All taxation is theft.
Taking property against someone's wishes using the threat of force is theft.
Unless you use a different definition of the word theft....
am I missing something?
they use different definitions of the word theft.
thats exactly what you would expect of thieves...
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
Am I missing something
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
limitgov: All taxation is theft. Taking property against someone's wishes using the threat of force is theft. Unless you use a different definition of the word theft.... am I missing something?
Most taxation isn't theft. It is extortion. Only if the extortion fails will they stoop to full on theft.
"I cannot prove, but am prepared to affirm, that if you take care of clarity in reasoning, most good causes will take care of themselves, while some bad ones are taken care of as a matter of course." -Anthony de Jasay
You are basically correct. Any further corrections are pretty much nitpicking.... Except for the fact that if its an all powerful benevolent and omnipotent being doing the theft it's called taxation.
All the statists and Keynesians will look up and shout "Save Us!" and I'll wisper "No."
limitgov: All taxation is theft. Taking property against someone's wishes using the threat of force is theft.
"It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But the half-wit remains a half-wit and the emperor remains an emperor." ~Dream
Snowflake:Some people want to pay taxes... Just sayin...
Would they still want to pay taxes if they didn't perceive to receive a benefit?
That is, if they paid taxes for garbage disposal without competition, then that might make sense, but if there was competition with better prices and/or service, would it be consistent to keep paying the monopoly prices? Do you normally overpay for the goods and services you purchase? Would a market be possible if people did not treat prices as measurements with which to allocate resources?
Likewise, if they pay taxes, but receive a larger net benefit, then surely that does not make the argument that they believe in paying their fair share, but only a share that entitles them to a larger share in return.
The premise of taxation rests on ignorance and monopoly. If we can reduce ignorance, and undermine monopoly, then taxation is on the endangered ideas list. But if we don't treat the cause (ignorance) and don't clearly identify the symptoms (monopoly, violence) then we're just spinning our wheels.
If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap