Libertariankid wrote:
Horrible response. You dont need excess taxes and government prgrams to feel mildly secure
Unimaginably, disgracefully vacuous response UNLESS you can point out where I said anything about "excess taxes and government programs" OR talked about my feelings.
Please try not to lie, challenging though that may be.
YOu said you needed superhero government to feel secure
libertariankid wrote:
YOu said you needed superhero government to feel secure
OK, so you have confirmed that you are a liar.
Anything else you'd like to share today?
How can I be a hip anarchist like you?
Well done anapaix.
Agreed
anapaix wrote:
No, taking someone's money without their permission is theft, regardless of whether or not people think it's necessary or not. People do not choose to be part of a society, hence the social contract which people so often point to is not valid.
What social contract? You neo-cons are always accusing liberals of living in a fantasy world, but you yourself live in a fantasy where everyone is nice, as if "live and let live" were the natural state of man.
It's not, except in areas where the population is so low that competition for resources is not important. In most of the world, the have-nots will take what you have and maybe kill you if nobody intervenes. It is your great fortune to live in a place where a well-organized government intervenes on your behalf and protects you. Whether you chose that is irrelevant. It's what happens and the alternative is worse, whether you admit it or not.
You can either give all your wealth to bandits, or part of it to the king. It's lucky for you that it's not your choice or you'd end up killed by bandits.
libertariankid wrote:
Social security=ponzi scheme, i wont see anything
Why wouldn't you see any? That's old rhetoric that no serious person believes anymore. As long as we mint money, it will be paid.
The looters are being dishonest about their motives. It isn't about roads, schools, or the vulnerable. If the purpose of taxes is to provide for the recipients of redistribution, why do we tax Social Security payments? It isn't about "giving," it's about the taking. If you have money, the looters want you to lose it—not for the sake of others' gain, but for the sake of your loss.
If you don't want to pay taxes to your government, enjoy being conquered by a country that you will then pay taxes to.
Yawn. Taxes are lower than they have been for decades, for the most part. Can't make it? Look in the mirror.
Bad Wigins wrote:
anapaix wrote:No, taking someone's money without their permission is theft, regardless of whether or not people think it's necessary or not. People do not choose to be part of a society, hence the social contract which people so often point to is not valid.
What social contract? You neo-cons are always accusing liberals of living in a fantasy world, but you yourself live in a fantasy where everyone is nice, as if "live and let live" were the natural state of man.
It's not, except in areas where the population is so low that competition for resources is not important. In most of the world, the have-nots will take what you have and maybe kill you if nobody intervenes. It is your great fortune to live in a place where a well-organized government intervenes on your behalf and protects you. Whether you chose that is irrelevant. It's what happens and the alternative is worse, whether you admit it or not.
You can either give all your wealth to bandits, or part of it to the king. It's lucky for you that it's not your choice or you'd end up killed by bandits.
What social contract? Good, so you admit that the social contract is not valid.
Then, if there is no social contract, what right does anyone or group of persons--whether they call themselves the mafia, the government, or just a random group of bandits--have to take your money without permission?
I'm not asking you if society is overall better or worse off if the money is taken. I'm asking from where do they take their authority to take your money? When has the citizen explicitly authorized it? If I take a million dollars from Bill gates at gun point, then 50,000$ each to 20 random homeless people, then there is no argument that I have just raised the standard of living amongst the 20 homeless people, while not affecting Bill gate's at all, because he's insanely rich and 1 mil is nothing to him. However, just because that would help other people does NOT give me the RIGHT to rob Bill gates at gun point. Regardless of how good my intentions are, I do not have the right to take his money, even if I think I will spend it better than him. It's still HIS. This is essentially what taxation is, in several ways.
People say it goes to good causes: schools, roads, and the such. But the means by which it is taken is immoral. Taxes are collected, and if you don't pay you will be arrested and thrown in a cage. If you resist arrest, police reserve the right to physically harm you and force you. If you resist even further, they reserve the right to shoot you. That's what taxation is. Now, does it come down to killing someone every time they won't pay taxes? No, 99.999% of the time it doesn't. But the use of lethal force is the bottom line and WILL be used if the other coercive/immoral means are not used. Policemen carry guns for a reason: the law is enforced at the point of a gun. The law is you have to pay your taxes. This is why taxes are immoral, as well as laws. These mechanisms of "pay or violence will be used" are the exact same extortion techniques used by the mafia.
You go on about the "haves and have-nots" and how the have nots will take from the haves. Show me a society where this doesn't happen? The have-nots always take from the haves, in one way or another. Taxation and welfare programs? Corporate subsidies? Social security? Medicare? ANY redistribution of wealth by the government is the have nots taking from the haves. Just because it is done under the guise of legislature and laws doesn't make it any more moral or less barbaric.
fellow sheep wrote:
How can I be a hip anarchist like you?
Get ready to face palm a lot because you'll then realize just how stupid and economically illiterate 99% of the world is.
wordanapaix wrote:
fellow sheep wrote:How can I be a hip anarchist like you?
Get ready to face palm a lot because you'll then realize just how stupid and economically illiterate 99% of the world is.
b
Op is an idiot