I do agree that the way taxation is currently implemented can be considered an outright theft.
But taxes as such could be set in a way that they are not imposed, but rather agreed upon by a (local) community, without central government intervention. For example, all (the majority of) inhabitants of a town could agree that amount X of money is needed to fix the roads, pay the police and firemen, and other expenses which are of common interest. Those who don't agree could simply claim a piece of land somewhere outside of that town and grow/sell their own food, take care of their personal safety, etc without using the town's services. Schools would be paid only by people who actually have children (functioning as cooperatives), and there would be absolutely no need for a bureaucratic monster of pea-counters, regulators, paper movers, etc.
Unless a country closes its borders and tries to prevent people from leaving, taxes pretty much
are voluntary, strictly speaking. Even if some people want to "opt out of the system", most people have their whole lives (and their children's lives) set up in such a way that they can't leave without massive upheaval (quit job, sell house/break lease, sell 50k different things, stop 20 different service contracts, notify bank+school+post office, scout out a new place to live and sign more contracts, find a new job...)
The voluntarists seem to have a (semi) legitimate point in that even if they're willing to uproot, they still can't escape because all the other countries (that are on the table) also have expensive regimes. However, as the forum's resident Anarchist 'Ktttn' shows, living tax-free does seem possible -- people are just unwilling to reduce their ecological footprint by about 1000 times. They want the
same lifestyle but without tax.
Some people would prefer to pay what is necessary to keep the common services running in order to benefit from the comfort of living in the town, and others would choose to live an autarchic life in the wild without paying a penny to anyone.
And some would refuse to pay, refuse to move,
and they would complain that they're being oppressed and tyrannised by the evil majority when tax collectors knock at the door.
My point is it shouldn't be established at a country level, but only locally. Every state should allow its citizens to live outside of urban areas and take care of their own needs without being taxed or needing to move to another country. Why should a bureaucrat in Washington decide anything about a town in Idaho, for example? Unfortunately, AFAIK this model just doesn't exist.
And to your second point, dealing with people who want to live in the system and don't want to contribute is as simple as kicking them out until they either pay up or establish themselves outside of the system.
