taxation IS theft
just try to prove me wrong
>>76672755
Anything I could say would literally not be an argument
So call a cop, sissy boy.
>>76672755
not an argument.
thanks for playing.
>>76672755
I agree.
Here goyim purchase this land from me but wait if you dont pay a fee on it yearly I will take it from you and give it to someone else.
Not sure how anyone can defend that especially since that tax then goes to feed starving niggers who arent even part of your ethnicity.
>>76672755
Libertardians believe this.
>>76673383
not an argument
Why use coercion when voluntary interaction benefits both sides or at least one side?
>>76672755
Taxation without representation is theft.
There, I fixed it for you.
So long as you're getting something back from taxes, it's not theft. It's paying into the pot for basic services. IE, garbage/infrastructure/police/fire/medical/social security/etc.
>>76672755
Not an argument if you don't pay taxes you're stealing from people who are. Drive on my roads and dont pay by taxes get shot faggot
>>76673463
I don't need to play an argument with somebody without an argument.
>>76673764
>So long as you're getting something back from taxes, it's not theft.
If someone steals your wallet, then gives you a few bucks from it, it's still theft.
>>76672755
Theft is a definable action by society. As a result, if the society deems that taxation is in the best interests of the majority of people then it isn't theft.
>>76673764
They charge my 15 dollars a month for garbage, infrastructure is crumbling, I pay 60 dollars a month for my insurance, and social benefits? Get a 401k bum.
Police and fire are the only things that make sense and they tax my pay checks for that.
>>76673852
Argument is: Taxation is the coerced extraction of wealth from an individual. Theft by definition. Now fuck off you portuguese-indian rape baby.
>>76672755
it is when it doesnt benefit invidual of that country he/she pays tax for
things you use together, need together are only ones that you could use tax on to make the process easier. without nationalism, there is no real restriction on what is and what is not taxed
army is always needed to defend the land. it isnt simply by having arms but also have people willing to defend the land and his own people
>>76673764
Government will NEVER give you back the same as you would have taken, first because of embezzlement and how 70% of all tax revenue is lost in "overhead costs", second by how since there's no competition with government they always give you the minimum quality service.
>>76672755
I'm in agreement
>>76672755
If it were theft it would be illegal, because theft is a crime.
>>76673981
>>76674240
This is true. Clearly showing that the system is buggered, and in need of repair.
I'm merely pointing out what it's supposed to be. How it's supposed to work.
>>76673750
Coercion has proven to be more reliable, and always benefits at least one side.
>>76672755
Define theft
>>76674187
If you don't want to pay taxation, go to the jungle, It's simple, Manuel.
They're fundamentally different concepts in a democratic society, if you can't understand that you're fucking retarded.
Because I used the phrase, "taxation without representation is theft" I decided to google where that phrase came from.
Here is the result.
Taxation without representation is tyranny definition. A slogan of the Revolutionary War and the years before. The colonists were not allowed to choose representatives to parliament in London, which passed the laws under which they were taxed.
And to use a popular meme that seems to be going around, Really makes ya think, eh?
>>76674478
Wtf. We are being robbed by 80 percent of what we make and you still defend it?
>>76672755
okay then, will you revoke your protection by the government, and any health inspections, because those aren't free?
>>76674809
Show me how to live without taxation and I will not defend it, maybe you have a magical solution.
>>76675154
Yes. Only provide those services to those that pay for it. If you don't pay into the system you don't benefit from it, at the same time you don't have to worry about the state sending men with guns to your house to haul you off to prison.
Yes Goyim, the State is the enemy. The Free market will always take care of you and be your friend. Nothing bad will come of private enterprise replacing governments.
>>76672755
It's an exchange of services. If you aren't interested in the services you can leave the country.
Can't drive off with the car and claim the loan is theft.
>>76673764
> Slavery isn't immoral because the master feeds and houses you in the pig shed.
>>76672755
are you talking of an homogeneous country or a multicultural shithole?
>>76672755
You can't prove a negative
>>76675517
States have a monopoly on the world, becoming stateless renders you unable to interact with other people because of the state you cant escape it besides on the high seas.
>>76675546
I don't think you understand how taxes work....
>>76672755
Learn how economy works
>>76675468
But with taxes, everybody pays for the system, it would be a clusterfuck and chaos without taxes.
>>76675766
>>76675766
>>76675766
>>76672755
You willingly live in the state, therefore you must pay what they demand.
>>76672755
sure it's theft Shithead™, but there has NEVER been ANY civilization with government that has NOT used it to finance their administration.
That includes all your conservitard memes like Reagan, all Bushes, and Gary "23% Sales Tax" Johnson
>>76672755
It absolutely is theft if you define it that way.
Thanks Rothbard.
Taxations not theft. I understand that governments are not a perfect system, but would you really rather not have them?
>>76676008
Sure, taxes should exist just in another capacity without the threat of violence.
pay your taxes, shits important. Civilization takes an epic fuck load of money to function.
>>76672755
Then don't pay them.
Thoreau didn't, and he got thrown in jail but accepted it.
Of course, by not paying taxes you should also revoke your privilege to drive on public roads, go to state parks, receive benefits of any kind (that includes NEETbuxs, faggots), or participate in elections.
Think of it as a membership fee and move on with life.
>>76673967
But what defines what society finds acceptable? Is it majority rules?
>>76676144
Idiot. This happens all the time and has happened countless times in history. The replacement for lands without government is organized crime and militias extorting people for protection money with mass rape and looting done by those same militias. How you have formed an opinion without looking at examples is crazy to me. It's dumb as shit man.
>>76674558
Not an argument
>>76672755
If I want to avoid being taxed what happens? I got to prison? What if I don't want to go to prison? I am forcefully imprisoned? What if I resist? I am killed?
No, definitely not theft.
>>76676324
It's not what is ''acceptable'', you retard. It's what is needed: Roads, Police, Sewerage, etc.
>>76672755
The tension between the state and the market is thicker than a double milkshake. They need to fuck already.
