Total Posts:30|Showing Posts:1-30
Jump to topic:

Lack Taxation . . .

SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 7:02:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
When government no longer maintains the power of taxation, government can no longer do its job which is to protect the rights and liberties of its subjects, so to say that government should not have the power to tax will lead to an all out destruction of the value of currency. If you remove government revenue the government can no longer provide education, construct and repair roads, defend borders, construct and maintain hospitals, etc . . . etc . . .
To state that government should not have taxation powers is down right bullsh*t and allow me to make a simple reference to a nation that tried to be founded on a principle of no taxation http://wikimapia.org... http://flagspot.net... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.google.com... no taxation = death of a nation . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 7:13:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Minerva failed because people we're unwilling to fight for it. Otherwise, libertarians want lower taxation or optional taxation. Opt out and you no longer get any of the governments fine services.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 7:13:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 7:02:10 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
When government no longer maintains the power of taxation, government can no longer do its job which is to protect the rights and liberties of its subjects
When prospective parents lose the power to rape, it becomes impossible for them to reproduce.
so to say that government should not have the power to tax will lead to an all out destruction of the value of currency.
And an abolition of disease will destroy the value of medicine, what's your point?
Unless you mean all currency rather than just fiat currency, which is false.

If you remove government revenue the government can no longer provide education, construct and repair roads, defend borders, construct and maintain hospitals, etc . . . etc . . .
Unless you prescribe a new revenue source.

To state that government should not have taxation powers is down right bullsh*t and allow me to make a simple reference to a nation that tried to be founded on a principle of no taxation http://wikimapia.org...
Micronations with taxation frequently falter too. "Make a micronation" has a low percentage of success as a move.
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.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 7:35:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 7:13:29 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Minerva failed because people we're unwilling to fight for it. Otherwise, libertarians want lower taxation or optional taxation. Opt out and you no longer get any of the governments fine services.

I am talking about those who want government to not be able to tax whatsoever, not lower or optional taxation . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 7:38:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 7:35:33 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 7:13:29 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Minerva failed because people we're unwilling to fight for it. Otherwise, libertarians want lower taxation or optional taxation. Opt out and you no longer get any of the governments fine services.

I am talking about those who want government to not be able to tax whatsoever, not lower or optional taxation . . .

They're Anarchists. They don't want a government.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 7:48:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
To state that government should not have taxation powers is down right bullsh*t and allow me to make a simple reference to a nation that tried to be founded on a principle of no taxation:

Who said anything about no taxation, other than anarchists? We want FAIR taxation, the kind CLEARLY outlined in the Constitution. We want APPORTIONED taxes, not unapportioned taxes.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 7:54:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 7:38:43 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 1/2/2011 7:35:33 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 7:13:29 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Minerva failed because people we're unwilling to fight for it. Otherwise, libertarians want lower taxation or optional taxation. Opt out and you no longer get any of the governments fine services.

I am talking about those who want government to not be able to tax whatsoever, not lower or optional taxation . . .

They're Anarchists. They don't want a government.

Yeah but there are some who believe they can keep the government and not have the taxes, we call them http://www.answers.com... and on most occasions tea party protesters . . . http://vodpod.com... http://www.nerve.com... #!
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 7:56:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 7:48:21 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
To state that government should not have taxation powers is down right bullsh*t and allow me to make a simple reference to a nation that tried to be founded on a principle of no taxation:

Who said anything about no taxation, other than anarchists? We want FAIR taxation, the kind CLEARLY outlined in the Constitution. We want APPORTIONED taxes, not unapportioned taxes.

I think you all are assuming I am simply pointing at libertarians, I am only talking about those who wish to ban taxes and keep the government, if you believe otherwise then you agree with me . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 7:57:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 7:35:33 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 7:13:29 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Minerva failed because people we're unwilling to fight for it. Otherwise, libertarians want lower taxation or optional taxation. Opt out and you no longer get any of the governments fine services.

I am talking about those who want government to not be able to tax whatsoever, not lower or optional taxation . . .

Who fell for the trap?
You fell for the trap.

Who doesn't know what distinguishes taxes from other forms of payment?
You don't know what distinguishes taxes from other forms of payment.
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.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 7:58:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 7:57:03 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/2/2011 7:35:33 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 7:13:29 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Minerva failed because people we're unwilling to fight for it. Otherwise, libertarians want lower taxation or optional taxation. Opt out and you no longer get any of the governments fine services.

I am talking about those who want government to not be able to tax whatsoever, not lower or optional taxation . . .

Who fell for the trap?
You fell for the trap.

Who doesn't know what distinguishes taxes from other forms of payment?
You don't know what distinguishes taxes from other forms of payment.

Who fell for the trap?
You fell for the trap.

