You seem to want more of an explanation in places that I feel that already that I have adequately explained. For example, my outlining situation 1 and situation 2 was to ensure with thread participants on this topic that we are talking about the same thing.. and some posters are trying to equate situations 1 and 2 (including yourself) that in my view should clearly and logically be understood as different... b/c the actor in situation 2 is different from the actor in situation 1 (which makes a very meaningful and material difference).
The difference does not change the situation.
My four legged animal is brown. Your four legged animal is black. My four legged animal is a dog. It does not therefor follow that your four legged animal *is not* a dog.
Theft is taking without permission. In both situations, more than adequately explained by yourself, permission is not given and taking occurs. It does not matter the why for that does not matter under the definition of theft. What it is about your situation 2 that does not fit the definition?
Thank you Richy_T for such an apt example.
Example 1:
Let's say one four legged animal is a brown dog and the other four legged animal is a black dog
Therefore both of them are dogs, and it may NOT make a difference in the situation and the two can be compared with one another.
Example 2
one four legged animal is a brown dog and another brown four legged animal is a grizzly bear (or a lion)
You are trying to suggest that example 1 and example 2 are the same, but they are NOT. In example 1, you will be closer to having similar situations unless the actual dog breed or the color matters for whatever application. Sometimes the color will matter, depending on the application, and some times the breed could matter, depending on the situation, even though both are dogs.
In example 2, you certainly have the same color and the fact that both are animals, but if the application is which one would you would trust to leave overnight as a pet to snuggle on the sofa with your 1 year old kid, then you may realize there is a material difference between the two.
The difference does matter especially when we are talking about the concept of theft and government and taxes.
I question why we seem to be caught up in arguments about definition.. what lack of meaning to this discussion... .NO?
In any event, I have NO issues with exploring various possible discussions on a broad array of topics, so long as they do NOT devolve and continually repeat into the ridiculous and silly realm.... such as continuing to assert that governments are the same as thieves b/c they make you pay taxes. I would laugh, if it were NOT causing me to cry over such need to repeat what to me seems obvious.
Asserting "Taxes are like theft because they involve taking without permission" leaves room for reasonable men to argue and come to an understanding about each others positions and can be enlightening. What is the nature of ownership, taking, permission. How strict is the definition etc.
Asserting "Taxes are not like theft because I believe taxes are not like theft" leaves nowhere to go and is the reason people are finding discussing with you frustrating.
And I can assure you that my academic credentials are sufficiently reasonable that you won't make me feel insecure about them.
YES... your academic credentials are so great that you want to continue to pursue a topic that I have NO interest in pursuing. Surely, you can answer your own questions above.. to the extent that they make any difference to my earlier points. Maybe in some kind of parallel universe you are correct, and government does equal thief? I am sure that we can find a large number of examples that either governments or government officials have acted like thieves, but so what? Those kinds of facts do NOT cause all governments to be same as thieves or taxes to be a form of thievery.
Additionally, the concept of government equaling thief may be interesting to you, and to others in this thread, and feel free to discuss that topic, without me. However, if you engage in such topic on this thread, I may chime in; however, I am inclined to think that I said as much as I need to say on the topic in order to make my point. Maybe I will think of something else later, but at the moment, I cannot think of anything further that I need to say about the topic.
