Topic: Is taxation theft? - page 41. (Read 75960 times)

THAT IS WHERE THE ANSWER LIES!

The problem is in fact what you've lived through and what USSR knew has never been communism. Yeah we called that communism but it was not. It was a simple and plain oligarchy with a group of people having all the powers.

But you'll tell me, it can only become this. Socialism and communism can only lead to that as the state will take more and more and "redistribute"... But only a few people will decide how it is redistributed!

WELL NO!
There is a solution now! Direct democracy.
Imagine this: a country with high taxation where the people rather than elected a king for a few years who will decide everything, people actually vote directly the laws and the budget.
Then there is no politbyro as you say. Because we all give and all decide equally.

That can sounds as an utopia but... Technologically it's fairly easy to do. What is really opposing that?

You make great comparison with communism - Ive lived through it.

You know where that lead to? Very, very small group of people (politbyro, but you can call them papacy aswell), who knew each other held responsibility for redistribution of wealth (social justice, but could be called salvation) in the name of the state (god). It is called democratic centralism and is still practiced by Peoples republic of China.

These men were very close to historical definition of demi gods. Tasked to administer collective means of production and development, since private property was not really an option. At different time periods taking or protecting lives seemingly at whim.

Democracy, that westerners taky for granted is quite fragile thing, tied intimately to the relationship between means of production and its owners. Take common men out of this equation and their role in the political system will diminish aswell. You are right, you would be probadly well fed and clothed in such system (as it will be obligation of upper class in such social contract), however ultimately you would lead a life of pet in a nice cage.

I am not forcing this view on you, just sharing my experience and perhaps hoping it will make you think.

No, taxation is not theft.

Technically it is extortion.

Theft is the forced taking. They do not take it forcefully. They threaten you with the use of force unless you hand them your money. Which is extortion.

Ah ok that's a good point.
We agree that we should have more power on how they handle our money.
Best would probably be to simply have a direct democracy. Then taxes would really earn their legitimity.

Lol, massive debt I agree on that one even though it's easily explanable by both the euro and the young population, but third word security? Seriously? xD
I... am. Not all of course but a good part of my profit goes in taxes, that's normal and fair, even though I'd love to be able to control more where the money goes that's for sure.
And what do we do when people who earn lots of money refuse to help?

The problem here you see is the fact that state invest in people.
I'll take my own example:
I'm from a rather poor family (not desperate but not middle class either) and I've made top notch scientific studies and am now an engineer who earns more in a month than both his parents combined. The fact is that yeah sure I became like this thanks to hard working, years of studies and my own skills. But not only.
I should not forget that I was able to do all this also because education is not only free but you're also helped by the state which pays you an appartment and food when you study and you're from a poor family. I should not forget that when my mother in law had a cancer, state paid for her cure during the whole year and paid here a part of her salary.

Sure hardworking is important and goodwill is better. But now suppose we "let the choice" to people as you say, and I chose to refuse to pay because I don't see the support the State gave me but I only see my own work and my years of struggle and I decide that people should just "work more". Then the virtuous circle is broken :/

But the community government is not using the money in the best way. How smart are they? Do they make $millions in investing? Why should they take MY money for things I don't want? I would rather buy what I want, and donate to charities of my choice for community improvement that I want.

Taxation is being done to improve the communities in different aspects, so taxation is not theft its just the people who is handling everything in taxation is the one to blame, if taxation was used in right way then you will be much pleased that there is a taxation thing.

Living in nature IS living in society a lot of the time. People have little choice offered to them to live without Government. This means that it is Government that is harming the people through taxes. But they call it benefiting the people.

"We will screw the heck out of you, and steal your property and labor in the form of taxes, for you, for your own good." All Government wants is a bunch of slaves.

The Jones Plantation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vb8Rj5xkDPk

You are not following the argument.

1) A person is not free to "live in nature". Unless you go to the middle of the desert, or buy a boat and sail to antarctica, you will face some interference from governments.

2) Very few people want to completely abolish all services. The issue is not "all services vs no services", the issue is why should we spend $5 trillion http://www.militarytimes.com/articles/war-costs-report-brown-university or $14,000 for every man, woman and child, to invade a country whose dictator we installed, only to make the region less stable anyway. The average household in America is about 3 people, roughly $35,000 to $40,000 per household that was worse than wasted, it actually did harm.