Who doesn't know what distinguishes taxes from other forms of payment?
You don't know what distinguishes taxes from other forms of payment.
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 8:00:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Facepalm. Repeating my words doesn't change anything.

Dude, if payment is optional-- ITS NOT A TAX. It's called a "user fee."
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.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 8:05:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 8:00:31 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Facepalm. Repeating my words doesn't change anything.

Dude, if payment is optional-- ITS NOT A TAX. It's called a "user fee."

Still a form of taxation, it acts as tax hence I refer to it as tax, it is that simple . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 8:06:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 8:05:09 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 8:00:31 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Facepalm. Repeating my words doesn't change anything.

Dude, if payment is optional-- ITS NOT A TAX. It's called a "user fee."

Still a form of taxation, it acts as tax hence I refer to it as tax, it is that simple . . .

"To tax is to impose a financial charge or other levy upon a taxpayer (an individual or legal entity) by a state or the functional equivalent of a state such that failure to pay is punishable by law."

Optional user fee =/= Taxation
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 8:10:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 8:05:09 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 8:00:31 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Facepalm. Repeating my words doesn't change anything.

Dude, if payment is optional-- ITS NOT A TAX. It's called a "user fee."

Still a form of taxation, it acts as tax hence I refer to it as tax, it is that simple . . .

Ah, so when I pay for insurance it's a tax. Got it.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 8:13:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"Sup KFC guy, i want one hunk of fried chicken."

"That'll be 2 bucks, with 20 cents tax."

"I thought it was all tax?"

"No, just the twenty cents is stuff the government points a gun at you for. The rest is for the chicken. Super Robot Wars is wrong."

"Thanks KFC guy."
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.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 8:37:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 8:13:25 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
"Sup KFC guy, i want one hunk of fried chicken."

"That'll be 2 bucks, with 20 cents tax."

"I thought it was all tax?"

"No, just the twenty cents is stuff the government points a gun at you for. The rest is for the chicken. Super Robot Wars is wrong."

"Thanks KFC guy."

GTFO
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 8:38:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 8:10:32 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 1/2/2011 8:05:09 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 8:00:31 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Facepalm. Repeating my words doesn't change anything.

Dude, if payment is optional-- ITS NOT A TAX. It's called a "user fee."

Still a form of taxation, it acts as tax hence I refer to it as tax, it is that simple . . .

Ah, so when I pay for insurance it's a tax. Got it.

Only if it goes to government . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 8:40:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 8:06:25 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 1/2/2011 8:05:09 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 8:00:31 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Facepalm. Repeating my words doesn't change anything.

Dude, if payment is optional-- ITS NOT A TAX. It's called a "user fee."

Still a form of taxation, it acts as tax hence I refer to it as tax, it is that simple . . .

"To tax is to impose a financial charge or other levy upon a taxpayer (an individual or legal entity) by a state or the functional equivalent of a state such that failure to pay is punishable by law."

Optional user fee =/= Taxation

To tax is to impose a financial charge or other levy upon a taxpayer (an individual or legal entity) by a state or the functional equivalent of a state

It is simply a new form of taxation . . . selective taxation . . .

Optional user fee by government = Taxation
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 8:46:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
no tax = no government
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 8:48:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Impose. Force is what you're missing.

If I go buy bread at some government owned store, the price isn't called tax, even though the cash goes to the government.
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.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 9:04:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 8:48:01 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Impose. Force is what you're missing.

If I go buy bread at some government owned store, the price isn't called tax, even though the cash goes to the government.

http://www.investorwords.com...
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 9:39:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
That definition is subpar. And if you believe otherwise, you are still committing the fallacy of equivocation, for that definition is not what people saying "Abolish taxes" speak of.
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.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 9:45:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 9:39:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That definition is subpar. And if you believe otherwise, you are still committing the fallacy of equivocation, for that definition is not what people saying "Abolish taxes" speak of.

It is a correct definition . . . such as these . . .
http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
http://www.google.com...
http://dictionary.reference.com...
http://www.investorwords.com...
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 11:44:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 7:02:10 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
When government no longer maintains the power of taxation, government can no longer do its job which is to protect the rights and liberties of its subjects,

It cannot accomplish such a job with it.

so to say that government should not have the power to tax will lead to an all out destruction of the value of currency.

How does that follow? Besides, it has no real value to begin with.

If you remove government revenue the government can no longer provide education, construct and repair roads, defend borders, construct and maintain hospitals, etc . . . etc . . .

Thank God.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2011 9:51:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 9:45:27 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 9:39:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That definition is subpar. And if you believe otherwise, you are still committing the fallacy of equivocation, for that definition is not what people saying "Abolish taxes" speak of.

It is a correct definition . . . such as these . . .
http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

"
1. A contribution for the support of a government required of persons, groups, or businesses within the domain of that government."