>>76676167
2016. now with minimal waste. lol
>>76676376
You'll find that not amount of historical example will snap them out of their special snowflake induced libertarian buttrage.
These people need to experience a real breakdown of law and order in order to appreciate it.
>>76676525
You only pay taxes on money made via US currency. Go get rich with a different banknote
>>76676444
You can't think of a single reason why taxation is different from theft? You're retarded,
>>76676376
Where did I say any of that? I'm talking about taxes.
>>76676694
Yes, and the alternative to taxes to the state is protection money to a militia or armed group.
>>76676694
With no law to prevent it from raping and pillaging.
>>76673764
So the fact the whole transaction happens at gunpoint doesn't matter? So if a guy comes up to me, points a gun at me then forces me to buy his bus pass for $200 and I use that to get home because he also took my car keys, it's okay because I got some benefit from the $200 that was taken from me?
A fucking leaf indeed.
>>76676834
>>76676787
I never said anything about abolishing the state. Fact of the matter is the "state" will exist in one form or another I just believe that taxes shouldn't have the threat of violence attached to them otherwise you're no better than the rapist militias or armed groups.
>>76676324
Well that is what democracy is? But it's also a rational approach. If the minority get their way, well then everything is fucked isn't it?
>>76673764
>Taxation without representation is theft.
No, taxation with representation is also theft.
>>76676139
>would you really rather not have them?
False dichotomy
>>76676144
>Sure, taxes should exist just in another capacity without the threat of violence.
Contradictory
>>76676615
The government is organized crime disguised as a benevolent institution.
>>76676629
You can go to prison for trying to make your own currency. And they actively destroy your wealth by printing more of it in the accumulated pool and call it Keynesian economics.
>>76676787
>the state is not a militia or armed group
>>76677027
>I just believe that taxes shouldn't have the threat of violence attached to them otherwise you're no better than the rapist militias or armed groups.
Taxation without the threat of violence is not taxation. You know you can write a check to the government any day, they would love donations, funny how socialists never do that. They actually try to get the most tax deductions possible.
>>76677027
You can't have a state with voluntary taxes. Too many people will simply opt out. You just wouldn't have enough money to do anything.
trust me, you don't want to see a world with low,no taxation.
>>76677244
>arguing with libertardians.
>>76677049
Morality trumps the will of the majority - if two men are in a room with a woman and the vote on whether the woman should fuck both the guys, and both the guys vote yes and the girl votes no, majority rule dictates the men are within their rights to rape the woman, despite it being obviously morally wrong.
>>76677214
It is not the same in a western liberal democracy, and you'd know that if you did any research into this.
>>76672755
It is, the alternative is worse.
>>76673967
Your image accurately describes how I felt reading your post.
Something is only theft if it's against the law. Taxation isn't against the law. The state controls the definition of both. Might makes right, and the US Govt is pretty damn mighty. Therefore, get fucked, faggot.
>>76672755
No it isn't. At the very least, you have to pay to live somewhere nice, you owe the local government money for being allowed to live in a pleasant area with low crime, and you must give back to keep it that way.
>>76677214
>>76677065
Ok, let's act under the temporary belief that you are right and taxation is theft. That means that ANY "coercion" in regards to capital changing hands is by definition, theft. Therefore the market must be abolished, as it is reliant on coercion to function.
>>76677313
Morality is relative to the beholder. A hundred different people from a hundred different places in the world would have different moral views on that scenario.
>>76677561
Refute it.
>>76677282
everybodys got to get their cut. been that way forever. lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlVDGmjz7eM
>>76677311
>it was too difficult last time so I just gave up to ad homs
>>76677282
>argument from ignorance
>appeal to fear
>>76677746
>Therefore the market must be abolished, as it is reliant on coercion to function.
The market is inherently non-coercive, the state coerces the market.
>Morality is relative to the beholder.
>There are no objective standards to address moral imperatives
>Sadness is happiness, fear is confidence
>>76678078
>The market is inherently non-coercive
lol.
Someone requires a task to be done. They hire someone to do the task. The labourer has the choice between accepting the job or starving. That is a free market acting irrelevant of the state. It is coercive. "Do this job you hate or starve" is a coercive statement.
>>76678078
sure buddy, you will be wishing you paid your minor penance to the I don't want to see shit all fucked up gods.
>>76678078
>the market is inherently non-coercive
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
>>76674441
>Coercion has proven to be more reliable
According to what? Common sense alone will tell you that voluntary cooperation is more sustainable over time. There's no incentive to continue producing resources if there is an obvious pattern of them getting stolen with no benefits in return.
>>76678518
Anon do me a favor and look up videos of stateless areas of the world.
>>76672755
taxation isn't theft...
it's robbery.
If you don't pay taxes then you should be banned from using public infrastructure. Because you haven't paid into it, you are literally trespassing on public property you didn't pay for.
In fact, you shouldn't even be using the Internet. All national Internet physical infrastructures like IXPs and phone lines were developed, and still maintained by the state and therefore public property.
So you're essentially a free loader. You reap the benefits yet you don't pay into it.
>>76676139
>>76676629
>>76678470
Yessss, good GoY, the state is your friend
haha silly libertarians hahaha
>>76678274
He has the choice to die. No coercion occurs. The person offering the job (presumably) didn't force him to starve.
You don't understand words.
You use roads, electricity, running water, trash disposal, EMS, and the military that defends your right to shit post. These are all paid for by taxes and you would not have them without taxes.
On the other hand you also pay for niggers welfare, child support to baby factories, Medicare and social security that you may never use yourself.
Everything comes with a price
>>76672755
I'm wrong, and that's why you're so incredibly angry, huh? Because it's normal for an "adult" to get angry at things that aren't true, right?
Please, you're such a child. Excuses, rationalizations, and a healthy dose of hi-jacking my words to change to your own narrative. If you weren't such a pathetic retard, you might be able to come up with your own argument.
