Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Abolish ALL taxes.

Justin_Thiel
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2012 9:17:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I believe that we do indeed need a group in power to protect our liberty from aggressive forces and to organize the collective efforts of those within the group. A benevolent group of Liberty Guardians that would perform many of the duties that government usually performs..But this group should only hold that power through the voluntary efforts of those within the group it is protecting. No taxes. Only donations. Donations that could be specifically directed and spent on something that the person who donated the money felt strongly about.

This would keep these Liberty Guardians (or any other label) in check and funded with the resources they need to provide the infrastructure and protection of the group at all times. If the individuals within the group felt that this should be done or this should be fixed... Then they would donate towards the project etc.

But no taxes.

Thoughts?
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2012 9:20:20 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/7/2012 9:17:14 AM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
I believe that we do indeed need a group in power to protect our liberty from aggressive forces and to organize the collective efforts of those within the group. A benevolent group of Liberty Guardians that would perform many of the duties that government usually performs..But this group should only hold that power through the voluntary efforts of those within the group it is protecting. No taxes. Only donations. Donations that could be specifically directed and spent on something that the person who donated the money felt strongly about.

This would keep these Liberty Guardians (or any other label) in check and funded with the resources they need to provide the infrastructure and protection of the group at all times. If the individuals within the group felt that this should be done or this should be fixed... Then they would donate towards the project etc.

But no taxes.

Thoughts?

Great idea.....voluntary government and private Armies. I am so excited.
Justin_Thiel
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2012 9:31:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/7/2012 9:20:20 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 9/7/2012 9:17:14 AM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
I believe that we do indeed need a group in power to protect our liberty from aggressive forces and to organize the collective efforts of those within the group. A benevolent group of Liberty Guardians that would perform many of the duties that government usually performs..But this group should only hold that power through the voluntary efforts of those within the group it is protecting. No taxes. Only donations. Donations that could be specifically directed and spent on something that the person who donated the money felt strongly about.

This would keep these Liberty Guardians (or any other label) in check and funded with the resources they need to provide the infrastructure and protection of the group at all times. If the individuals within the group felt that this should be done or this should be fixed... Then they would donate towards the project etc.

But no taxes.

Thoughts?

Great idea.....voluntary government and private Armies. I am so excited.

Close, but not quite...

Voluntary government with a voluntary army. Not private armies. Private armies from the inside would be a threat to those of the inside and coild not be allowed to exist. Those who felt the urge to be a part of an army would need to volunteer into the volunteer based militia.

You see the volunteer government wouldn't even exist or have the power to protect against these internal private armies unless enough people within the group supported it and funded it voluntarily. That's the difference between this and an involuntary government.

The only way an internal private army could exist and challenge the voluntary government is if more people supported that group.

What I am basically explaining is the natural way that groups should be granted and hold power. Through voluntary support. It's just that in my own ideology I would like to see a voluntary government that uses its power to give and protect liberty to the highest caliber while also protecting the health and environment of those same people within the group.
imabench
Posts: 21,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2012 9:32:39 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/7/2012 9:17:14 AM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
I believe that we do indeed need a group in power to protect our liberty from aggressive forces and to organize the collective efforts of those within the group.

Congress and the Supreme Court both have the role of protecting Civil Rights they feel are being violated and have done a decent job of protecting them in the past.

A benevolent group of Liberty Guardians that would perform many of the duties that government usually performs..

So basically another government

But this group should only hold that power through the voluntary efforts of those within the group it is protecting. No taxes. Only donations.

Then whats the incentive? People hate taxes more then anything else if you give them the option of making a donation then there is the possibility that they would donate only scrap amounts, if any at all.

Donations that could be specifically directed and spent on something that the person who donated the money felt strongly about.

So now people limit their meager donations (if any) to the thing they feel strongly the most about and the "liberty protectors" cannot use it for anything else? That would be madness and even less would be available to help "preserve liberty"

This would keep these Liberty Guardians (or any other label) in check and funded with the resources they need to provide the infrastructure and protection of the group at all times.

It most certainly would not. If Liberty Guardians had all the guns they could easily start shaking down people for money and then spend it on whatever the f*ck they wanted, they wouldnt be guardians like you would make them out to be.

