Topic: Is taxation theft? - page 59. (Read 76002 times)

Have to agree 100% with you. In my country, most of the factory workers are protected by the unions. This has caused enormous hardship to the business owners. They are forced to employ unskilled people at exorbitant rates. As a result, a lot of these factories are closing down now. But the unions still demand 12-months or 24-months salary as severance benefit.

Taking money from people without their consent is theft. Casting a vote among a group of people to take away money from other people is also theft.

Taking away a person's car without his consent, and giving him something back (a bike) is also theft, and that's the way most governments work today.

Even taking away someone's car and giving him a better car, without his consent, could also be considered theft.

"Consent" is the key word here. Statists can argue all they want about how taxes are important for society, public roads, education, etc. But tax is really just a less ugly word for theft. Make your case about it as a necessary evil but don't try to fool anyone about what actually it really is: theft pure and simple.

Are those people really smart? Have they really figured out how to fix people so they live in health for a thousand years? Are they just hiding it because they don't believe in a continuing Pangea-like expansion of Earth?

Well you're definitely right in that for the technological singularity to happen we will have had to have solved intelligence. A super intelligence wouldn't necessarily spell the end of humanity, but who knows what could happen. Even if it would bring a certain destruction, it won't stop people from pursuing it. Mankind has never not scientifically progressed because it seemed scary. This is why there are committees and A.I. ethics boards being formed, because a lot of really smart people and the worlds largest companies are working on this idea of A.I. that would result in unfathomable changes to human civilization. It sounds like science fiction but it's not too unfathomable to think that one day we may figure it out.

Technological singularity would bring about certain destruction. Here is why in a very simple statement. The greater the complexity, the harder it is to maintain it.

All of our technology today is based on the complex "technology" already found in the universe. Remember, the universe has life. We can't make life at all, but the universe seems to make it daily in abundance. The universe has way more technology in it that we do.

For technological singularity to work, robots or AI would have to start to track multitudes of electrons, protons, neutrons, energy waves, etc., way beyond anything we can even dream of today. Scientists are barely able to manipulate genes, today. In super-intelligence of artificial AI, the AI would need to be able to track the dramatically tinier particles and waves, each individually, and with certainty.

Forget it.



Consider Marc Stevens and No State Project at http://marcstevens.net/. The whole point that Marc is promoting is, if you need something from Government or anyone else, buy it. Don't get taxed for it. Marc is having success educating people.

The only (BIG) difference between Mark and Karl Lentz is, Mark busts them right in the chops with their own court processes, while Karl uses court processes that beat them every time because those processes aren't theirs.

The problem with Marc's stuff is, they can beat him every time if they really want to. They don't, because if they did, we would see through their game and start looking at Karl's stuff. Then their number would be up, and Government would collapse to a thousandth of its current size, and they wouldn't be able to rip the people off any longer.

I am not sure if you are joking here ,but this sounds like a very poor argument.


No the upside is that people can get food for cheap, and dont have to starve, and the downside is potential cancer from the chemicals in the food.

But even then, the chemicals are less dangerous than a parasite infection, which in the middle ages was always deadly.

And even if its not deadly, you need to take antibiotics for it, which is again, more chemicals.


So either way you will get getting chemicals, the question is, which path is less dangerous.

You're not thinking this thing through.

There is enough modern technology so that we can do the organic food thing without the downsides that the Middle Ages or anyone else had. The modern problem is the poisons that are being used for modern problem. Even though the food is healthier, the modern poisons are weakening us more than the benefits of modern farming are doing us good.

Consider. Organic could safely mean healthy vegetarian. Why? If there were no modern chemicals poisoning us any longer, our immune systems would be strong enough to easily fight off worm and parasite problems. This means that we would be getting enough protein from the worms and parasites to not need meat any longer. We would be healthier than ever.

No because organic food doesnt always mean it's healthy. It can have worms or parasites in them.

You need modern technology, you just have to make it very very safe and with no downsides. GMO is probably not safe.


I suppose we should resurrect Marx and ask him?


But really, all wages are fair. If a worker is incompetent to negotiate (or doesnt have a union which negotiates on his behalf), then he deserves exactly the wage he gets.


If he gets paid 1$/hour, then he has 2 options:  find a better job or negotiate with your boss for a better salary.


But if people are so stupid to not do this, then they deserve the wage they get.

I don't mind taxes if they are put to good use.  One thing I despise about it though is taxing the richer people more. As said before, you cannot make the poor richer by making the rich poorer.  Continuing the good uses, my township doesn't seem to make good use of the money.  They take the easy way out of things, but dump more money in the meantime.  Something as simple as the traffic lights are pulling millions of dollars a year just for that.  And they do it as inefficiently as possible for all the money they put in, and it shows because the lights are absolutely horrible. 

Ever heard of the technological singularity? I think that one day it'll probably happen.

To get on topic though, I don't think proper taxation is theft. I think there should be a small price to pay if you wish to live in a society in which everyone contributes to in order to make it better.

That's only half of it.
You have to pay:
- a property tax, just for owning it. It's nothing but theft IMO.
- capital gains tax (when you keep your money in a bank it's deducted automatically)
- excise on certain goods like alcohol
- road tax
There are also inheritance tax, customs tax and other.

Damned! we agree on 2 things in less than a week? What's happening??

Yeah we should have a much clearer tax system!
And don't complain, in France we still have the old Nazi system --'

But they make it complicated simply so you don't understand how much you pay...
So you don't ask results with the amount you pay.

I'm for taxation, but for one which is clear, transparent and where you know what they do with your money.

Wahou great!
And how do you guarantee fair wages?
How do you define that?
Who takes care of the fact that wages must be fair?

IMO, a person should be taxed only once. But in reality, we are taxed multiple times. Take my case for example. The company for which I work, has to pay a corporate tax. I need to pay income tax on my salary. And once again, I am paying VAT whenever I am purchasing something from the market.

I disagree with you dude, some of tax is for us too, how the goverment build something if not for tax. Ya but i cant say all of them is clean from corruption though

Technology allowed to produce more products in the same area. This should significantly increase the amount of taxes collected and to provide food for more people. If not then the taxes stolen.

If you "just focus on eliminating cancer, and all the chemicals from our food, and invent better efficient organic farming, without the downsides," you will have to get rid of most of the everyday technology. Focus on eternal life without eliminating the technology.

Also, you end up paying tax over the same amount several times, in the form of capital gains tax and dividend tax. And some idiots want to increase the rate of long term capital gains tax.

Exactly, paying a fixed tax would be great, but they add taxes over taxes and you end up paying a lot more, paying 10 to 15% will be fine by me but after paying your income tax you need to pay taxes for your car, house and everything you buy or use.

I doubt people will ever live for thousands of years. All this transhumanism is just stupid.

Yes I hate humanity for all the evil humans constantly do (war, violence, lies, arrogance, ignorance) , but I dont want to give up my humanity to live in a tin can robot body.

It would be the ultimate form of slavery to live like a robot, it's not just your body will be enslaved but your mind too.

You will never experience anything good ever again, you will just do [0,1] bits, thats all that you will do. Who in their right minds wants that?


Why not just focus on eliminating cancer, and all the chemicals from our food, and invent better efficient organic farming, without the downsides.




A lot goes to politicians pockets, not just from bribes but also "legally", by siphoning or embezzling funds, either party donations or from tax funds into personal expenses.

They get free transport, free housing, free utilities, and for pretty much every other expense, from tax payer money.

Then they also have a lot of gov employees who are also living off productive people's taxes.