you and admit it, they take forever to give you back some of your money, but if you owe them, they want it right now or else suffer the weight of the agency coming down on your bank account or property., and even when you make arrangements to pay them what they say you owe them, you have to pay interest on top of your money that they took from you to begin with., so hell yeah is a big rip off., but the question is not really whether taxation is necessary or not., the question really is, are we being taxed fairly, and are our taxes being put to the right use?

Any supposed service that the government provides can easily be provided on the voluntary market more efficiently and humanly.

Theirs nothing magical about the state and road making. Theirs no service in demand that can't be provided on the market...Government only takes over sectors or creates unneeded sectors..

Besides, government roads are not efficient. In high populated areas, the roads are usually all cracked up full of holes, horrible traffic, and hundreds of ways to get tickets. Not to mention the thousands of people that are killed on the roads every year.(imagine what everyone would say if a private company had thousands dying on their road every year). Government has no incentive to improve the situation in any way. They have no competition, its a monopoly, their revenue is obtained by force..It takes years to see any improvements. Now they want to go back to mass transportation because their roads are failing...

I'm 100% certain that if government wasn't in the way, we would have a far safer, more efficient system in one form or another.

^ ^ i don't think so crayola

if there wasn't any government involved in road building and maintenance, per say
then what you would have is private enterprise choking you to get out of your neighborhood just to get to market

but the question is not really whether taxation is necessary or not., the question really is, are we being taxed fairly, and are our taxes being put to the right use?

Ah but that's exactly the question.

I argue that not only is it NOT necessary, it is also immoral.

And if it is immoral(assuming you agree that it is robbery) then you must admit it is immoral. So unless you support something that you know is immoral, then how could you support it? You can't, unless you just admit that you're in favor of immoral behavior.

If the argument is that you know it is immoral but it is still a "necessary evil" then I would have to say that argument is bunk also.
Similar to those who would say "yes, slavery is immoral but if we free the slaves, who will pick the cotton?"..From an ethical and philosophical point of view, we are not concerned with who will pick the cotton once the slaves are free, we are only concerned about whether or not slavery is immoral or if taxation is robbery. Then we must concede that it must be abolished, completely and totally. Let the chips fall where they may !

wolfman wrote:^ ^ i don't think so crayola

if there wasn't any government involved in road building and maintenance, per say
then what you would have is private enterprise choking you to get out of your neighborhood just to get to market

Private business, you mean the ones that have to compete for your dollar instead of being allowed to throw you inside a cage if you don't pay them? Doesn't sound like choking to me.

And who know's how it would work.. but I know it'll be better then when government has a monopoly..

hell yeah i'm the best at being immoral

j/f NOT! lol

ey but hold up a minute, i never said anything about it being immoral., immoral falls under a whole different categoty in my book., just because something set in place by an agreement of sorts, doesn't necessarily make it evil or immoral., it is the mis-use of it that becomes the question at hand., whether this taxation serves a purpose or is unnecessary, that was the question., but if you want to think of "immorality," well then, you're getting into the spiritual realm.

So theft/robbery, can it be justified? Is it not immoral?

Is it perfectly justified to rob my neighbor to feed my family if I have no money?

i dont think privatizing everything would work out.

RC wrote:So theft/robbery, can it be justified? Is it not immoral?

Is it perfectly justified to rob my neighbor to feed my family if I have no money?

just what is immorality?

is it sin?

is it biblical?

is it a matter of perception?

is it like the ying and the yang?
an imbalance if not in balance?

and what is right?

what is wrong?

are we getting into that type of defining immorality?

or are we still talking about the needs of a society in this here day and age?

and what works to the best of their advantage?

DontxTrip wrote:i dont think privatizing everything would work out.

If it moves, privatize it. If doesn't move, privatize it!

"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public."
- Adam Smith

DontxTrip wrote:"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public."
- Adam Smith

Yea. except businesses conspiring against the public are never successful until they have a central state they can bribe in their favor...

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public."
- Adam Smith

Yea. except businesses conspiring against the public are never successful until they have a central state they can bribe in their favor...

there wouldnt be a need to bribe if the central state wasnt there, there would be no one to bribe either

DontxTrip wrote:

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public."
- Adam Smith

Yea. except businesses conspiring against the public are never successful until they have a central state they can bribe in their favor...

there wouldnt be a need to bribe if the central state wasnt there, there would be no one to bribe either

That's the good thing. No central gang of thugs to bribe. Now, theirs a level playing field. No regulations to stop small competitors..No special taxes on certain businesses over others....No special govt contracts...etc etc. Then the consumer becomes boss.

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public."
- Adam Smith

Yea. except businesses conspiring against the public are never successful until they have a central state they can bribe in their favor...

there wouldnt be a need to bribe if the central state wasnt there, there would be no one to bribe either

That's the good thing. No central gang of thugs to bribe. Now, theirs a level playing field. No regulations to stop small competitors..No special taxes on certain businesses over others....No special govt contracts...etc etc. Then the consumer becomes boss.

and nothing to stop the capitalist businessmen from extortion, hoarding, and general corruption. in a sense the private companies would become a form of government

DontxTrip wrote:

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public."
- Adam Smith

Yea. except businesses conspiring against the public are never successful until they have a central state they can bribe in their favor...

there wouldnt be a need to bribe if the central state wasnt there, there would be no one to bribe either

That's the good thing. No central gang of thugs to bribe. Now, theirs a level playing field. No regulations to stop small competitors..No special taxes on certain businesses over others....No special govt contracts...etc etc. Then the consumer becomes boss.

and nothing to stop the capitalist businessmen from extortion, hoarding, and general corruption. in a sense the private companies would become a form of government

All myths. It doesn't quit work that way. Not if freedom is allowed.

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public."
- Adam Smith

Yea. except businesses conspiring against the public are never successful until they have a central state they can bribe in their favor...

there wouldnt be a need to bribe if the central state wasnt there, there would be no one to bribe either

That's the good thing. No central gang of thugs to bribe. Now, theirs a level playing field. No regulations to stop small competitors..No special taxes on certain businesses over others....No special govt contracts...etc etc. Then the consumer becomes boss.

and nothing to stop the capitalist businessmen from extortion, hoarding, and general corruption. in a sense the private companies would become a form of government

All myths. It doesn't quit work that way. Not if freedom is allowed.

Who "Allows" freedom?

DontxTrip wrote:

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:

RC wrote:

DontxTrip wrote:"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public."
- Adam Smith

Yea. except businesses conspiring against the public are never successful until they have a central state they can bribe in their favor...

there wouldnt be a need to bribe if the central state wasnt there, there would be no one to bribe either

That's the good thing. No central gang of thugs to bribe. Now, theirs a level playing field. No regulations to stop small competitors..No special taxes on certain businesses over others....No special govt contracts...etc etc. Then the consumer becomes boss.

and nothing to stop the capitalist businessmen from extortion, hoarding, and general corruption. in a sense the private companies would become a form of government

All myths. It doesn't quit work that way. Not if freedom is allowed.

Who "Allows" freedom?

People in society...The people in society have to believe in freedom in order for it to be "allowed".

If as a majority we fear and distrust freedom, then we will continue with politics, voting, taxation.