If the individuals within the group felt that this should be done or this should be fixed... Then they would donate towards the project etc.

If they donated, and you can bet they would only donate a few times and then stop donating to expect everyone else to pitch in.

But no taxes.

Thoughts?

Wouldnt work in a modern society at all
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Justin_Thiel
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2012 10:07:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/7/2012 9:32:39 AM, imabench wrote:
At 9/7/2012 9:17:14 AM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
I believe that we do indeed need a group in power to protect our liberty from aggressive forces and to organize the collective efforts of those within the group.

Congress and the Supreme Court both have the role of protecting Civil Rights they feel are being violated and have done a decent job of protecting them in the past.

A benevolent group of Liberty Guardians that would perform many of the duties that government usually performs..

So basically another government

But this group should only hold that power through the voluntary efforts of those within the group it is protecting. No taxes. Only donations.

Then whats the incentive? People hate taxes more then anything else if you give them the option of making a donation then there is the possibility that they would donate only scrap amounts, if any at all.

Donations that could be specifically directed and spent on something that the person who donated the money felt strongly about.

So now people limit their meager donations (if any) to the thing they feel strongly the most about and the "liberty protectors" cannot use it for anything else? That would be madness and even less would be available to help "preserve liberty"

This would keep these Liberty Guardians (or any other label) in check and funded with the resources they need to provide the infrastructure and protection of the group at all times.

It most certainly would not. If Liberty Guardians had all the guns they could easily start shaking down people for money and then spend it on whatever the f*ck they wanted, they wouldnt be guardians like you would make them out to be.

If the individuals within the group felt that this should be done or this should be fixed... Then they would donate towards the project etc.

If they donated, and you can bet they would only donate a few times and then stop donating to expect everyone else to pitch in.

But no taxes.

Thoughts?

Wouldnt work in a modern society at all

I appreciate your thoughts, but disagree obviously.

This model is needed even more in modern society. You want everyone to have drone missiles, tanks, and nuclear warheads? These things have to be regulated by a group in power. The difference is that the people who control this power should be of the highest caliber morally and intellectually. There is no other way. Power always wins, so we need to make sure however we can that we give that power to the right people. Otherwise, those who are not suited to wield this power will be open to take it and use it aggressively to oppress people.

There is always going to be the chance of those who have guns to aggressively shake down those who they wish to control. This can be anyone or any group... Not just a government.

Sorry my friend... Congress and the Supreme court are all part of our oppression and only do what is the best interests of those who wish to maintain their non-voluntary hold of power. They oppress far more liberty than they grant and protect. As long as you comply and obey to their authority you will be ok... We are slaves not volunteers.
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2012 10:36:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/7/2012 9:32:39 AM, imabench wrote:
It most certainly would not. If Liberty Guardians had all the guns they could easily start shaking down people for money and then spend it on whatever the f*ck they wanted, they wouldnt be guardians like you would make them out to be.

Pretty much what happens now, except the "Liberty Guardians" are the government.

Also, I'm not sure if this idea would work but I like it.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
imabench
Posts: 21,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2012 10:43:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/7/2012 10:07:14 AM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
At 9/7/2012 9:32:39 AM, imabench wrote:
At 9/7/2012 9:17:14 AM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
I believe that we do indeed need a group in power to protect our liberty from aggressive forces and to organize the collective efforts of those within the group.

Congress and the Supreme Court both have the role of protecting Civil Rights they feel are being violated and have done a decent job of protecting them in the past.

A benevolent group of Liberty Guardians that would perform many of the duties that government usually performs..

So basically another government

But this group should only hold that power through the voluntary efforts of those within the group it is protecting. No taxes. Only donations.

Then whats the incentive? People hate taxes more then anything else if you give them the option of making a donation then there is the possibility that they would donate only scrap amounts, if any at all.

Donations that could be specifically directed and spent on something that the person who donated the money felt strongly about.

So now people limit their meager donations (if any) to the thing they feel strongly the most about and the "liberty protectors" cannot use it for anything else? That would be madness and even less would be available to help "preserve liberty"

This would keep these Liberty Guardians (or any other label) in check and funded with the resources they need to provide the infrastructure and protection of the group at all times.