As it is ; it's clear that you're proud of your ignorance and utterly devoid of critical thinking or empathy beyond the typical pretentious tripe that fools like yourself pretend to make you superior to others. So partaking in any "conversation" with you is an utter waste of time. You won't change even when the truth is presented to you because you're operating on the idea that everything is the way you believe it to be and only the way you believe it to be, and thus nothing wrong or bad is occurring in the world, and nothing needs to be changed from the top-down. It's all just the bottom-up for you.
Your delusions fuel your ego and your ego fuels your delusions. Nothing left to be done but let you exist in your futile loop of stupidity and arrogance.
Ta-ta.
>>76674357
Yeah I agree. I'm not against taxation of the money I earn. Only property taxes.
Once I purchased the property it should just be mine. If they wanted to tax it they should do it when I am purchasing the house and land and that should be the only time like everything else.
>>76672755
>know there are taxes in country
>choose to continue living there
>choose to preform taxable behaviors
>cry about it when you are taxed
>b-but doing something about it on my own would be hard!
>but i'd totally be a successful billionaire in a cutthroat free market like my hero john galt no-homo.
Libertardians are worse then Communists.
>>76679125
Libertarianism helps the jews and international market elements the most. You're the jew puppet.
>>76679125
Do you really believe as an a priori that coercion does not exist in markets?
It's great I pay my taxes and some truck comes by every friday to pick up my trash. Get a heart attack? I just call 911 and people come and rush me to the hospital, what a country!
>>76679259
> you would not have them without taxes.
Are you literally retarded?
>>76679334
>>76678274
>Someone requires a task to be done. They hire someone to do the task. The labourer has the choice between accepting the job or starving. That is a free market acting irrelevant of the state. It is coercive. "Do this job you hate or starve" is a coercive statement.
You are attributing false cause. You're conflating the market's non-coercion with the requirement to work in order to survive to which the latter is the better alternative.
>>76678282
>appeal to fear
>>76678470
>non argument
>>76678639
>Correlation is causation
>>76679017
According to that logic, the state free loads off the people it coerces to fund its infrastructure, therefore the state is the actual free loader.
>>76679259
>Everything comes with a price therefore you should be forced to pay for a good you might not want
>>76679407
>choosing a better alternative under a poor economic context means you agree with the economic context you are subjugated to.
>>76679476
>no evidence or justifications
>>76679714
>non argument
Your "argument" is based on a rhetorical fallacy.
That which was conceived with no thought requires to response.
>>76679868
>claim supposition A
>laugh
>non argument
>you're fallacious!!!
>>76679618
He's right, you almost certainly would not. You may scream muh business and free market fairy, but all business is just a client and end product of state infrastructure.
McDonalds and Walmart won't build your roads, bridges, water supply and airports just out of the kindness of their hearts. They won't build trans-continental railroads as there's not profit in it. The space programmes? Lol no profit. Eliminating cancer and aids? Lol no profit.
And by profit, i mean long term sustainable business models
>>76679714
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbZuBDJVHEI
>>76679611
dead dog by your mailbox(happen to me) gone in an hour. ect. ect . ect
>>76679714
There is no evidence to suggest the state coerces people to begin with.
Im sure there's some obnoxious latin phrase to point out the fallacy there.
>>76673967
And what is society? Is it a single organism or a gathering of individuals? Because if the former, then why are we in disagreement right now?
>>76680000
>providing goods and services people want
>not profitable
I guess you've never heard of a toll road.
Regardless, companies will need roads to traffic their goods if they want to successfully sell them. Of course they'll build roads.
Why do you think those things came about in the first place? To expand markets.
>>76676040
>Somalia is doing better than all other surrounding nations
>>76680081
someone breaks in your house, they will send the whole swat team, they weren't doing nothing anyway.
>>76680081
Oh dear senpai, you fucked up.
It's from the Latin 'et cetera', etc.
>>76679994
In libertariainism, coercion is called "business plan."
Look at any organized crime, even dating back to the Irish raiding England
>>76680277
Roads were made for more efficient transportation of military personal and equipment. That's why American has the interstate system we do today. The Romans built their roads for the same reason.
And what pays for the military?
>>76673967
If some arbitrarily decided majority votes that they can kill of any minority subgroup is it no longer murder?
>rent is theft
>don't call it squatting I never signed a lease
>>76680567
Do you seriously mean to imply defensive forces can only exist when the money is taken in the form of taxes?
Like, literally? That's your argument?
>>76680277
In the US, most toll roads are built with govt grants
Nice try Schlomo
>>76680680
Therefore, toll roads can only exist if publicly funded, right? :^)
Do I really need to post the wiki 'list of private roads in the US?"
>>76679714
>You are attributing false cause. You're conflating the market's non-coercion with the requirement to work in order to survive to which the latter is the better alternative.
Do what I tell you or die is a coercive statement. You are straight up ignoring facts. The definition of "coercion" is : the action or practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats. Saying DO THIS OR DIE is coercion. End of story, the logic cannot be denied. It is factual to it's core. But believe whatever you want. It's clear that if you can't see this you're literally delusional, no insults intended. Enjoy your life.
>this action is this concept
Try to add some actual substance of any type to your argument instead of saying LITERALLY nothing
It's like asking,
>are games art?
It gets a million replies because there's no specific argument at hand, just a concept and arbitrary application
Next time ask,
>is taxation effective/necessary/etc.?
>>76679714
>>76679259
Okay, then stop paying your utility bills, don't call and ambulance when you get injured, and don't call the fire dept when your house is on fire. Don't forget to fight an entire war with only you and your family since you don't want the militaries help either.
Hopefully your neighbors will form a bucket brigade to save your house (which is on government land by the way) or hopefully one of them can sew up your gunshot wound you got in the war of Mayberry versus Branch county
>>76680277
They will build roads, to profit their own business. Why would Walmart provide highway access to Target? And even if they did they charged for access, you don't think their competitor will be tolled out of the ass deliberately to take them out of business?