Does not support your side, supports ours. It doesn't say only required of users, merely of those within the domain.

http://www.google.com...
Most specific definition that's relevant:

"
Money paid to the government other than for transaction-specific goods and services; To impose and collect a tax from; To use to the limit"
OTHER THAN FOR TRANSACTION-SPECIFIC GOODS AND SERVICES.

http://dictionary.reference.com...

DEMANDED.

Note that you evaded the stuff about equivocation.
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.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2011 10:00:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/4/2011 9:51:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/2/2011 9:45:27 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 9:39:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That definition is subpar. And if you believe otherwise, you are still committing the fallacy of equivocation, for that definition is not what people saying "Abolish taxes" speak of.

It is a correct definition . . . such as these . . .
http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

"
1. A contribution for the support of a government required of persons, groups, or businesses within the domain of that government."

Does not support your side, supports ours. It doesn't say only required of users, merely of those within the domain.


http://www.google.com...
Most specific definition that's relevant:

"
Money paid to the government other than for transaction-specific goods and services; To impose and collect a tax from; To use to the limit"
OTHER THAN FOR TRANSACTION-SPECIFIC GOODS AND SERVICES.


http://dictionary.reference.com...

DEMANDED.

Note that you evaded the stuff about equivocation.

If it makes you feel any better I shall say taxation and other means of government revenue . . . happy now . . . so shall you answer the initial question now . . . ?
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2011 9:31:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/4/2011 10:00:29 AM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/4/2011 9:51:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/2/2011 9:45:27 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 9:39:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That definition is subpar. And if you believe otherwise, you are still committing the fallacy of equivocation, for that definition is not what people saying "Abolish taxes" speak of.

It is a correct definition . . . such as these . . .
http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

"
1. A contribution for the support of a government required of persons, groups, or businesses within the domain of that government."

Does not support your side, supports ours. It doesn't say only required of users, merely of those within the domain.


http://www.google.com...
Most specific definition that's relevant:

"
Money paid to the government other than for transaction-specific goods and services; To impose and collect a tax from; To use to the limit"
OTHER THAN FOR TRANSACTION-SPECIFIC GOODS AND SERVICES.


http://dictionary.reference.com...

DEMANDED.

Note that you evaded the stuff about equivocation.

If it makes you feel any better I shall say taxation and other means of government revenue . . . happy now . . . so shall you answer the initial question now . . . ?

Why, it's really rather simple. I don't support removing other means of government revenue. Once taxation is removed, we agree on the value of those other means of government revenue!
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.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2011 4:25:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/4/2011 9:31:20 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/4/2011 10:00:29 AM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/4/2011 9:51:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 1/2/2011 9:45:27 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 9:39:10 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That definition is subpar. And if you believe otherwise, you are still committing the fallacy of equivocation, for that definition is not what people saying "Abolish taxes" speak of.

It is a correct definition . . . such as these . . .
http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

"
1. A contribution for the support of a government required of persons, groups, or businesses within the domain of that government."

Does not support your side, supports ours. It doesn't say only required of users, merely of those within the domain.


http://www.google.com...
Most specific definition that's relevant:

"
Money paid to the government other than for transaction-specific goods and services; To impose and collect a tax from; To use to the limit"
OTHER THAN FOR TRANSACTION-SPECIFIC GOODS AND SERVICES.


http://dictionary.reference.com...

DEMANDED.

Note that you evaded the stuff about equivocation.

If it makes you feel any better I shall say taxation and other means of government revenue . . . happy now . . . so shall you answer the initial question now . . . ?

Why, it's really rather simple. I don't support removing other means of government revenue. Once taxation is removed, we agree on the value of those other means of government revenue!

I am glad we can come to an mutual understanding . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2011 8:27:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/2/2011 9:04:57 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 8:48:01 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Impose. Force is what you're missing.

If I go buy bread at some government owned store, the price isn't called tax, even though the cash goes to the government.

http://www.investorwords.com...

Avoid definition battles. Especially when you're wrong.
Levy means "to impose by authority or force." http://dictionary.reference.com...
If I were to impose by force a fee upon you, it would be theft.
If the government were to impose by force a fee upon you, it would be both taxation and theft. Taxation is only theft done by the government.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2011 3:32:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/5/2011 8:27:22 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 1/2/2011 9:04:57 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
At 1/2/2011 8:48:01 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Impose. Force is what you're missing.

If I go buy bread at some government owned store, the price isn't called tax, even though the cash goes to the government.

http://www.investorwords.com...

Avoid definition battles. Especially when you're wrong.
Levy means "to impose by authority or force." http://dictionary.reference.com...
If I were to impose by force a fee upon you, it would be theft.
If the government were to impose by force a fee upon you, it would be both taxation and theft. Taxation is only theft done by the government.

30 . . . and I was right . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.