It most certainly would not. If Liberty Guardians had all the guns they could easily start shaking down people for money and then spend it on whatever the f*ck they wanted, they wouldnt be guardians like you would make them out to be.

If the individuals within the group felt that this should be done or this should be fixed... Then they would donate towards the project etc.

If they donated, and you can bet they would only donate a few times and then stop donating to expect everyone else to pitch in.

But no taxes.

Thoughts?

Wouldnt work in a modern society at all

I appreciate your thoughts, but disagree obviously.

This model is needed even more in modern society. You want everyone to have drone missiles, tanks, and nuclear warheads? These things have to be regulated by a group in power. The difference is that the people who control this power should be of the highest caliber morally and intellectually. There is no other way. Power always wins, so we need to make sure however we can that we give that power to the right people. Otherwise, those who are not suited to wield this power will be open to take it and use it aggressively to oppress people.

There is always going to be the chance of those who have guns to aggressively shake down those who they wish to control. This can be anyone or any group... Not just a government.

Sorry my friend... Congress and the Supreme court are all part of our oppression and only do what is the best interests of those who wish to maintain their non-voluntary hold of power. They oppress far more liberty than they grant and protect. As long as you comply and obey to their authority you will be ok... We are slaves not volunteers.

You didn't address the main problem that people wouldn't have an incentive to give money as a donation for the same services it takes billions in tax dollars to fund.

You can't simply replace government with charity and expect everything to work
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Justin_Thiel
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2012 11:57:50 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/7/2012 10:43:22 AM, imabench wrote:
At 9/7/2012 10:07:14 AM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
At 9/7/2012 9:32:39 AM, imabench wrote:
At 9/7/2012 9:17:14 AM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
I believe that we do indeed need a group in power to protect our liberty from aggressive forces and to organize the collective efforts of those within the group.

Congress and the Supreme Court both have the role of protecting Civil Rights they feel are being violated and have done a decent job of protecting them in the past.

A benevolent group of Liberty Guardians that would perform many of the duties that government usually performs..

So basically another government

But this group should only hold that power through the voluntary efforts of those within the group it is protecting. No taxes. Only donations.

Then whats the incentive? People hate taxes more then anything else if you give them the option of making a donation then there is the possibility that they would donate only scrap amounts, if any at all.

Donations that could be specifically directed and spent on something that the person who donated the money felt strongly about.

So now people limit their meager donations (if any) to the thing they feel strongly the most about and the "liberty protectors" cannot use it for anything else? That would be madness and even less would be available to help "preserve liberty"

This would keep these Liberty Guardians (or any other label) in check and funded with the resources they need to provide the infrastructure and protection of the group at all times.

It most certainly would not. If Liberty Guardians had all the guns they could easily start shaking down people for money and then spend it on whatever the f*ck they wanted, they wouldnt be guardians like you would make them out to be.

If the individuals within the group felt that this should be done or this should be fixed... Then they would donate towards the project etc.

If they donated, and you can bet they would only donate a few times and then stop donating to expect everyone else to pitch in.

But no taxes.

Thoughts?

Wouldnt work in a modern society at all

I appreciate your thoughts, but disagree obviously.

This model is needed even more in modern society. You want everyone to have drone missiles, tanks, and nuclear warheads? These things have to be regulated by a group in power. The difference is that the people who control this power should be of the highest caliber morally and intellectually. There is no other way. Power always wins, so we need to make sure however we can that we give that power to the right people. Otherwise, those who are not suited to wield this power will be open to take it and use it aggressively to oppress people.

There is always going to be the chance of those who have guns to aggressively shake down those who they wish to control. This can be anyone or any group... Not just a government.

Sorry my friend... Congress and the Supreme court are all part of our oppression and only do what is the best interests of those who wish to maintain their non-voluntary hold of power. They oppress far more liberty than they grant and protect. As long as you comply and obey to their authority you will be ok... We are slaves not volunteers.

You didn't address the main problem that people wouldn't have an incentive to give money as a donation for the same services it takes billions in tax dollars to fund.

You can't simply replace government with charity and expect everything to work

Desire and self preservation IS the incentive. If the people want their liberty protected then they will donate to ensure that happens.. If they want a road from point A to point B they will donate to get it built.. If they want a universal healthcare system.. They will donate to fund it. Etc.

