Is taxation theft? (By WhiteChocolate MaleGold MedalGold TrophySuper StarDiamondGold Crown 10 months ago)

OR
97 votes
25 comments
image
WhiteChocolate says If the taking of money that a person earned through threat of coercion is not theft, then what is? You DO NOT have the right to own the product of your own labor, the State decides the amount you can have. You DO NOT have the right to own your own property, you have to rent it from the State. Is this a "fair" and "just" system, Statists?

Votes by gender

Guys
34 votes
38.2%
61.8%
Girls
6 votes
50%
50%
Unknowns
57 votes
49.12%
50.88%

Votes by country map view

United States
49 votes
51%
49%
United Kingdom
9 votes
11
89%
Canada
7 votes
57%
43%
Sweden
3 votes
100%
Israel
2 votes
50%
50%
Germany
2 votes
50%
50%
Belgium
2 votes
100%
France
2 votes
50%
50%
Portugal
2 votes
100%
New Zealand
2 votes
50%
50%
Czech Republic
1 vote
100%
Spain
1 vote
100%
Bulgaria
1 vote
100%
Switzerland
1 vote
100%
Finland
1 vote
100%
Ireland
1 vote
100%
Italy
1 vote
100%
Poland
1 vote
100%
Australia
1 vote
100%
Indonesia
1 vote
100%
Hong Kong
1 vote
100%
Malaysia
1 vote
100%
Netherlands
1 vote
100%
Russia
1 vote
100%
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    oook calm down
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    of course it is, and it is useless
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    F*ck the police
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    MustaKrakish Gold MedalGold TrophySuper Star from Pennsylvania, United States
    The concept of it and what it's purpose is supposed to be, not so much. The amount they do it these days, absolutely.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    Technically yes
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico +1
    Under your logic, profit is theft as well. Entrepreneurs don't work hard, their workers do and a fraction of what they produce is taken from them. The only difference is that nothing is given back to them.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico +1
    The difference is choice. Mutual consent is the basis of the free market. Use of force and a "might makes right" attitude is basis of communism. But I guess that doesn't mean much when you hate freedom.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico +1
    anameok MaleGold MedalGold TrophySuper StarDiamond from North Carolina, United States
    It's the price for living in a successful country
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico +1
    Bullsh*t. Anything the government does, the free market can do better. There is no competition in government, so there's no incentive to offer better service. Competition creates innovation and efficiency.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico +1
    anameok MaleGold MedalGold TrophySuper StarDiamond from North Carolina, United States
    taxes are used to fund a large number of things that are needed within their respective country. Our country would be a lot more sh*t if it didnt have taxes in place
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    You mean schools, police, hospitals, etc? These institutions would be much better in private hands. They would be able to compete, thus incentivizing innovation; the companies that provide the best educational, security and healthcare services would come out on top. Throughout the world, countries that embrace free-market policies have the best quality of life, while countries that embrace economic centralization have rampant poverty, corruption and oppression.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    Name me a single country that have completely privatized education and healthcare institutions that is at the top of the world in terms of quality of life.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico +1
    Anything the government does, the free market can do better? There is many instances in which that is true, but to suggest that that is applicable throughout all industries is completely false. The government runs education. healthcare, roads, and the armed forces better than private industries do. There is no competition in government. There's also no incentive to make a profit, so all people are provided with these services and for the lowest price. Also, the government plays a huge role in innovation. Many innovations comes directly from the government or from government funded or subsidized organizations. Taxes also give currency value. Without taxes currency is just paper. The whole reason you can use it to purchase goods and services is because it can be used to pay taxes. Even printing money itself is a government industry and cannot be paid for without taxes.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    Cheshire MaleGold MedalSuper Star from Skåne, Sweden
    So we are to leave the regulation of the free market to... The free market?
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    It's bulls*it but it's not theft.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico +1
    It's your debt to society that you pay to use its institutions.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico +1
    Except you don't have a choice. When you're forced pay taxes towards services, you might as well use the services. That's not wrong. Whats wrong is being forced to pay in the first place.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    So are you telling me the only reason you use the services provided by the government is because you pay taxes toward them? So you wouldn't use the roads, currency, telephone lines, etc. Hell if you buy food from the grocery store you're using government services which ensure those products won't give you e coli, salmonella, or other illnesses through inspection and regulation. If you want to live in that type of society, no, you don't have a choice. Your choice is to pay the taxes or leave.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico +1
    Many of the those services could be improved through privatization. Of course I'd still use them, but I'd have a choice what company I did business with and to what extent. Much better than having a monopoly confiscate my money by force and then granting me permission to use those services.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    So who's gonna pay these private companies to build and repair the infrastructure? Who's gonna pay these private corporations to ensure our food is safe?
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    Infrastructure could be sold off to private companie, who would maintain them (much more efficiently and inexpensively than the state) and charge for their use, but voluntarily.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    They tried privatizing their roads in Omaha. The roads became so bad the city was forced to dig up the asphalt and leave them as dirt roads. The funny thing is the companies built the roads with shít material and left. So, let's assume the roads will be the same. What's the difference between paying a company and paying the state? You're either paying a tax to the state or paying the equivalent of a tax to the company. What if you wanna make a road trip across the country and a different company owns a different section of roads every mile, do you have to stop and pay every time? The only way for your toll road system to work if if a few companies own a monopoly on the road systems. What happens if no company wants to buy the roads in a poverty stricken area? Who's gonna maintain those roads? What happens if all the companies decide to raise the price of the toll? What's to stop someone from buying the road in front of your house and not allowing you to use it? If you wanna suggest that somehow this ill be much more efficient and inexpensive you'll have to explain how on Earth you came to that conclusion. It's not voluntary if there's only one road out of your house. Many places don't have sidewalks and I assume those will be privatized too, so you literally have to pay a toll to be able to leave your yard. You can use public roads as much as you want for one rate. In fact, you have a right to mobility according to many national laws including in Canada and the US, so the state has to let you use their road systems.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    There are private roads in shopping malls - have you ever paid a toll to enter a shopping mall?. There are private roads in various places, such as Japan. They're not funded by tolls, but by large office complexes, which value transportation for employees and customers. Tolls are not the only method of paying for roads. The prime beneficiaries of roads are actually the property owners. Given half a chance, they'll pay to have access for customers, employees, and supplies.
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    Yes, private roads do exist on a micro scale. This is about the privatization of the whole state road system. There may be a drive to build a road in front of your business, but what would a company gain from building a road in a poor residential area? How will they pay for this road without government funding or tolls? There are plenty of reasons for companies to built roads where profit isn't being made on the road itself, but rather the access it provides. However, providing access for a community that doesn't have the basic income to purchase your products is a huge waste of money. Government funding is clearly out of the option and these areas pay so little in taxes that they spend less when they use government roads than toll roads. On another note I'm curious about these Japanese roads you referred to. I couldn't find anything on them. I don't want to assume wrong on what you said, so I figure it's smarter to just ask you. So are these roads built by the companies solely for the access and paid off through increased profit from the increased sales or how does it work?
  • image
    10 months ago
    ico
    generally speaking, nah