Is Taxation Theft?

Discussion in 'Debates & Contests' started by Sonofodin, Nov 2, 2011.

  1. Kramer

    Kramer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Thank you, nonetheless, I did not need your assistance. Your hypothetical was superfluous, condescending and plain old wrong.
     
  2. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63




    *shrug* I don't think so. It truly is an example of theft which "pay(s) for services which people may be able to avail themselves of." It therefore truly demonstrates that "pay(ing) for services which people may be able to avail themselves of" does not make something "not theft."

    The example might be inconvenient for you... but if it's wrong you have yet to show me the error.

    Anyway: you're welcome.
     
  3. Kramer

    Kramer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Next time you consider how society benefits from the turd that flows down the sewage system, the criminal that is tried by the judicial system or an armed force that protects a country so it's citizens can stand around a decry the tax system that pays for such services as thievery then perhaps you will realize that society as a whole takes advantage of the tax scheme whether actively or passively. As such it is not a theft but a payment for such services.
     
  4. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63




    I don't understand your comparison between excrement and a soldier. Seems rather insulting and the analogy doesn't seem to demonstrate anything.

    You are also going off topic again, it seems you are now suggesting that folks who provide value cannot be thieves. Gangsters who keep the peace in a neighborhood but break into your home at night to collect payment for their services are thieves.

    It's not the providing of service that makes taxes different than theft. The difference is that taxation is allowed by law.
     
  5. Kramer

    Kramer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    No I was clear: taxes pay for services. It appears you just want to win some internet argument at all costs, including the integrity of your own argument...:winner:

    Your assertion simply does not makes sense.

    Try living in a place that has no taxation I am sure you will be back in the US in no time.

    The US Constitution speaks authorizes and even directs it. "Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:

    The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises."


    "In Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad, 240 U.S. 1 (1916), the Supreme Court ruled that "the federal income tax statute does not violate the Fifth Amendment's prohibition against the government taking property without due process of law;"
     
  6. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63




    None of which has anything to do with the definition of those two words.
     
  7. Kramer

    Kramer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    What I have cited once again clearly establishes the right/lawfulness of taxation. Therefore taxation is not theft.

    Kindly cite a source or two when you wish to rebut my presumption, it is very tedious and boring discussing this in your vacuum of unsubstantiated and erroneous opinion.
     
  8. Object227

    Object227 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    3,950
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Citing the Constitution as the source of the right to tax begs the question: Where does the Constitution derive this right from?
     
  9. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Using an example of theft in an attempt to describe taxation is disingenuous

    everyone can see the bias
     
  10. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,617
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Government and laws, including the constitution, derive rightful power from the people of which they govern.
    That is my belief, and it is held by a great many others.

    Ultimately, one can say that rights do not exist outside of agreements between humans.
    If such rights were to exist though, where would they come from? I believe the only other option would be God.

    -Meta
     
  11. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63




    My assertion was not describing taxation. It was describing theft. My statement was a genuine attempt to show that the criteria Kramer proposed for proving something cannot be theft ("Taxation is not theft in so far as it is a means to pay for services which people may be able to avail themselves of") was insufficient. It's called a counter example.

    I posted the definition of taxation on page 3, where I clearly stated that taxation is "not literally theft because our laws allow it to happen."

    Please read my posts before responding to them.
     
  12. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    that is circular logic, those posts referenced describe theft OR describe taxation

    the example used to create the bias was one of theft not of taxation, to clearly establish the difference with taxation and theft an example of TAXATION must be used as the question relates to "is taxation theft"? not "is theft taxation"?
     
  13. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63



    My post wasn't answering that question (although I had answered it in a previous post). The post you are taking issue with was my response to Kramer's assertion that something cannot be theft if it provides a service that people may avail themselves of.

    That assertion is relevant to the topic and can be disproved without reference to taxation. Which is what I did.

    Please read my posts before responding to them.
     
