I was making the point that you don't like being insulted but in the next breath called principled posters fanatics, jokesters or terrorists.And, as I’ve pointed out repeatedly, if no tax is theft, then you must say there is no theft in 100% taxation by a military junta. Your insistence on absolutism cuts both ways.
You might have a point if I actually had made that absolutist argument. However, just the opposite is true: I keep repeating that “all tax is theft†is just as absurd as “no tax is theft.†It is the non-libertarian who keeps insisting that we settle on only one absolute or the other.
Frankly, I’d be ecstatic if there were such a candidate. I’ve said in other threads that we ought to go as far as possible. If the ideal isn’t achievable – and it probably isn’t – that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t move in that direction. Refusing all but perfect movement would be kind of like never exercising because you’ll never be the top Iron Man competitor in the world.
Spare me.
The fact that people can move in and out of the payer and payee categories doesn't make welfare a system in which all pay and all benefit. It remains a system in which some pay and others receive.
Isn't it funny that the proponents of welfare, when all their arguments are exhausted, always seem to resort to the false dilemma that it's either government help or starvation ... that there are no other solutions?
Mark Tyson's parting shot is false, yet hilarious, on two counts:
Yes. Voluntary contributions would be a moral way of funding a military force. Why?
That is not name calling.
It is harshly frank, but it is not name calling. Note that you couldn't find the actual name that I allegedly called someone.
What working citizens are exempt from income taxes? In any event, even if you were correct that military spending meets the corollary to my definition of theft, that fact would not change that welfare is theft. And besides, you know very well that defense and welfare work in entirely different ways -- defense spending is not a system designed to take money from one person and give it to someone else. Welfare does and thus is theft.
My original comment was not addressed to a specific "name" by you or limited strictly to this thread.
Everyone that makes less money than the minimum taxable amount is exempt from income tax! I believe the current figure is that approximately 40% of tax filers pay NO income tax. In fact, every dollar that you or I make under that limit is exempt from taxation. Spare me. I never said defense isn't theft because all citizens get money from it. I said all citizen benefit.
Uh, so can I. What's your point?
webster's dictionary
It would seem that no taxes are theft by this definition. Even paying 100% to a tyrant literally at gun point is not theft if the tryant makes the law. Maybe that would not apply because the definition was meant to be used in PvP not person vs government.
webster's says
I think any tax an individual does not agree to pay is robbery. Anyone want to start debating when robbery is justified? Does anyone deny that the government uses force or intimidation?
I'll decide if I benefit from the actions of the U.S. military. I don't. They aren't anywhere in sight; they are mostly overseas stirring up trouble.
