Print

[jbs49238]

I'm not talking about systems.  I'm talking about an ethical principle. 

If I came to your house and washed your car without your permission then threatened you with a gun when you refused to pay the $100 I demanded, I think you would recognize the immorality of the situation.  Why then can you not recognize it when the people doing the demanding call themselves government? 

whoa there.  you just contradicted yourself.  you cannot both claim the right to exchange freely and then give a giant exclusion.  that's like saying you have the right to free speech as long as you don't say this list of words and you pay a small fee for every sentence. 

do you or do you not believe that we have the right to exchange freely (without any interference from a 3rd party)? 

There is no contradiction there at all.  You can feel free to exchange with whoever you wish, you just have to know who you are dealing with.

Hey drug dealers, gun runners, and other awsome folks do it everyday JL... make millions... government no where in those transactions, unless of course they transact with the wrong person.

[ussoccer26]

I'm not talking about systems.  I'm talking about an ethical principle. 

If I came to your house and washed your car without your permission then threatened you with a gun when you refused to pay the $100 I demanded, I think you would recognize the immorality of the situation.  Why then can you not recognize it when the people doing the demanding call themselves government? 

JL

I understand where you are coming from, on all levels. The only problem is how would you propose making a civilization with this high of living standards? The idea of extracting wealth forcibly in the name of society is certainly medieval but at this point in history there is no better alternative. This is the best we have right now, which is why it's widely accepted.

[jbs49238]

are you trying to make an argument, or are you agreeing with me? 

wait a minute.  are you one of the people who, when dragged to the logical conclusion of your claims, had to say that rape was ok in some situations or that there is no truth?

Nope not agreeing, just putting the roadmap out for all to see where you are going.

And no, rape is always wrong.

I see you have made that sharp left turn towards your tail again... and so begins another trip around the circle.

[JL]

so you acknowledge that it's immoral, but you support it because you can't think of a better plan?

JL

I understand where you are coming from, on all levels. The only problem is how would you propose making a civilization with this high of living standards? The idea of extracting wealth forcibly in the name of society is certainly medieval but at this point in history there is no better alternative. This is the best we have right now, which is why it's widely accepted.

[jbs49238]

JL

I understand where you are coming from, on all levels. The only problem is how would you propose making a civilization with this high of living standards? The idea of extracting wealth forcibly in the name of society is certainly medieval but at this point in history there is no better alternative. This is the best we have right now, which is why it's widely accepted.

Balderdash... there are millions.. hell BILLIONS of folks that would give every dime needed to keep society functioning AS IS if not better.  Just gotta get gummit out of the way so the wealthy can do things on THEIR own terms.  Oh wait you though JL's world would be fair and equal?  Not a chance... sheer tyranny and oppression by the wealthy (infinately worse than under this system).

[JL]

I don't think you understand what it means to have a right to something.  I'm asking you if you believe humans have a right to exchange freely.  In other words to think that we should be able to buy and sell with each other without the threat of interference from a 3rd party? 

you keep saying you do believe that, but then condoning interference by a 3rd party (i.e. taxation by the government).  So which is it?  do you or do you not believe we are free to exchange without threat of interference by a 3rd party? 

There is no contradiction there at all.  You can feel free to exchange with whoever you wish, you just have to know who you are dealing with.

Hey drug dealers, gun runners, and other awsome folks do it everyday JL... make millions... government no where in those transactions, unless of course they transact with the wrong person.

[ussoccer26]

so you acknowledge that it's immoral, but you support it because you can't think of a better plan?

Like I said. It's the best we have. It's like comparing Greek democracy and Jeffersonian democracy. There is nothing wrong with questioning what we have now but unless you can replace it with something better and advance upon your ideas, we are pretty much stuck with the best society has to offer today.

[JL]

yikes.  that's like saying: "I know slavery is wrong, but how else would cotton be picked, and where would all the freed slaves go?  It would be chaos.  I can't think of a better way right now, so I'm going to support slavery." 

That's what many people did back them.  Thankfully there were people who opposed it based moral principle rather than pragmatics. 

I'm not discussing specific solutions.  I just want people to acknowledge that taxation, at its very core is immoral.  It seems you agree, but you don't want to admit it because you can't think of a better solution on your own.