They will do these things not because someone tells them to or forces them to.. But because whatever they donate towards is in their best interests as it pertains to what they feel is important as an individual.

Do you have any idea how many people donate time and money nationside each year? Combine that with the people who would join the ranks from no longer feeling oppressed by taxes and you have more than enough to make a voluntary government entity a functioning reality.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2012 4:58:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Liberty Guardian: Hey, we need more people to protect our citizens... d'oh well, let's just pass out our donations to our two hundred employees... eight hundred grand each. Done! Oh wait, no we can't, because they've all died in that riot over on the other side of the country cos there's now no police force there as we don't have enough policemen...
Newspaper: "Liberty Guardians get paid 800k a year even though Washington burnt down!"
two million recruits: We want to join the army to get paid 800 gra-- I mean, to help the citizens!
Liberty Guardian: OK! That sounds like a great idea! Now all I need is the weapons and payment for these guys... Oh well. There, you can half a bullet per person and your weekly wage of $2.50. Don't spend it all at once!

This really, really bad script would be the result of a voluntary army. Nowhere near enough money in the system to maintain it, nowhere near enough weaponry and transport, and an idiotic fluctuation in the number of recruits.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Justin_Thiel
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 12:04:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/8/2012 4:58:22 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Liberty Guardian: Hey, we need more people to protect our citizens... d'oh well, let's just pass out our donations to our two hundred employees... eight hundred grand each. Done! Oh wait, no we can't, because they've all died in that riot over on the other side of the country cos there's now no police force there as we don't have enough policemen...
Newspaper: "Liberty Guardians get paid 800k a year even though Washington burnt down!"
two million recruits: We want to join the army to get paid 800 gra-- I mean, to help the citizens!
Liberty Guardian: OK! That sounds like a great idea! Now all I need is the weapons and payment for these guys... Oh well. There, you can half a bullet per person and your weekly wage of $2.50. Don't spend it all at once!

This really, really bad script would be the result of a voluntary army. Nowhere near enough money in the system to maintain it, nowhere near enough weaponry and transport, and an idiotic fluctuation in the number of recruits.

The people would be funding through donations and directing their donations as they see fit. The only way your scenario would play out is if people directed their donations in such a way.
imabench
Posts: 21,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 3:59:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/10/2012 12:04:01 PM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
At 9/8/2012 4:58:22 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Liberty Guardian: Hey, we need more people to protect our citizens... d'oh well, let's just pass out our donations to our two hundred employees... eight hundred grand each. Done! Oh wait, no we can't, because they've all died in that riot over on the other side of the country cos there's now no police force there as we don't have enough policemen...
Newspaper: "Liberty Guardians get paid 800k a year even though Washington burnt down!"
two million recruits: We want to join the army to get paid 800 gra-- I mean, to help the citizens!
Liberty Guardian: OK! That sounds like a great idea! Now all I need is the weapons and payment for these guys... Oh well. There, you can half a bullet per person and your weekly wage of $2.50. Don't spend it all at once!

This really, really bad script would be the result of a voluntary army. Nowhere near enough money in the system to maintain it, nowhere near enough weaponry and transport, and an idiotic fluctuation in the number of recruits.


The people would be funding through donations and directing their donations as they see fit. The only way your scenario would play out is if people directed their donations in such a way.

People DO do that! People are greedy and hoarders and anyone who would make 3 or 4 donations to a cause would soon start to give less and less since no progress is being made, and eventually stop donating completely.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
EricPrice
Posts: 79
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 4:38:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I want to point out that this is not a hypothetical conversation " it is reality. There are many nations with a governing system almost exactly like this. The residents of these nations pay no taxes, unless they wish to do so. As a bonus, businesses and private enterprises are almost entirely unregulated. Their national armies are also fully volunteer militaries.

I don"t think these are utopian paradises, but I want to make it clear that they exist.

East Timor, Sudan, Border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan are three prominent examples.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 4:39:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/10/2012 4:38:09 PM, EricPrice wrote:
I want to point out that this is not a hypothetical conversation " it is reality. There are many nations with a governing system almost exactly like this. The residents of these nations pay no taxes, unless they wish to do so. As a bonus, businesses and private enterprises are almost entirely unregulated. Their national armies are also fully volunteer militaries.

