Theft & Taxes

[@AlexisAutotte]

"When the average citizen is burdened with massive debt, they become bankrupt, homeless, lose their freedom, and the trust of others. Yet, when the government is buried in massive debt, it takes money from taxpayers to pay off the very debt it created." -Alexis Autotte

[@xtremejohnny69]

Well we do need some taxes in any nation to pay for defense, police protection, roads things like that. But taxing the shit outta the rich isn't the way to do it. Now the fairtax...thats the way to do it!

[@Anekantavad]

Objections: - Fred's horses are only "his" in the sense that everyone else agrees they are. That's what property is. Legitimacy only exists in the collective sense, and without legitimacy we're in a state of Hobbesian anarchy. - Fred's legitimacy is guaranteed by the community. If there are 100 people without horses, and Fred has 2, and everyone is okay with that, they are keeping their end of the social contract. Fred has to keep his end. What end is that? Whatever he and society agree it is.

[@Bambinoxx12]

No No No , town people should stay out of Maynard & fred's life .

[@trollymctrollface6179]

Difference is... Fred lives in the real world, and lives in land which the Government has soveriegnty over (He doesn't own the land, he just has a 'freehold' over it, that's how property works) and in living there he agrees that the government which he can vote in can tax him of his horses.

[@UnPoeteMaudit]

You're right, if only by a logical accident. Taxes are necessary for any 'modern society', if our contemporary societies define what 'modern society' is. They are not in any way, shape or form necessary for human life and human society in general. And spare me any 'back to the stone age' nonsense..

[@UnPoeteMaudit]

There exists no such thing as a 'social contract'. It's a theoretical object of a 500-year-old political philosophy.

[@Sagefrakrobatik]

It's not necessarily re-distribution of wealth because its not wealth that people are thinking its income.

[@Anekantavad]

@storyhack "You say that there are no natural rights. You only have what rights a government gives you." Who says we even have the rights that the government gives us? Who says that the government has the authority to bestow any rights? For the matter of that, who says that the government even exists? The entire idea of "government" assumes legitimacy, and legitimacy only exists in the collective sense. If people don't believe the government is legitimate, it isn't the government anymore.

[@AndrewDeFaria]

I disagree. You don't even have the moral responsibility to help those who are less fortunate. You have no responsibility at all. You can choose to help - you have the choice. You do not have the obligaton. And saying I have the obligation does not make it so.

[@Bolgernow]

"pre-steal" isn't a word. It's an urban dictionary term for "when you want to take credit for something you knew was done before". It doesn't exist in our language. How can one "steal" something that doesn't exist?

[@steveryan1799]

Brilliant!

[@johnsergei]

"GOOD GRIEF!"

[@Anekantavad]

@storyhack "I simply believe that no one has the right to take away another's possessions without the owner's consent." But how do someone's possessions become their possessions? I don't mean "how does someone create wealth". I mean, how is something identified as someone's possession at all? Is there something inherent in the thing itself that gives it a "mine-ness" or a "yours-ness"? Nope. Possessions only exist as possessions because we all agree they are.

[@joshc6314]

"Give us a horse. You greedy capitalist." LOL

[@Hotcheeehatos]

Whats the difference? Thats money or "income" they earned, you didnt.

[@freefalling]

Way to go thank you!!!!

[@AndrewDeFaria]

How foolish. True, governments grant rights. True they can take them away by force. However from the time they are granted until the time they are taken away you have that right and it could be violated. If government wishes to take away rights the people believe the are entitled to then it's time to prune the tree of liberty.

[@OriginalKarasu]

this is mario and luigi guys... XD this psychopath mario should just give luigi a horse :'(

[@Sagefrakrobatik]

An example is between blacks and whites, while blacks may have the same income levels they have less wealth than whites because whites accumulated more wealth because of heritage.

[@weobeyjesus4565]

It's not stealing if it's part of the terms you signed up for. It's a duty as per your use of the SIN or TFN. If you do not want to pay tax, do not use a tax-file-number. Only profits are taxed, so why are they using a horse as an example of something that might be taken? The principal cannot be taxed, only the profit. The creator of this video does not understand morality or commerce. Don't want to pay tax, don't use registered commerce.

[@jenm1336]

WE OBEY JESUS you speak like someone on government assistance..

[@Hotcheeehatos]

that was awesome and easy to understand for the newbies! lol thanks brother.

[@johnsergei]

Well I liked it. It still doesn't explain how the monetory system works though. I'll leave that to you but one thing I forgot to ask, if money is contracting, what's happening to this contracting money ??? and by the way, unless you're dirt poor taxation is a massive problem for you, dominating your life

[@rickelmonoggin]

Libertarian: "Let's imagine that Bob breaks into John's house at night time, kills John, and steals all his possessions. Is that right? Well, that's what taxation is like, therefore taxation is wrong!" Me: Why, in order to try and show me that taxation is wrong, do you describe something that isn't taxation? Why don't you just describe what taxation is?

