Is Taxation Theft?

Is taxation theft? (Disregard whether you think taxes are necessary.)

  • Yes

    Votes: 127 87.0%
  • No

    Votes: 19 13.0%

  • Total voters
    146
It is impossible for you to amend a contract you did not sign.


I thought we were talking about the constitution and the ability to amend it in the event 'we the people' didn't want taxation anymore. ????

Your argument was an analogy, I thought. No?
 
I thought we were talking about the constitution and the ability to amend it in the event 'we the people' didn't want taxation anymore. ????

Your argument was an analogy, I thought. No?

The question was, "is taxation theft?". I didn't see any indication the question was restricted to the Constitution. Anything can be constitutional as long it complies with the Constitution, and includes the the amendments. But theft is theft whether or not it is constitutional.
 
Why don't yous (that should be a word) guys move to a different country where there are no taxes?
By living here you agree to some of those taxes.
By electing representatives and them creating taxes you are participating.
Theorecticly(sp) you agree to the taxes, and the other laws as well.
Ignoring At the wikipedia aspect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Consent says, and I agree, that if you don't like it then move, to another country.
You could also try to change your Congress reps but that obviously isn't working.

Here is a great rebuttal to this argument by Dr. Walter Block. You can start from the beginning but the relevant part starts at 25 min. 5 sec. On Libertarian Political Philosophy (http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/block/1.mp3)
 
The question was, "is taxation theft?". I didn't see any indication the question was restricted to the Constitution. Anything can be constitutional as long it complies with the Constitution, and includes the the amendments. But theft is theft whether or not it is constitutional.

Yes, dearest, I know what the question was. But you responded to my statement regarding the Constitution on this matter....nuff said....
 
Yes, dearest, I know what the question was. But you responded to my statement regarding the Constitution on this matter....nuff said....

:o I was giving you my reasoning for responding as I did. I wasnt trying to be an a-hole.
 
Heres what I say.


By living in The United States Government you are agreeing to pay taxes equal to WHAT IT TAKES TO PAY FOR THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF TO KEEP GOING AT THE BARE MINIMUM LEVEL. However anything the government decides to take above of what they need to keep the government functioning is theft.
 
Heres what I say.


By living in The United States Government you are agreeing to pay taxes equal to WHAT IT TAKES TO PAY FOR THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF TO KEEP GOING AT THE BARE MINIMUM LEVEL. However anything the government decides to take above of what they need to keep the government functioning is theft.

Why should I have to pay tribute to a bunch of thugs? Cause they have more guns than I do? Cause a bunch of people think their authority is legit? If I don't consent, it's immoral for them to take my money by force for any reason. If it was 299,999,999 to 1, they still don't have the right to mug me every paycheck.

And I was born here, this is my home, why should I have to leave because some terrorists insist on stealing from me? The argument for small govt is the same argument for big government. Your line of reasoning can be used to justify any level of government.

Let go of the notion that "but we HAVE to have SOME government." We don't.
 
Heres what I say.


By living in The United States Government you are agreeing to pay taxes equal to WHAT IT TAKES TO PAY FOR THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF TO KEEP GOING AT THE BARE MINIMUM LEVEL. However anything the government decides to take above of what they need to keep the government functioning is theft.

That's idiotic. But please the read my earlier posts.
 
According to the constitution, unapporitioned taxes (like the income tax) are a no-no, and therefore theft. (See article 1, section 9 of the constitution).

Not true. Reread the Constitution.

Income tax is an indirect tax and doesn't need to follow the rules of apportionment.
 
Not true. Reread the Constitution.

Income tax is an indirect tax and doesn't need to follow the rules of apportionment.

Income tax IS a direct tax on income.

Article 1, section 2-"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other persons."

Is that not clear enough for you? Now YOU reread the constitution! :mad:

P.S....
supplemental for you-
http://moneycentral.msn.com/taxes/glossary/glossary.asp?TermID=99
Direct Tax
A tax that you pay directly, as opposed to indirect taxes, such as tariffs and business taxes. Direct taxes include income and property taxes.
 
Last edited:
Income tax IS a direct tax on income.

Article 1, section 2-"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other persons."

Is that not clear enough for you? Now YOU reread the constitution! :mad:

P.S....
supplemental for you-
http://moneycentral.msn.com/taxes/glossary/glossary.asp?TermID=99
Direct Tax
A tax that you pay directly, as opposed to indirect taxes, such as tariffs and business taxes. Direct taxes include income and property taxes.

Wrong.
 
Taxes are government threatening to imprison you unless you give them money.

It depends on the tax. For example, excise taxes, tariffs, taxes on unearned income - all fair. Taxation on wages is not only thievery, it's unconstitutional.

Those taxes are extortion.
 
Back
Top