I don"t think these are utopian paradises, but I want to make it clear that they exist.

East Timor, Sudan, Border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan are three prominent examples.

Oh yeah, cause Sudan, dang they have it good there. Same with Afghan and Pakistan.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
rogue
Posts: 2,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 7:18:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/7/2012 9:17:14 AM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
I believe that we do indeed need a group in power to protect our liberty from aggressive forces and to organize the collective efforts of those within the group. A benevolent group of Liberty Guardians that would perform many of the duties that government usually performs..But this group should only hold that power through the voluntary efforts of those within the group it is protecting.

Yeah and how easy is that gonna be when no one in the U.S. can agree on anything?

No taxes. Only donations. Donations that could be specifically directed and spent on something that the person who donated the money felt strongly about.

That idea is incredibly inefficient. First of all the donations would probably be practically nonexistent. Second of all if they are all the donations are spread out, how do we know that different things get enough money to make a difference? Who deals with the donations?

This would keep these Liberty Guardians (or any other label) in check and funded with the resources they need to provide the infrastructure and protection of the group at all times. If the individuals within the group felt that this should be done or this should be fixed... Then they would donate towards the project etc.

But no taxes.

Thoughts?

Why do you have such a problem with taxes? Taxes makes people do their part in taking care of other Americans. Everyone benefits from taxes. Taxes go to roads, schools, so many other things besides welfare. So tell me why taxes are so awful?
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 7:20:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Plus, if you honestly believe our current military would in any way be outclassed by these "Liberty Guardians" then your a lot stupider than you seem.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 9:41:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/10/2012 9:32:21 PM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
Why do I have a problem with taxes? Because taxes equal slavery. If I don't have a choice then I am a slave.

You can choose to live in jail or Somalia so you don't have to pay taxes.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
imabench
Posts: 21,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 10:31:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/10/2012 9:32:21 PM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
Why do I have a problem with taxes? Because taxes equal slavery. If I don't have a choice then I am a slave.

Man I wish that DDO had a program where a stereotypical condescending black guy can jump out of someones computer and beat the sh*t out of someone for comparing slavery to something ridiculous.

Taxes do not = slavery. Taxes take somewhere from 20% to 35% of your income and you get to work in whatever field you want as long as you have the training and you allowed benefits like taking days off, being allowed to raise a family, spend your income on whatever you want, and having reasonable working conditions.

Slavery takes ALL of your income in a field you do not want to work in and have to work at all your life and you do not enjoy the luxuries of life, or even basic rights for that matter. Slavery is being denied basic freedoms that still exist under taxes and the argument goes much deeper than that but basically slavery means that in the end, you have nothing, taxes on the other hand mean you lose maybe 10%.

Learn the difference between slavery and taxes dude....
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
quarterexchange
Posts: 1,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 10:33:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/10/2012 9:32:21 PM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
Why do I have a problem with taxes? Because taxes equal slavery. If I don't have a choice then I am a slave.

I would agree that taxes are a form of theft, but theft =/= slavery.

Additionally I'd argue that a minimal amount of theft on the government's part is justified, just barely enough to cover the police, the judicial system, and much more scaled down military.
I don't discriminate....I hate everybody.
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 11:09:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/10/2012 10:31:51 PM, imabench wrote:
At 9/10/2012 9:32:21 PM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
Why do I have a problem with taxes? Because taxes equal slavery. If I don't have a choice then I am a slave.

Man I wish that DDO had a program where a stereotypical condescending black guy can jump out of someones computer and beat the sh*t out of someone for comparing slavery to something ridiculous.

Taxes do not = slavery. Taxes take somewhere from 20% to 35% of your income and you get to work in whatever field you want as long as you have the training and you allowed benefits like taking days off, being allowed to raise a family, spend your income on whatever you want, and having reasonable working conditions.

Slavery takes ALL of your income in a field you do not want to work in and have to work at all your life and you do not enjoy the luxuries of life, or even basic rights for that matter. Slavery is being denied basic freedoms that still exist under taxes and the argument goes much deeper than that but basically slavery means that in the end, you have nothing, taxes on the other hand mean you lose maybe 10%.

Learn the difference between slavery and taxes dude....