Like I said. It's the best we have. It's like comparing Greek democracy and Jeffersonian democracy. There is nothing wrong with questioning what we have now but unless you can replace it with something better and advance upon your ideas, we are pretty much stuck with the best society has to offer today.

[ussoccer26]

Balderdash... there are millions.. hell BILLIONS of folks that would give every dime needed to keep society functioning AS IS if not better.  Just gotta get gummit out of the way so the wealthy can do things on THEIR own terms.  Oh wait you though JL's world would be fair and equal?  Not a chance... sheer tyranny and oppression by the wealthy (infinately worse than under this system).

What makes you think this world is fair and equal? The wealthy already do things on their terms. Who do you think runs congress? Who do you think controls the White House? The rich pass laws to increase their own wealth and they bailout their own with our money.

[jbs49238]

I don't think you understand what it means to have a right to something.  I'm asking you if you believe humans have a right to exchange freely.  In other words to think that we should be able to buy and sell with each other without the threat of interference from a 3rd party? 

you keep saying you do believe that, but then condoning interference by a 3rd party (i.e. taxation by the government).  So which is it?  do you or do you not believe we are free to exchange without threat of interference by a 3rd party? 

What part of my answer is unclear to you?

Feel free to exchange with whoever you wish, but DO NOT under any circumstance  voluntarily exchange with someone that intends to do so in accordance with US government policy ONLY TO THEN CLAIM YOU PAID TAXES IN DURESS.

Neighborhood kid does the lawn next door for $30 a week... cash exchange, no taxes involved, gummit nowhere to be found... what is your excuse for dealing with people who don't believe as you do?  Are you a hypocrite or just lazy?

[jbs49238]

What makes you think this world is fair and equal? The wealthy already do things on their terms. Who do you think runs congress? Who do you think controls the White House? The rich pass laws to increase their own wealth and they bailout their own with our money.

Who taught you everything was supposed to be fair?  The Constitution only says we were created equal... not that everything was going to fall in your favor.

When I was 8 my parents taught me life is not fair... life has been a lot less confusing for me than it has for some others I know.

[ussoccer26]

yikes.  that's like saying: "I know slavery is wrong, but how else would cotton be picked, and where would all the freed slaves go?  It would be chaos.  I can't think of a better way right now, so I'm going to support slavery." 

That's what many people did back them.  Thankfully there were people who opposed it based moral principle rather than pragmatics. 

I'm not discussing specific solutions.  I just want people to acknowledge that taxation, at its very core is immoral.  It seems you agree, but you don't want to admit it because you can't think of a better solution on your own.

Do I think taxation is wrong? Yes. Does society? No.

I accept taxation because  of what it provides, even if a major portion of it is wasted. If there was a better system, I would advocate it.

[JL]

I don't think you understand how things work in real life.  Say I wanted to start selling furniture that I made.  I just want to lease a storefront where I can exchange my furniture for money from other people.  Should I or should I not be able to do this without a 3rd party interfering? 

What part of my answer is unclear to you?

Feel free to exchange with whoever you wish, but DO NOT under any circumstance  voluntarily exchange with someone that intends to do so in accordance with US government policy ONLY TO THEN CLAIM YOU PAID TAXES IN DURESS.

Neighborhood kid does the lawn next door for $30 a week... cash exchange, no taxes involved, gummit nowhere to be found... what is your excuse for dealing with people who don't believe as you do?  Are you a hypocrite or just lazy?

[ussoccer26]

Who taught you everything was supposed to be fair?  The Constitution only says we were created equal... not that everything was going to fall in your favor.

When I was 8 my parents taught me life is not fair... life has been a lot less confusing for me than it has for some others I know.

Never said it was. I'm not going sit here and take it in the *** from the rich though, and I can tell you that is more or less said in the constitution as well.

[JL]

So you would also have accepted slavery because it provided something? 

Have you ever considered that maybe voluntary transactions are a better solution to achieving ends?  Have you ever considered that maybe all the services provided by the government could be done so through peaceful means rather than by gunpoint?  If car wash services were provided "free" from the government by taxing people, do you think you would support that?  or could you come up with a better solution?  what would that solution be?   

Do I think taxation is wrong? Yes. Does society? No.

I accept taxation because  of what it provides, even if a major portion of it is wasted. If there was a better system, I would advocate it.