You have to think multidimensional here. Behind the corporate pretence of social responsibility, their primary goal is to make a profit. And that means destroying local competition. So if Walmart is given power to freely create their own utilities and infrastructure, only the most powerful will win, and all small businesses will be extremely hampered by this. As the very top businesses already have that network.
>>76680775
Whos money were they built with?
Oh, thats right...
>>76680832
Why not just have Muh Defense Contractors, huh?
Hiring a mercenary army has always worked out well in the past
>>76680621
"we the people" own ourselves and our country
oh wait nvm our statist masters do and we need to ask them for permission and give them a portion of our entire production like free range slaves right?
Income taxes are necessary by the way, extensions to property and transaction taxes are wrong in that they arose as a necessity in the face of wasteful spending
>>76672755
I guess it's theft you willingly put up with.
>>76680663
Do you seriously imply we would not be the worlds most powerful military force without everyone paying taxes to fund the research and production of our modern military equipment?
Of course I'm not implying our military wouldn't exist, but it would be garbage.
This is just simple cause and effect we are talking about
>>76679714
>>I'm not responsible for my own decisions or actions or their consequences.
Could you at least put a little effort into pretending to be a libertarian? I mean just a little? doesn't even have too be as much as I did in my shitpost just enough to continue my SoD.
>>76680775
>76680775
Just looked it up
Theres 9 private highways in the entire country?
Wow, how impressive...
>>76680832
Private fire companies police and medicine have all proven to be much more efficient than state analogs.
And this is with people being forced to pay for these things twice in the form of taxation and still wanting to pay for these various private services.
The most drastic is Detroit and the rise of private police forces being significantly better than the city police departments
>>76680976
Who will pay for the mercenaries?
>>76672755
You agree to pay taxes any time you seek employment, start a business, buy products or services or trade assets.
Now here’s the tricky part. Prove to me that the coup Walmart enacted was voluntary when it had the resources to shut down competition and force people to select it to survive during a time of economic difficulty, knowing that people couldn’t afford to shop anywhere else.
>>76680663
>defensive forces can only exist when the money is taken in the form of taxes
Not 'can', but 'can consistently, reliably, usefully and predictably,' yes
>>76680883
>And even if they did they charged for access, you don't think their competitor will be tolled out of the ass deliberately to take them out of business
There are several instances of businesses in major American cities 150 years ago getting together to build up roadway infrastructure and none of what you suggest is what happened.
>>76679714
>choosing a better alternative under a poor economic context means you agree with the economic context you are subjugated to.
Hmm, that's odd, because I'm POSITIVE you would be alright with Walmart doing this, because that is LITERALLY how they became a monopoly.
>>76680883
It's not immoral to be successful, and it's not immoral to pursue greater success as long as it's without the use of force.
You're making the strong implication that it is MORE moral to steal money at gunpoint to create roads, when the biggest businesses already destroy smaller ones every day, anyway.
>>76680832
In the lolbertarian universe everything is a randian fantasy. The Smoky Bear Fire & Sons co will charge you per fire, The Boys In Blue police Ltd will compete with The White Knight Protection Ltd for police coverage by going to war with each other
>>76681193
>military
>consistent
>reliable
>predictable
There are literally a thousand other, better arguments you could've used. The root of the term 'military efficiency' is not arbitrary or fictional.
>>76681097
And how will you decide you gets to use those emergency services? Will they have a tag on there shirt like a allergy wristband that says "if I'm being mugged please send Detroit Police of the People's" and if so will the people not paying for private police be left to die?
>>76680976
>Hiring a mercenary army has always worked out well in the past
Not nearly as bad as the death toll caused by standing armies just in the last 100 years.
>>76680000
>He's right, you almost certainly would not. You may scream muh business and free market fairy, but all business is just a client and end product of state infrastructure.
See >>76679714
>McDonalds and Walmart won't build your roads, bridges, water supply and airports just out of the kindness of their hearts.
>fast food and grocery stores won't build infrastructure, therefore no businesses will build infrastructure.
>what are shopping malls
>They won't build trans-continental railroads as there's not profit in it.
>there were no private railroad companies in the US
>the private railroad companies did not make a profit while the public ones were in the negative
>The space programmes? Lol no profit. Eliminating cancer and aids? Lol no profit.
>Going into space is not profitable
>What is SpaceX
>Eliminating cancer and aids is not profitable
>And by profit, i mean long term sustainable business models
>businesses must be long term and sustainable like the leeching state instead of adaptive to the current state of affairs
>>76680181
>There is no evidence to suggest the state coerces people to begin with.
A gun if you don't comply? You can't be this retarded.
>>76680525
>businesses are coercive
>>76680621
>what is private property
According to that framework, purchasing anything is theft
>>76680787
>Do what I tell you or die is a coercive statement
False. The causation of death is ambiguous in this statement. Death could be because of natural causes or suicide. Attributing false cause. I'm enjoying how your conventional worldview is shattering by my arguments.
>>76680832
>the public crowded out said private industries, therefore they wouldn't exist without the state's coercion
>>76681049
>Income taxes are necessary by the way
>Income taxes have only existed in the US since the 1890s
>>76681088
>did not comprehend my refutation
>>76681237
>private institutions of non-coercion is a poor economic context relative to the state's coercive institutions
>>76681380
Do you mean to imply it's okay to steal goods/currency/services, as long as it's to prevent death?
If we can't agree that theft is universally immoral, we can't have a coherent discussion about any of this.
>>76681380
>And how will you decide you gets to use those emergency services? Will they have a tag on there shirt like a allergy wristband that says "if I'm being mugged please send Detroit Police of the People's" and if so will the people not paying for private police be left to die?
Maybe look into what happens in real life instead of projecting absurd strawmen as if it is reality.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vqlVL26jrCA
>>76681138
Independent, self-interested citizens who have inform-o-vision so they know which group of men with guns really means it when they pinky swear not to violate the NAP
and then an eagle named rothberg flies through a window and lands on the gadsden flag shedding a single tear.
>>76681392
Your kidding. right?
