Ayn Rand, Objectivism, Atlas Shrugged, et al.

[Timsup2nothin]

How in the world is that theft?

Because the agreed upon distribution of the costs of governance is being violated, allowing the tax evader to take the product without paying the agreed upon price.

 

[RFC_Viceroy]

Because the agreed upon distribution of the costs of governance is being violated, allowing the tax evader to take the product without paying the agreed upon price.

Agreed upon by who? Taxes are theft because they take money at gunpoint. Refusing to pay the man who holds a gun to your head may be foolhardy, but it isn't theft.

It seems to me that you're simply defining "aggression" as "unjustified acts of violence", with the corresponding assertion that justified acts of violence are "non-aggressive", regardless of how, well, aggressive it actually is. You're not actually talking aggression and non-aggression as qualities of human behaviour, which would entail trying to discover the nature and origins of violence in human society, you're simply explaining when you think cracking skulls is justified and when it is not. And if you'll permit me to be a bit cynical, you're just calling it "non-aggression" because that sounds like something a libertarian would talk about.

Its non-aggression because to aggress is to initiate force, rather than to use it defensively or in retaliation for the initiation of force.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Agreed upon by who? Taxes are theft because they take money at gunpoint. Refusing to pay the man who holds a gun to your head may be foolhardy, but it isn't theft.

Agreed upon by the recipients of governance. If you want governance, you have to pay for it. Taking it without paying is theft.

 

[Traitorfish]

Its non-aggression because to aggress is to initiate force, rather than to use it defensively or in retaliation for the initiation of force.

What constitutes the "initiation of force"? Cane struck Abel, and we've been bashing skulls ever since; where is the line to be drawn?

 

[El_Machinae]

Taxes are no more theft than franchise fees are. Someone else paid for all the infrastructure you're leveraging to create wealth with the understanding that a fee will be required based on your success. You're free to not use the infrastructure. The infrastructure someone else designed and paid for, viable currency, an educated customer base, etc. But, chances are you're better off if you do. It's why a lot of entrepreneurs choose to buy into a franchise instead of building a unique mom&pop business.

 

[RFC_Viceroy]

Taxes are no more theft than franchise fees are. Someone else paid for all the infrastructure you're leveraging to create wealth with the understanding that a fee will be required based on your success. You're free to not use the infrastructure. The infrastructure someone else designed and paid for, viable currency, an educated customer base, etc. But, chances are you're better off if you do. It's why a lot of entrepreneurs choose to buy into a franchise instead of building a unique mom&pop business.

When did anyone actually agree to pay taxes?

Even if you don't use the infrastructure you are still threatened.

I don't know what franchise fees are, to be honest.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Even if you don't use the infrastructure you are still threatened.

This is a commonly used line of total bovine excrement.

If you own property, you are receiving governance. If you drive a car, or use any other form of transportation, you are receiving governance. You are reading this on the internet, which could not exist without the environment produced by governance. The claim 'oh they are making me pay for something I'm not using' is a crock.

 

[duckstab]

Taxation is an artifact of law and convention, just as personal property is. If you want to insist that taxation occurs by threat of force than you also have to acknowledge that your personal property "rights" are also held in place by threat of force. If I have more weaponry and body armor than you do, then ultimately the only thing that keeps me from taking anything I want from you is that we live in a community that will prevent me from doing so.

Or, if you don't believe me, see my signature.

 

[RFC_Viceroy]

Taxation is an artifact of law and convention, just as personal property is. If you want to insist that taxation occurs by threat of force than you also have to acknowledge that your personal property "rights" are also held in place by threat of force. If I have more weaponry and body armor than you do, then ultimately the only thing that keeps me from taking anything I want from you is that we live in a community that will prevent me from doing so.

Or, if you don't believe me, see my signature.

Yikes, that's an awful quote. I've always liked Ben Franklin, but man, that's an awful quote.

