It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Janky RedWell you stating that taxation is theft is your subjective opinion -
Taxation is far more prevalent in the world than not, empirically so.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Janky Red
Voluntary exchange is what created the prosperity you seem to deem as evil.
Voluntary exchange is the only reason someone would actually go out and produce something.
If I desire something someone else has, then I must produce something of value that I can trade them if I am to get from them.
If the other person simply handed me his stuff, and I knew I could always get it by simply asking him, then what reason would I have to go out and engage in productive behavior?
While it is certainly nice of the man to give me his stuff for free, if all the producers did that, nothing would ever get produced.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Covet is a desire for the property.
Greed, by my definition, is a desire to take the property by force.
It is impossible to do harm to others by acquiring things through voluntary exchange, since the person giving you the property must be benefiting from the transaction himself.
By voluntarily exchanging things with others, you are actually doing the community a service.
The desire to take the fruit of other people's labor without having to work for it.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Golf66
I have a big problem re-branding violent theft as taxation and then claiming it is good.
If something is good for me, it will not require the use of firearms to impose upon me.
I am not a slave.
Originally posted by quantum_flux
I'm on board, I love this idea. I'm not greedy after all. I'll tell you what, nothing more annoying than being a rich guy in a poor country, the greedy beggars are everywhere. Would be nice if they got my money by working for it instead of begging for it.
Originally posted by quantum_flux
I define "wealthy" in a mathematical sense. Making more money than you spend. I define "poor" as being spending more money than you make. You're middle class if you make equal amount of money as you spend.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by quantum_flux
I define "wealthy" in a mathematical sense. Making more money than you spend. I define "poor" as being spending more money than you make. You're middle class if you make equal amount of money as you spend.
I define wealthy in a political sense.
If you make more money on government contracts, subsidies, bailouts, and the suppression of competition through regulations than you pay in taxes, you are wealthy.
If you get looted at a higher rate than you use government services, you are middle class.
If you come out a head in terms of government services used versus how much you pay in taxes, you are poor.
edit on 18-1-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Jazzyguy
Making violent theft legal does not automatically make it moral.
Therefore your argument fails.