>>76681523
>didn't refute shit too libertarded to even see it
>>76681523
>businesses are coercive
Look at literally any mercenary army in history.
and when you get around 62-67 guess what? you don't have to work. we will just send you a check, live long and prosper.
>>76681392
this might be because there are more states than libertarian stateless NAP fearing utopias
>>76681523
Why do you keep talking about guns and gunpoint you fat retard? This all comes down to a simple explanation. Libertarianism appeals to rebellious teenagers who try to find some way of feeling oppressed now that you've escaped your overbearing parents.
So you look online and you reach sophomore or whatever and you come to pol and start parroting really shitty nonsensical buzz phrases like tags is thefd :DD and nod an argumend :DD
Yes I'm personally attacking you because you've presented zero credible arguments over than "c-coercion and erm gunpoint and muh liberty"
Fucking sort it out mate. This is not how reality works
How is it theft if you voluntarily choose to live in a society that taxes? By living in a specific society, you acknowledge it's laws, and consequences for breaking them. If you don't agree with certain policies, you're free to vote against them, however you also acknowledge that the laws are based on the opinions of the majority.
>>76672755
muh gym membership is theft.
Why I gots to pay fo dis shit. All dis country i should get it fo free.
you libertarians sound just like welfare niggers.
>>76681640
The American military alone has killed roughly 10million people over the last 70 years
>>76682008
If you don't agree that extortion and theft are immoral, there's no reason to even talk. We're coming from incompatible standpoints.
>>76682199
>if you agree to be a slave, it's now moral
>mentioning fucking voting
Holy cuck.
>>76682309
>extortion and theft
Squatting isn't a right just because you call rent "theft"
>HELP A NIGGER IS ATTACKING ME
>Ill call 555-SAVE-ME and get Protectors of the innocent Tm on the case
>shit I'm not insured
>I'll just pay up front
>don't have the right currency
>only have sunset parsparilla caps
>>76682301
Adjust for population size
And blackwater helped
>>76673904
Someone steals $30 from the $100 I originally had. The robber then starts constructing a road in front of my house. When I slip off a ladder at work the robber takes me to hospital and does what he can to make me better. He then compensates me for the time off work, allowing me to focus on recovery. One day my house starts burning down. The robber races to my home and puts out the fire, saving me hundreds of thousands of dollars. One day someone breaks into my home, punches my wife and steals my car. The robber then catches the guy who stole my car and delivers appropriate justice. While I don't have a car, the robber organises trains and buses for me to take to work until my car is recovered. The robber ensures that my drinking water is clean, that my electricity is connected and that my mail gets delivered. One day the robber sits down with my family and explains that he knows he's sometimes imposing on me and my families lives, and that he feels we should have a say in what he should be doing.
A factory down the road opens up and starts polluting the whole neighbourhood. I want to go stop the factory owner myself, but the robber insists that he will go to have a strong word with the factory owner and ensures that the problem gets solved.
When I'm old enough to retire, the robber informs me that he invested the original $30 he took from me, and that he now has enough money to ensure I have enough for the rest of my twilight years without posing a burden on other people.
I don't know about you guys, but I kind of like my robber. I think the $30 he took originally is well worth the tradeoffs, and most people around me would agree. Even if he just asked for the $30, I would have given it to him.
He's not perfect, but I'm not childish enough to think that $30 is worth more than everything he provides me.
>>76682382
Literally what the fuck are you talking about?
Squatting on someone else's property isn't a right. And entering into a contract to rent something, voluntarily, isn't theft.
Are you twelve?
>>76672755
The free market steals whiteness from my community. That's the only kind of theft I care about.
>>76682309
>i have no answers better claim the moral highground while running the fuck away screaming NAHAHAHA I CAN'T HEAR YOU I WIN KEK!
>>76682491
>entering into a contract
I NEVER SIGNED SHIT, FILTHY STATIST
>>76672755
tragedy of the commons
>>76682565
Then you're not obligated to pay rent. But that doesn't give you the right to squat there.
>>76682521
If the government doesn't exist in the pursuit of morality, then why does it exist? My views are 100% consistent with my morality. Are yours?
>>76682708
>But that doesn't give you the right to squat there.
Then stop complaining about theft and just stop squatting on America's land.
>>76682756
>buy land
>have a deed
>statists argue that you're squatting
So nobody but imaginary government entities can own land, or...?
>>76682878
Eminent domain. Government owns all land.
>>76682408
Yes adjusting for population size standing armies have killed immensely more people than any mercenary army in human history.
Also Blackwater's role was very miniscule in the large scheme of things.
Oh and BTW private contractors were famous for stabilizing regions in Africa that were impossible to do so by the local warring governments.
>>76682984
Sorry, I meant to say "NAP Friendly AmeriGov Ltd™"
>>76682309
You didn't address any point I made. How is taxation theft if you agree to live in a society, thus agreeing to it's rules and how they're made?
>>76682984
So if you steal something, then write into law that it's yours and nobody else can have it, then anybody who buys land is actually squatting.
That's literally your argument.
>inb4 might makes right
So if I kill anyone who opposes me in a village, say all the land is mine, and then somebody buys some land in the village, they're squatting. Makes perfect sense.
>>76682631
This tbqh
>>76683170
>agree to live in a society
What constitutes agreement? Be specific.
Because you don't resist a mugger with a gun does not constitute consent to be mugged.
>>76683035
>blackwaters role was minuscule
They made the situation *much* worse
>>76681738
>conflating internal and external coercion into a single entity
The market itself is non-coercive, that is the purchasing of a mercenary group, but if the mercenary group threatens you to pay them or coerces against others, then coercion is enacted.
>>76682008
Do you think it is perfectly fine is someone threatens you with violence? Are you a cuckold? The irreverence to coercion is a moral precedent which induces a slippery slope. Do you want a man to come to your house every day and demand money? Ok. Do you want a man to come to your house every day and rape your daughters? At the end of the day, you have to draw a line to how much coercion is really necessary, as less coercion is morally better than more coercion. Sweeping all coercion under the rug is lazy and morally apathetic.