I'll stick with the Bible over Franklin, thank you very much. Note that the Bible calls Saul tyrannical for taking ten percent...

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Yikes, that's an awful quote. I've always liked Ben Franklin, but man, that's an awful quote.

I'll stick with the Bible over Franklin, thank you very much. Note that the Bible calls Saul tyrannical for taking ten percent...

Not ready to 'retire and live among savages' I take it?

Duckstab, for the win.

 

[aelf]

I'm not sure what your argument is asserting here. There are numerous passages that condemn tax collectors as thieves.

Your Bible knowledge seems to be rather poor. Tax collectors were called thieves not because they collected taxes, but because they collected taxes with commissions decided by themselves. The system was that tax collection was outsourced to private contractors who seemed to be pretty much free to do what they wanted as long as they gave the Roman authorities the amount that the latter wished to collect as taxes.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

RFC, in your perfect non-government world a murder is commited.

Who will try to catch the murderer?
Who will pay for trying to catch the murderer?

 

[Old Hippy]

RFC, in your perfect non-government world a murder is commited.

Who will try to catch the murderer?
Who will pay for trying to catch the murderer?

don't forget who will decide if it was murder...

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Indeed. Who will determine the penalty, who will execute this penalty, who will conduct the legal procedings and pay for all that.

 

[Truronian]

Nor who will clean up the crime scene...

 

[Thedrin]

Your Bible knowledge seems to be rather poor. Tax collectors were called thieves not because they collected taxes, but because they collected taxes with commissions decided by themselves. The system was that tax collection was outsourced to private contractors who seemed to be pretty much free to do what they wanted as long as they gave the Roman authorities the amount that the latter wished to collect as taxes.

That's my understanding: the Roman government contracted people to collect a certain amount of tax from a region, but did not restrict how much they could take leaving the contractor free to keep the excess.

Biblical tax collectors were private organisations keeping money they claimed as taxes for themselves. It seems unfair to apply biblical condemnation of tax collectors to modern tax collectors (whomever they may be) who operate quite differently.

 

[Goodfella]

Yikes, that's an awful quote. I've always liked Ben Franklin, but man, that's an awful quote.

I'll stick with the Bible over Franklin, thank you very much. Note that the Bible calls Saul tyrannical for taking ten percent...

Isn't learning about the actual political ideologies of the founding fathers fun?

 

[El_Machinae]

When did anyone actually agree to pay taxes?

Even if you don't use the infrastructure you are still threatened.

I don't know what franchise fees are, to be honest.

You implicitly agree to taxes when you make use of the infrastructure built by society (that you didn't build) once you become capable of consent, as an adult. you're not forced to pay, you're allowed to leave. It's like how you're not actually 'forced' to pay rent in your current apartment. You're allowed to leave.

Franchise fees are what you'd pay to McDonald's Corp for the right to put their logo and menu on your restaurant, gaining a standardization and infrastructure your customers appreciate. It's a win/win arrangement if done wisely. By analogy, you'd rather pay taxes in the US , where you can leverage society's infrastructure to build great wealth than not pay taxes in the Congo, where there's way less 'society' for you to build off of.

 

[RFC_Viceroy]

RFC, in your perfect non-government world a murder is commited.

Who will try to catch the murderer?
Who will pay for trying to catch the murderer?

Private institutions.

Indeed. Who will determine the penalty, who will execute this penalty, who will conduct the legal procedings and pay for all that.

Penalties will be proportional to the crime, law enforcement would be a service provided on the market just like anything else.

Isn't learning about the actual political ideologies of the founding fathers fun?

I was actually surprised by the comment from Franklin. I've known Hamilton and Adams to be fascists for a long time, but I didn't really expect a quote like that from Franklin. Oh well, nobody's perfect.

 

[jackelgull]

The problem is that private institutions are set up on the basis of self interest. So the reason to enforce the crime would be that a person could pay for enforcement, and that means that anyone could be brought in for a crime, as long as the person who wants them arrested has the money to do so.