From the following article on Harvard libertarian philosopher Robert Nozick and his ideas:

"But if individuals are inviolable ends-in-themselves (as Kant describes them) and self-owners, it follows, Nozick says, that they have certain rights, in particular (and here again following Locke) rights to their lives, liberty, and the fruits of their labor. To own something, after all, just is to have a right to it, or, more accurately, to possess the bundle of rights " rights to possess something, to dispose of it, to determine what may be done with it, etc. " that constitute ownership; and thus to own oneself is to have such rights to the various elements that make up one"s self. These rights function, Nozick says, as side-constraints on the actions of others; they set limits on how others may, morally speaking, treat a person. So, for example, since you own yourself, and thus have a right to yourself, others are constrained morally not to kill or maim you (since this would involve destroying or damaging your property), or to kidnap you or forcibly remove one of your bodily organs for transplantation in someone else (since this would involve stealing your property). They are also constrained not to force you against your will to work for another"s purposes, even if those purposes are good ones. For if you own yourself, it follows that you have a right to determine whether and how you will use your self-owned body and its powers, e.g. either to work or to refrain from working.

So far this all might seem fairly uncontroversial. But what follows from it, in Nozick"s view, is the surprising and radical conclusion that taxation, of the redistributive sort in which modern states engage in order to fund the various programs of the bureaucratic welfare state, is morally illegitimate. It amounts to a kind of forced labor, for the state so structures the tax system that any time you labor at all, a certain amount of your labor time " the amount that produces the wealth taken away from you forcibly via taxation " is time you involuntarily work, in effect, for the state. Indeed, such taxation amounts to partial slavery, for in giving every citizen an entitlement to certain benefits (welfare, social security, or whatever), the state in effect gives them an entitlement, a right, to a part of the proceeds of your labor, which produces the taxes that fund the benefits; every citizen, that is, becomes in such a system a partial owner of you (since they have a partial property right in part of you, i.e. in your labor). But this is flatly inconsistent with the principle of self-ownership."
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2012 11:17:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/10/2012 10:31:51 PM, imabench wrote:
At 9/10/2012 9:32:21 PM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
Why do I have a problem with taxes? Because taxes equal slavery. If I don't have a choice then I am a slave.

Man I wish that DDO had a program where a stereotypical condescending black guy can jump out of someones computer and beat the sh*t out of someone for comparing slavery to something ridiculous.

Taxes do not = slavery. Taxes take somewhere from 20% to 35% of your income and you get to work in whatever field you want as long as you have the training and you allowed benefits like taking days off, being allowed to raise a family, spend your income on whatever you want, and having reasonable working conditions.

Slavery takes ALL of your income in a field you do not want to work in and have to work at all your life and you do not enjoy the luxuries of life, or even basic rights for that matter. Slavery is being denied basic freedoms that still exist under taxes and the argument goes much deeper than that but basically slavery means that in the end, you have nothing, taxes on the other hand mean you lose maybe 10%.

Learn the difference between slavery and taxes dude....

Also refer to 2:30 - 5:45 in this video. It illustrates Robert Nozick's "Tale of the Slave" which he discusses in pages 290-292 in his Anarchy, State, and Utopia. If you want to see it in written form - http://www.duke.edu... . I think the Tale of the Slave shows pretty convincingly that government taxation as we know it today is at least akin to partial slavery.
imabench
Posts: 21,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2012 12:34:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/10/2012 11:17:08 PM, jat93 wrote:

I think the Tale of the Slave shows pretty convincingly that government taxation as we know it today is at least akin to partial slavery.


Comparing taxes to partial slavery is a comparison i find very reasonable and accurate, I just have an issue when someone has the audacity to think that taxation is as bad as slavery on every level.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2012 12:57:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/11/2012 12:34:29 AM, imabench wrote:
At 9/10/2012 11:17:08 PM, jat93 wrote:

I think the Tale of the Slave shows pretty convincingly that government taxation as we know it today is at least akin to partial slavery.


Comparing taxes to partial slavery is a comparison i find very reasonable and accurate, I just have an issue when someone has the audacity to think that taxation is as bad as slavery on every level.