>>76682199
>Choosing the best alternative offered in our current context implies that there could be no better alternatives
>>76683170
Pic
>>76683271
>They made the situation *much* worse
At orders of the US government which was already ruining everything in sight.
Also executive outcomes did immense good in Africa squashing warlords that were going unopposed
>>76683367
But you can pay the mercenaries to coerce someone else...
What part of this are you not getting?
>>76676324
> what is a social contract
>>76683521
So mercenaries did something chill one time, and that means someone cant pay them to do something fucked up? No one questioned their tactical prowess
>>76683597
I'm not sure if you thought you proved a point, but you didn't.
"if you can pay someone to commit a crime, voluntarism therefore is okay with crime!"
>>76683597
I already addressed your point. You're attributing the coercion of a mercenary group with the business. They are independent. The market is non-coercive, but the mercenary group is coercive. Therefore the mercenary group is immoral, not the market.
>>76683692
>So mercenaries did something chill one time,
Not even one time
That was the norm for mercenary companies.
> and that means someone cant pay them to do something fucked up?
As opposed to government armies responsible for killing tens of millions of people in wars for special interest.
>>76683255
>What constitutes agreement? Be specific.
You making the choice to live in a specific society (aka country), and thus becoming a member of it.
>Because you don't resist a mugger with a gun does not constitute consent to be mugged.
A mugger won't let you leave until you give him what he wants. Also chances are you weren't aware you were going to be mugged.
When you live in a country, you are aware of what will be asked of you. You aren't forced to stay in a specific society/country, and are free to find one that better suits you.
>>76683859
>As opposed to government armies responsible for killing tens of millions of people in wars for special interest.
>>76683692
The point being it isn't a valid argument in favor of something when that something you're arguing for is responsible for actions orders of magnitude worse than the hypothetical placed on what you're arguing against.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4068.htm
>>76683747
>>76683847
>>76683859
So what does the market do to prevent this?
>>76683397
You can call it whatever you want, however it's still voluntary.
>>76684055
>You aren't forced to stay in a specific society/country, and are free to find one that better suits you.
That is actually the opposite of most of human societies in history.
Shit like the Soviets Union and north Korea were the norm in most of human history
>>76684216
>So what does the market do to prevent this?
It is extremely unprofitable to wage aggressive warfare when the funds aren't gained through taxation.
>>76684055
>You aren't forced to stay in a specific society/country
You are forced to be subjected to a country's laws if you are born there, until you can leave, which can be impossible or nearly impossible. You were never given the choice, being born there. You were, by any definition, forced to submit to their laws until you can afford to leave.
>>76684216
>it is the job of the market to prevent immorality
Literally what are you talking about?
>>76684274
Obviously if you live in a dictatorship, then taxation is theft, as you have no choice to leave whatsoever.
>>76684365
Exactly. Which is why when wars end, mercenaries often turn to pillaging their clients
>>76684387
>what are you talking about
Im not cool with gangs of bandits roaming around
>>76684424
If every piece of land on Earth forces you to pay taxes, then is it theft to tax people, since leaving makes no moral difference?
>>76684598
>the only way to deal with criminals is to have the government take money at gunpoint from people to send people after them
Why does every business worth a damn employ private security? Even CVS has private security. The office I work at has it.
>>76684424
>Obviously if you live in a dictatorship, then taxation is theft, as you have no choice to leave whatsoever
Dictatorship of the majority is still a dictatorship.
When the majority of a nation votes to do whatever they wish to a minority it is murder theft or slavery.
The whole social contact argument only goes so far as to the taxation being used for the benefit of the nation at large.
When it is used to benefit one group at the direct expense of another it is theft.
This is what is causing the massive moral degradation of our society today
>>76674558
>Yo NIGGUH hand ova ur keys and CASH I SHOOT YO ASS, bitch ass white boi.
>PAY YOUR TAXES OR GO TO JAIL WE LIVE IN A DEMOCRATIC NATION, THEY'RE FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT CONCEPTS CAN'T YOU SEE THAT THIS SINGLE MOTHER NEEDS TO FEED HER KIDS FUCKING CIS SCUM
>fucking retarded
>>76684387
>You were never given the choice, being born there.
Of course, and I agree. However, you still make the voluntary choice to continue living in the country you are born in.
>You were, by any definition, forced to submit to their laws until you can afford to leave.
Keyword being afford. You still aren't being forced by the state to live in that specific country/society. Once you save up enough money for a plane ticket, you're free to leave.
>>76684721
>private security
They just roam hallways and call the cops when real shit happens
Are you kidding? They arent even armed usually.
>>76684506
>Which is why when wars end, mercenaries often turn to pillaging their clients
As opposed to the significantly worse pillaging fone by standing armies.
Again saying that x which you're attacking may do z bad things whole ignoring that y which you're defending does significantly worse things all the time isn't an argument.
>>76684598
>Im not cool with gangs of bandits roaming around
You must have missed all of the rioting niggers allowed to do as they please at the behest of the government police forces doing nothing in fear of being "racist".
See
>>76681545
Private police are already proving to be brtter than public police by every metric.
>>76684867
Except the state forces you to pay taxes and play by their rules until you can leave. So subjecting people who never agreed to your rules is okay, as long as they haven't yet waded through your immoral, theft-laden process of employment to get the money to leave?
The state determines at what age somebody is even legally considered an independent adult, so they're being forced to stay there until that age, presumably. Why is that period okay and not immoral, in your opinion?
I'm tired from anarcho capitalism pushed around here. Anyone here think a minarchy is a more realistic solution?
>>76684721
>If every piece of land on Earth forces you to pay taxes, then is it theft to tax people, since leaving makes no moral difference?
Yes. However that's not the case today.
>>76684770
>When the majority of a nation votes to do whatever they wish to a minority it is murder theft or slavery.
Once again, if the minority chooses to live there, and aren't being forced to live there by the state, then they have acknowledged how that specific society is run, and its effects on them.