[@ironman1233]

Richard Hunter he described extortion supported by the majority of people around him (taxation)

[@letsfindabetterway]

The social contract? For a contract to be valid, there has to be full disclosure and it must contain the wet signatures of the creator of the contract and the person bearing responsibility for the contract. I never signed the constitution, and neither did you.

[@Barskor1]

Responsibility by proximity, Consent by normalcy bias and indoctrination of children. I hate Statists.

[@shepd3]

That's why it has a dash. Anyways, you can take what doesn't exist by promising to take away future earnings, I'm sure you've seen this before. If you want the dictionary word, this is called "usury". A term which doesn't just mean unacceptably high interest, but also means to keep someone in bondage by telling them the more they work, the more money they owe (this is still practiced in parts of India). Sounds like taxes. Sounds like theft. Sounds like it's morally wrong.

[@shepd3]

I never said I didn't pay taxes. I just think we should all stop and pay for what we use directly, you know, like normal people do. Hey, history buff, the British North America act is no longer in force. Since you're so much into history, mind telling me why (I know the answer already. Here, genius, I'll give you a hint--"1982"). That being said, I'm sure the mob passed plenty of laws stating they can steal (or, in their words, appropriate) my money. Sounds like you if it's law it's moral.

[@Anekantavad]

@storyhack Who says anyone has any rights at all? The usual response to this is to cry "heretic", but I'd like to hear someone tell me how rights exist independent of collective human consciousness. They don't. Rights are concepts, and like all concepts, they only exist in the human mind. IOW, rights only exist because we say they do, and in they only exist in the form that is generally agreed upon. Good or bad, that's just how concepts work.

[@Bolgernow]

you asked no valid question related to the discussion topic between shepd3 & I. It's akin to stepping into a conversation about NFL refs saying "but what about the DH in baseball?!?!". No thanks!

[@Anekantavad]

@storyhack "From a practical standpoint, basing the government with the assumption of natural law worked out very well for the US, and allowed it to be the strongest, most prosperous nation on the planet." Do you have any evidence that there is a link between the two? Between national wealth and power and natural law? The Chinese may believe otherwise, and they may be in the process of proving it. I'm not saying I agree with them. Rather I am warning against being to ideological.

[@shepardthinks]

I don't believe in a moral rsponsibility to other's welfare.. but great point otherwise!

[@shepd3]

If you think taking something to which you have no claim nor right just because you can use force against someone else, perhaps you are the one who is insane. If you feel that taxes are so great, why don't you give all your money to the government and let them spend it as they see fit? Also, I'm Canadian, so frankly, I don't give much of a shit about your constitution. It's as valuable to me as toilet paper.

[@Bolgernow]

aside from personal insults you reject reality. That is your issue, I have no stake in your sanity. You said, "I am not forcing my will on anything because I don't believe anyone should force their will on anyone else". You rejection of our social contract, US Constitution, & reality itself aren't my issue. Good luck!

[@Buna97]

But people voted for the government. It is still wrong I know, you just didn't include that.

[@Bolgernow]

your ability to understand of accept the societal norm of taxation isn't my problem. It is yours. Please seek mental help

[@Bolgernow]

this is one massive straw man. George pays taxes so if he still has two horses the point is moot. If he couldn't afford two horses with paying taxing, he never HAD two horses, ergo, no "horse to steal" so it falls badly apart. Also BOTH George & Maynard pays taxes which you don't seem to understand. In rejecting Article 1, section 8/9 of our US Constitution, & our social contract; you appear detached from reality. Good luck with that!

[@Bolgernow]

taxes are ordained in the Social Contract, & apart of US Constitution. Ahem, you still pay taxes. Please the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). The Canadian federation was formed in 1867, section 91(3)of the British North America Act attempted to create a federal government with virtually unlimited revenue gathering abilities. Please learn your history. I don't think they're "great". They're necessary in any modern society. Sorry you reject reality. Not my issue, it's yours

[@Bolgernow]

It sounds like you're clinically insane with no argument aside from "I hate taxes". Sure, everyone hates the only 2 certain things in life: death, & taxes. Please direct your argument to our Social Contract, that every modern rational society has. Also argue with the US, Article 1, section 8/9 of our Constitution. Leave me out of it

[@UnPoeteMaudit]

I see you're a clinical psychologist too, able to perform diagnoses of mental health over KZbin commentary. Aren't you a special one.

[@Bolgernow]

non-response addressing no facts Charlie Brown. You stalking me by also replying to me on the Ron Paul taxes clip? How cute. My skills are in economics, I hold a degree in it. You're clearly in way over your head, but keep digging

[@KatyKhaos]

Tax Day JOKES!!

[@Bolgernow]

if you can't address a mans valid arguments, you can always call them vile names. How expected. Live in your fantasy anrcho-capitalist illusion. It's a battle between you & reality I have no stake in. Also, learn how to consolidate your thoughts into one response, not four; otherwise you come off as a babbling troll