Oh, well you're obviously right about that... With taxation, the government at least lets us keep most of our income, and we mostly retain self ownership of our bodies. That's better than having no freedom at all; the only problem is that precisely because it's more subtle and less extreme partial slavery, there's the danger that people will not find it theft/slavery at all. When you don't ultimately own most of the fruit of your labor or your body at all, as in the kind of slavery you're talking about, it's pretty undeniable that you are in fact a slave.
Justin_Thiel
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2012 1:59:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/11/2012 12:34:29 AM, imabench wrote:
At 9/10/2012 11:17:08 PM, jat93 wrote:

I think the Tale of the Slave shows pretty convincingly that government taxation as we know it today is at least akin to partial slavery.


Comparing taxes to partial slavery is a comparison i find very reasonable and accurate, I just have an issue when someone has the audacity to think that taxation is as bad as slavery on every level.

I never said that taxation equals slavery on every level and in every way. I said that it equals slavery and it was meant as a generalization. If the government decided to pass legislation that you couldn't leave the country and then raised the tax rate to 99.5% on all forms of taxation it currently enforces...

Would that look more like slavery to you?

The government makes the rules just like a slave owner and you will obey or be punished just like a slave would. Is my comparison irrational or illogical? I think not.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2012 2:31:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/11/2012 1:59:29 PM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
At 9/11/2012 12:34:29 AM, imabench wrote:
At 9/10/2012 11:17:08 PM, jat93 wrote:

I think the Tale of the Slave shows pretty convincingly that government taxation as we know it today is at least akin to partial slavery.


Comparing taxes to partial slavery is a comparison i find very reasonable and accurate, I just have an issue when someone has the audacity to think that taxation is as bad as slavery on every level.

I never said that taxation equals slavery on every level and in every way. I said that it equals slavery and it was meant as a generalization. If the government decided to pass legislation that you couldn't leave the country and then raised the tax rate to 99.5% on all forms of taxation it currently enforces...

Would that look more like slavery to you?

The government makes the rules just like a slave owner and you will obey or be punished just like a slave would. Is my comparison irrational or illogical? I think not.

You still have voluntary action on what you can buy or whether you want to work or not, and how much you want to work.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2012 11:03:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Man I wish that DDO had a program where a stereotypical condescending black guy can jump out of someones computer and beat the sh*t out of someone for comparing slavery to something ridiculous.
Slavery is forced labor.

Taxes exert force on a portion of my labor.

Comparing taxes to partial slavery is a comparison i find very reasonable and accurate, I just have an issue when someone has the audacity to think that taxation is as bad as slavery on every level.
Slavery a is slavery a. There is no moral difference between traditional sole proprietorship slavery and modern joint stock slavery. Either you own yourself or you don't. There are free men and slaves. No third option.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Justin_Thiel
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2012 2:35:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/11/2012 2:31:13 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/11/2012 1:59:29 PM, Justin_Thiel wrote:
At 9/11/2012 12:34:29 AM, imabench wrote:
At 9/10/2012 11:17:08 PM, jat93 wrote:

I think the Tale of the Slave shows pretty convincingly that government taxation as we know it today is at least akin to partial slavery.


Comparing taxes to partial slavery is a comparison i find very reasonable and accurate, I just have an issue when someone has the audacity to think that taxation is as bad as slavery on every level.

I never said that taxation equals slavery on every level and in every way. I said that it equals slavery and it was meant as a generalization. If the government decided to pass legislation that you couldn't leave the country and then raised the tax rate to 99.5% on all forms of taxation it currently enforces...

Would that look more like slavery to you?

The government makes the rules just like a slave owner and you will obey or be punished just like a slave would. Is my comparison irrational or illogical? I think not.

You still have voluntary action on what you can buy or whether you want to work or not, and how much you want to work.

You have basically the same options as a slave. You don't HAVE to work... But you won't survive very well in either situation if you don't. Also, where do you think a person who doesn't work can go to live in our country? All the property is owned by the government. You do as your government masters say or you will be punished in some way. We are not free to opt out. We have the illusion of freedom. If your slave owner gives you a house, laptop, tv, smartphone, etc. and gives you some freedoms in the surrounding environment... But can change the rules at anytime and punish you for not obeying... Is that freedom? Is that slavery? You be your own judge. To me.. It's slavery with the illusion of freedom.