>>76676139
>I AM SILLY
>>76685261
Your views don't have any logical consistency. I understand what you THINK you mean, but it's hypocritical.
Why does an action only become moral or immoral based on whether or not there is an alternative OUTSIDE of the nation imposing that action? That makes no sense.
>>76672755
>muh taxation is theft
You're absolutely right. However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't have taxes.
>>76675357
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_man
Enjoy your halved lifespan.
Also, if you hue's paid more taxes and had a more functional government perhaps you would not live in an unstable shithole that businesses fall over themselves to get away from.
>>76685261
>Yes. However that's not the case today.
Yes it is.
There is nowhere on the planet that doesn't do this.
Fuck off, anarchists. Pay your taxes and reap the benefits of your nation. Consolidation and communal action are more efficient than individualism. But still overthrow the bourgeois.
>>76685547
>Consolidation and communal action are more efficient than individualism.
I agree. However, they're demonstrably worse when it's forced, rather than voluntary.
Literally every industry that government tries to monopolize has a superior privatized alternative.
>contractors are better than military regulars
>private medicine > public
>etc
>>76685480
>However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't have taxes.
Hence pic in
>>76683397
>>76685100
>So subjecting people who never agreed to your rules is okay, as long as they haven't yet waded through your immoral, theft-laden process of employment to get the money to leave?
How much does a passport and paperwork cost? Anyway, I agree that it should be free to leave a particular society if you happen to be born in it. However, if you make enough money to leave a country, but choose not to, then taxes on you are not theft.
Also I'm curious, by your logic, having children is immoral, as they never were asked to be born?
>my arbitrary moral system is internally consistent
>therefore all real world actions should be moral as set out in my system because reasons
>why doesn't the imperfect world match up consistently with my arbitrary moral system? it should because its internally consistent!
What are practical real world concerns? God this thread got boring fast.
I pay them willingly, in knowledge of the benefits I will receive. That is by no definition theft.
>>76685744
>How much does a passport and paperwork cost?
That itself is a concession that one isn't free to leave this nation without permission.
>>76683397
>>76685739
>muh morals
It doesn't matter. Taxation means a stable government which benefits society.
>>76672755
I'd rather the government steal my money than be murdered by muslims.
>>76685935
>Taxation means a stable government which benefits society.
Taxation used as plunder leads to destabilization of government and the society at large.
As you can see all around you today.
You are seeing the beginnings of the death of a nation all centred around taxation being used as a vehicle of theft.
>>76685744
>How much does a passport and paperwork cost?
That's up to the government that is demanding the money, from somebody who never agreed to it in the first place... and, somehow, this is considered moral by you.
>if you make enough money to leave a country, but choose not to, then taxes on you are not theft.
So you agree that taxation before this point is theft, good.
>Also I'm curious, by your logic, having children is immoral, as they never were asked to be born?
You can't ask something if you don't exist. Assuming that the parents don't force the child to do anything, no, of course it's not immoral. That's like asking if it's theft to turn a tree into boards and build something with it.
>>76686095
>As you can see all around you today.
Nope. Without a monopoly on violence, you would revert back to feudalism. People need to be forcibly controlled by higher authority for a stable society.
>>76686073
>I'd rather the government steal my money than be murdered by muslims.
I'd rather not have a government take my money to use it to fund Muslims that want to kill me :^)
>>76673904
>>76682461
BTFO
T
F
O
>>76685085
My bad, I was in another thread
All I have to say is, based off what I know of military history, mercs are typically as bad as states or worse. Using the US as an example is strange because its such an outlier, but the contractors they have used have proven to be total shit.
As for coercion in markets, there are in fact ways to coerce them. Artificially creating supply and demand, for instance. Or blackmail. Or whatever else comes up.
The point is, your saying the market is "neutral" because the people trading services are the only ones responsible.
Well, by that logic, governments are neutral as well. The only people responsible are individual politicians, and specifically for their own actions.
>>76672755
>taxation IS theft
Who gives a shit. Rent is theft. Deal with it.
>>76686231
>Without a monopoly on violence, you would revert back to feudalism
Feudalism was a Society with a monopoly on violence you turdstick.
The King and his Lords had complete monopoly of force against those under them.
> People need to be forcibly controlled by higher authority for a stable society.
Anarchist Ireland lasted for several hundred years as a stable civilization with no government bodies.
>>76686411
>Well, by that logic, governments are neutral as well. The only people responsible are individual politicians, and specifically for their own actions.
That's true. The difference is that the market doesn't demand taxes or kill people for disagreeing.
>>76685433
>Why does an action only become moral or immoral based on whether or not there is an alternative OUTSIDE of the nation imposing that action?
What you think is moral is irrelevant. The original post I made was that if you *make* the choice to live in a society that taxes, then it is by definition not theft.
>>76685529
>Yes it is.
>There is nowhere on the planet that doesn't do this.
There are countries with no income tax, however any country with a government will have taxes. If you want no taxes, you'd have to find a place with no government.
>>76682461
Ayyyn Randmaos BTFO
>>76686565
>What you think is moral is irrelevant.
Hardly. If you believe in moral relativity, then there can be no truly moral laws, by definition.
>>76686540
And they dont magically form themselves, either
>>76686503
>Feudalism was a Society with a monopoly on violence you turdstick.
There were different kings and lords competing with each other. This is what would effectively happen under anarchism. Nobody would obey the NAP religiously other than anarchists.
>Anarchist Ireland lasted for several hundred years as a stable civilization with no government bodies.
Until it got conquered by an existential threat. There is no way to revert to anarchism in our current climate without being conquered by a foreign power.
>>76686411
>Using the US as an example is strange because its such an outlier, but the contractors they have used have proven to be total shit.
Because they were paid to be shit. Doing things off the book that the government couldn't or didn't want to.
> As for coercion in markets, there are in fact ways to coerce them
There being ways to add coercion into a system not based on coercion isn't an argument in favor of a system that relies only upon coercion.