3) One of the foundations of America specifically, if you research its origins, is the importance of the consent of the governed. Today America is not a political entity that governs a population, it is an assemblage of law enforcement entities that incentivize their employees to create criminals, to turn citizens into law breakers by adjusting laws to increase the number of criminals. Taxes are an excellent example.

you are free to leave your country or to go live in nature, but if you want the shared benefits of a modern society, then you have to contribute in the form of taxes to upkeep this society.

Where is the consent in taxation? It is similar to rape. The government decides the tax rates, and the citizens have to pay. It doesn't matter whether they want to pay or not.

Coerced consent is not really consent. Governments use force and threats now instead of the will or consent of the governed. Like Bill Cosby with his romances, there are very few complaints but calling it consent is a stretch.

Taxation is not theft for the same reason sex is not always rape, there is consent.

I'm with you dude.  Especially with the type of government our current taxes fund.  If the "state" was run by benevolent scientists and innovators...maybe I'd voluntarily contribute...but current politicians...no bueno

I think my buddy Jacques Ellul...a french sociologist, had it right..."There are no political solutions, only technological ones; the rest is propaganda."

Interesting.

There is a human component to build the robot and program it to function in a certain way.  But the human component is decreasing.  You already have robots that make robots, programmed by human.  But AI will likely be here this century, which would mean there doesn't need to be any human input at all.  You don't need to pay robots, they don't need breaks or holidays...so they generate value that can either go to the owners (like in our current economic system), or to be for the benefit of civilization, or a combination of both.

I don't insist on that notion of obligation, but I feel like humanity will likely move in that direction.  The old and present model of being paid money for hours of human labour...I feel will need to change with automation.  Think of taxi drivers and alternative paid transportation like uber...imagine how it will be affected by driverless cars with autopilot and gps.  There are many other industries that will get affected similarly and those jobs will go away over time.  It's even in the best interest of rich people, to have a middle class.  If it's only super rich and poor, then it can become unsafe for a rich person.

Look at Elon Musk for example...he is voluntarily trying to make a positive impact on the environment through sustainable energy (solar), battery storage and electric cars.  I think there will be more people that take that model of work, where they are super smart, understand how to acquire huge resources, and the use those resources to innovate technology that will help humanity as a whole, even though it is for profit...the impact is positive.

But in terms of what will humanity do in return for having their basic needs provided...I'm not sure.  Society would be very different if the extreme struggle associated with fulfilling basic needs was completely removed.  I think people would be two ways to go.  The lazy people can just chill, and be content.  And others would follow their passions, which may result in some type of mastery and contribution back to society.  Personally, if that was the way society was at the moment, and my basic needs were taken care of, I would follow my passions and dedicate myself to get as good as I could possibly get.  And maybe if I get good enough, I can produce a good or service that people would enjoy.  Actually sounds like a communist approach...but a very technologically advanced execution lol.

You make a valid point with ever increasing population being essentially fed by ever decreasing group of people.

However, keep in mind, that the actual work is not done by robots. But by those behind them. Capital holders (owners), technicians, engineers etc... robots are merely muscles.

If you insists on the notion - very noble notion, that this small group is obliged to feed the inactive rest, how are you going to compensate those pillars of humanity? Lets cut the BS and talk actual bussiness. What will the rest of humanity gives in return for being caretaken by minority of dedicated specialists and share holders slaving away for its welfare?

You cant offer them immortal salvation, only faith in God can do that. So what then?

short answer YES long answer YESSSSSS

FREEYOURWALLET from taxation.   

I completely agree with you.  When the military industrial complex was starting out, Eisenhower warned about the situation we're in today, in 1961.  Can't spend $700 billion to prepare for war and not have wars.

But going back to taxation, this type of industry is only possible with a massive budget that is funded by tax payers.  Although some tax payers are in favour and would support it, there is a significant part of the population that doesn't, but is still forced to fund it. 

What if you were one of those babies?

Possibly the same resources that are being invested into building a bomb?  I'm not going to defend that man in anyway though...and maybe the point is many would take advantage of the handouts given...which I agree with.

But with technological advancement, at the end of the day...machines or robots will be doing more and more work which will replace human labour and income.  The world will have to go in a socialist direction because of this anyways, or you will have to deal with a massive population that cannot support themselves, which will make the aggregate standard of living lower.  How happy will you be as a wealthy person getting into your ferrari when there are 10 people starving outside your front door?