  14. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    exactly that is disingenuous taxation cannot be theft even if it is used to provide a service that they may avail themselves of

    in other words just because someone can provide for their own needs and doesn't need help from the government that does not mean they are victims of theft with taxation as they choose to deny assistance and provide those services for themselves
     
  15. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63




    Sixty-five words without a single capitalization, punctuation mark, or hint that you actually read anything to which you are responding. If I didn't recognize some of the words in your post as being extracted from my own, I would believe you using a random word generator to build your posts.
     
  16. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One more try.

    It was saying that if someone denies themselves services from the government that is made available through taxation, they are not justified in making the claim that they are victims of theft because they choose to provide those services for themselves at an extra expense.

    That is why that post was disingenuous as it was attempting to claim it was theft when someone pays taxes for services which they can avail themselves of.
     
  17. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It didn't make that claim.

    Please read my posts before responding to them.
     
  18. Thinker

    Thinker New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    761
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Taxation is not theft, its more like a protection fee from the Mafia.
     
  19. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    agreed it attempted to make the claim
     
  20. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,617
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What do mafia protect you from?
    They claim to be the solution to the problem, when it is they who are the problem.
    If the mafia were to simply go away, you would only be better off for it.

    The government may ask you to pay for protection,
    but what is it that the government primarily protects you from?
    What would you face, if the government were to cease to exist?

    Or do you mean that in the same way that BleedingHeadKen meant it?????

    -Meta
     
  21. Thinker

    Thinker New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    761
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Other countries, economic downfall, general *hit that since we have a government mafia we dont even think about.
     
  22. Taxpayer

    Taxpayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,728
    Likes Received:
    207
    Trophy Points:
    63





    I attempted to make the claim? You are stating I wanted to say something other than what I actually said? And you are criticizing me for what you imagine I wanted to say instead? Even though you recognize I did not say it?

    I'm done. You are already arguing with the voices in your head rather that with me -- there is no need for me to be involved in this discussion.
     
  23. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    in the posts below there were two attempts to make the claim that taxation is theft, they both failed but nonetheless anyone can see what their intent was and that is what was disingenuous

    legality constitutes the differences between taxation and theft, just because someone can avail themselves of services provided by taxation does not mean they are victims of theft and so on........

    the one below shows circular logic

     
  24. Kramer

    Kramer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    You took my example totally out of context and attempted to perform an intellectual "beat-down" in this discussion by trying to bring the example of theft and your persistence in trying legitimatize that woefully erroneous tactic.

    The fact that The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution* commands that Article 1 section 8 of the Constitution to be recognized by the judiciary clearly established such as a matter of law. There was no reason to reinvent the wheel. Further, there was no reason to introduce the legality of taxation as that was already suggested by you in your previous post. Therefore, I provided a reason to be expanded upon should it have been necessary. Such was not as you suggest the sole "criteria Kramer proposed for proving something cannot be theft".

    I treated you and your thoughts with respect, patience and tolerance in return you specifically informed me you wanted to "to help [me] understand [my] error". I found your position to be quite demeaning and I informed you that, "your hypothetical was superfluous, condescending and plain old wrong."

    I provided you with my reasoning and left this discussion. Kindly do not mention me again in this thread unless it is to show a true error or reliance on my posts rather than another attempt to characterize me or my posts in a negative light to validate your failure to give credibility to your example and your attitude in this thread.

    Thank you

    Kramer

    ________________________________________________________________

    *Article VI: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.
     
  25. nomoreneocons

    nomoreneocons New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You all are acting like this is a black and white situation when it's not. Government operates in a gray area called "color or law".

    Black's Law Dictionary 4th Edition

    Tax, v. A precuniary burden laid upon individuals or property to support the government, and is a payment exacted by legislative authority.


    Exaction. The wrongful act of an officer or other person in compelling payment of a fee or reward for his services, under color of his official authority, where no payment was due.

    Between "extortion" and "exaction" there is this difference: that in the former case the officer extorts more than his due, when something is due to him; in the latter, he exacts what is not due, when there is nothing due to him. Co.Litt. 368.
     

Share This Page