Double so when everything you listed is more common in the system you're defending.
> Well, by that logic, governments are neutral as well. The only people responsible are individual politicians, and specifically for their own actions.
Since government is solely funded through coercion no.
>>76686788
>There were different kings and lords competing with each other
And governments dont wage war and compete against each other?
Moron
>>76685715
They're also less efficient and more expensive oftentimes. More government auditors and experts in business need to be applied to government institutions.
>>76686789
>being paid shit
6 w6t m6tey
Also, who cleans up chemical spills and such?
>>76686936
Modern day nation states are far more stable than feudalistic kingdoms.
Enjoy your anarchist fantasy moron.
>>76683174
What the fuck are you talking about? Objectively the US owns all land within her borders.
>>76686727
Markets are simply people voluntarily making deals and trading goods with each other.
Then again this is magic if you talk to some socialist retards
>>76687018
>objectively
>imaginary entities can own things
Must be nice to just arbitrarily make things up to suit your worldview, regardless of them even existing or not.
>>76687012
>being paid shit
>You
>Reading comprehension
They were paid to BE shit.
When you wqnt to do something extremely bad and dont want it to be known you have a proxy do it for and i quote "plausible deniability".
>>76687013
>Modern day nation states are far more stable than feudalistic kingdoms
The Us alone has been in a constant state of warfare for 100 years.
Most European nations as they exist today are less than 100 years old and have experienced two wars larger than the worlds has ever seen in Its history.
>>76685920
>That itself is a concession that one isn't free to leave this nation without permission.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal-considerations/us-citizenship-laws-policies/renunciation-of-citizenship.html
You can renounce your citizenship for free, however it is up to you to raise funds to leave.
>>76686139
>That's up to the government that is demanding the money, from somebody who never agreed to it in the first place... and, somehow, this is considered moral by you.
If you want to renounce citizenship, it's free. If you want to enter another society, then you're responsible to pay for your own passport. I was curious to what the costs usually are however.
>So you agree that taxation before this point is theft, good.
Yes. I believe you shouldn't be taxed until you're 18. At that point you're old enough to choose to leave the country.
>You can't ask something if you don't exist. Assuming that the parents don't force the child to do anything, no, of course it's not immoral. That's like asking if it's theft to turn a tree into boards and build something with it.
And you can't reject a choice if you exist either. However, once brought into existence, then it's already too late to "ask" not to be born.
>>76687163
Institutions are not imaginary. They are descriptions of relationships between individuals.
>>76687283
They werent being paid shit. Comparable positions were paid 2x US army at the managerial level, and 5x or more for operators.
Seems like pretty good pay
>>76687627
Being born/conceived isn't a choice. You can't say yes and you can't say no. It doesn't matter if, once your born, you wish you hadn't been. There was never a choice made by you because you didn't exist.
>>76686633
>Hardly. If you believe in moral relativity, then there can be no truly moral laws, by definition.
I don't believe in objective morality. And yes, there are plenty of laws I personally think are immoral, however they are in place due to majority rule.
>>76687869
>I don't believe in objective morality.
Then we can never possibly agree. There's no reason to continue talking.
If you can't determine right and wrong, then you can't determine what would make a government (or lack thereof) right or wrong. There's no reason to bother trying. It's like trying to win a game that has no rules.
>>76687627
>You can renounce your citizenship for free, however it is up to you to raise funds to leave.
>Legally cannot get on any airline out of the nation without a US passport.
>Legally cannot build your own boat or plane to leave the nation without government permission.
>Legally can't drive out of the nation without government permission
>>76687761
>They werent being paid shit.
Again
>You
>Reading comprehension
Im not talking about their compensation you dumb illiterate nigger.
I'm telling you that they were paid to do shitty things the government didn't want to risk being caught doing.
>>76687855
Then by that logic it's immoral to have kids. A person makes the choice that affects another life, and the party being affected has no choice in the matter.
>>76688154
So how does that change the fact that they are coercive in a freemarket? Youve still lost me
The state owns the land. This is called Allodial title. And if you want to live on the land you must pay rent. All your property rights are ultimately subservient to the allodial lord, which means you do not own anything until the state lets you have it. That is why the idea of pre-tax income that is then "stolen" after the fact is a myth. Your income is always already taxed and you then owe the government, because you used their land to create wealth.
>>76688336
Affecting a life is not the same as initiating force, but nice try!
This is akin to saying "it's immoral to talk in public because people will be forced to hear what you say and have no choice in the matter omg!"
>>76688010
>If you can't determine right and wrong, then you can't determine what would make a government (or lack thereof) right or wrong.
Once again, I was never originally making the case that taxes are moral. I was making the case that if you have the ability to leave the country, then it's not theft.
>>76688030
>Legally cannot get on any airline out of the nation without a US passport.
Once again, up to you to be able to afford a passport to leave. I believe there should be no taxes before the age of 18, or it should be free to leave the US if you renounce citizenship, however that's not the case.
>>76687439
>Reading this entire thread
>Finding most arguments interesting and valid
>Come to this claim
Welp, into the trash it goes.
>>76688731
>Once again, up to you to be able to afford a passport to leave
>This somehow isn't being forced to stay in a nation
>>76674441
VENEZUELA
>>76689032
Point out where the US hasn't been in a constant state of warfare over the last 100 years and that most European nations arent less than 100 years old.
Germany Italy and Spain as the governments they are today are less than 80 years old and all of the former Eastern bloc are less than 30.
Geographical regions=/= States/governments.
For example if the United States dissolved the Constitution and adopted say some full Commie form of government it would no longer be the USA
>76683367
>Choosing the best alternative offered in our current context implies that there could be no better alternatives
Never made that claim.
>>76689161
>Once again, up to you to be able to afford a passport to leave
>This somehow isn't being forced to stay in a nation
Having to buy a passport isn't the same as being forced to live in a country your whole life and pay taxes. As I said, you shouldn't have to pay for one in order to leave, but if you have the money to buy one and refuse, then you made a choice to stay.
