I say Im a Socialist and people dig it

Of course not. Theft doesn't involve threat or violence. (he may be thinking of robbery)​

 

What is your reasoning behind this claim?

Are you seriously claiming that the state does not rely upon violence in order to enforce the collection of its taxes?

Then why is it right for some people to extort money while if you or I did so we would be regarded as thugs?

 

Actually, I think that an extortion racket is the closest parallel.

 

"Where is it?"
Perhaps you should ask Wesley Snipes where the violence involved in tax collection is. You seem to think that the threat of violence is not pretty much the same thing as violence. That is an insane viewpoint. All aw enforcement, ALL law enforcement relies on violence or the threat of violence. I assure you, I do not pay my taxes because I want to. If I were to stop, I would probably get a letter. If I ignored this letter, I may even get another one. If I ignore all letters from the IRS, someone will show up with a gun. If I resist, that man (or woman) will either detain, or possibly draw, and possibly use that firearm. Law enforcement, including tax collection requires violence or the threat of violence. You either know this and are being intentionally obtuse (I suspect this is the case.) Or you are an idiot.

 

"The purpose of taxes is 100% to fund the government"
This is demonstrably not true. What is FICA? The alleged purpose of this is not to fund the Government. In fact it is allegedly illegal to use FICA tax revenues to pay for the Government. So you are really wrong here.

"most of that funding being for the government to protect the lives and freedoms of its citizens."
That is a lie. The vast majority of spending goes to entitlements, which not only do not protect lives or freedom (and don't even claim to, in response to your ridiculous nonsense distinction.) So you are wrong not only because the Government doesn't live up to its standard of of spending most of the money on protecting lives and freedom, but because that standard doesn't even exist within the Government.

 

Well, unless Hitler, Stalin, Kony, Mugabe, Khan, Pol Pot, Pinochet, etc. were all bad dreams, I would think it was obvious.

No, I'm just saying that currently, ours does not.

It's not. It only appears that way because you are greatly stretching the meaning of words to justify a never-ending persecution complex.

 

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

First of all, if you're going to keep talking like a teenager in high school, you might as well not bother responding to me, because I'll just laugh, pat you on the head condescendingly, and ignore you.

Second, threat of violence is not the same as violence, and if we're REALLY going to argue that eventually violence will be used to arrest you should you continue to refuse to pay your fair share to keep society running for your benefit, then you should just protest law enforcement completely or just advocate that we should not react violently to murderers.

Matter of fact, just close down the jails. Can't have none of that violence crap.

 

It's called an exaggeration. You guys are using it in reference to tax collection being "violent."

Yes, it doesn't do that now, I acknowledged that. What I said is that taxes are supposed to be for that purpose.

Reading: it's good.

Wow, really? So if you lose your job, unemployment doesn't give you income to keep a roof over your family's head, clothes on your backs? Food stamps don't give you money to buy food so you don't die off from malnutrition or starvation? Medicare/Medicaid doesn't make it cheaper for you to buy the life-saving medicines you need?

This is news to me.

And I'm not wrong, because I already pointed out that the government doesn't use taxes the way they are supposed to.

 

You said that man requires near perfection for a stateless society to work. Your statement above still doesn't explain your argument behind that claim.

I think you are being a little disingenuous. You know that the state will use violence against those who violate its edits.

All right, then why is it right for some people to tax others while if you or I did so we would be regarded as thugs?

 

My point is that some government and law enforcement structure has to exist because without one we have no justification or real power to go after wrongdoers. Eliminate wrongdoers, eliminate the need for a state.

Please. The IRS will send you strongly worded letters for a very long time before sending people to your door and even then, if they arrest you, it's because you voluntarily (since that's you modern anarchists' favorite word) chose to break the law knowing what would happen if you did.

It's akin to saying we should not let the cops arrest murderers so as not to "violently" stop people from breaking the law.

Because taxation is a power wielded by an inhuman entity.

 

A coercive, monopoly state is not the only option. A voluntary state could go after wrongdoers in exactly the same manner as an involuntary state.

It's impossible to eliminate wrongdoers.

What gives the IRS the right to extort money from people. If I tried to collect taxes from my neighbor, I would (rightfully) be regarded as a criminal. Why, in your mind, do some people get a free pass to act like criminals?

Not really. A murder has wrong someone and must be made to pay restitution. A victim of taxation has done no harm to anyone.

Like the mafia?

 

Ah yes. I remember meeting some these women you were with. Lisa and Brittany were their names?

That's right. They were your left and right hands.

You go you DOG!!

 

Do you have any examples of you voluntary, stateless society working?

 

Yes, the people of Appalachia lived without a State for many decades before the US subsumed them.

The western American frontier prior to the US moving in.

The people of the zomia region of southeast asia.

Irealand prior to the English moving in.

That's a few off the top of my head.

 

All had some form of government.

 

I'm less inclined to grant cops license to violently prevent 'breaking the law' than I would be to concede violence may be necessary in protecting people from murder. Guys knocking on my door to collect tribute under threat of violence ain't the same as responding to violence violently.​

.

 

But you yourself said they'll send you strongly worded letters for awhile before even sending someone to your door.

 

Of course they had a system of government. All societies have a system of government.

However, not all societies have a coercive, monopoly state. That is what I oppose. The idea of some people ignoring the natural law and "creating" their own laws and inflicting these laws on their fellow man is abhorrent. A just society is one in which ALL people are bound by the same laws, not where the populace is divided up into the ruled and the rulers.

 

In your dreams.


I think the middle class American who has been finanically raped by the Obama Hope and Change is more of the Opinion that our need to be the bourgeoisie crushed between Taxation and Inflation by the Cloward-Piven Strategy makes American Socialists not just the worst element in our society, but public enemy number one.


http://www.politicalforum.com/elections-campaigns/258354-rumble-coming-wheels.html


After the middle class financial disaster of the last four years, the Only "Digging" most want for Obama Socialists is to dig them a political grave.


You and your ilk made this mess deliberately to seek power and money for yourselves. We're not falling for it, and you'll fall because of it.


Rot in Hell!

 

You have never seen socialism in America.

 

And you say that because....

In America, Government hasn't performed a political dissident "Purge" killing 30 million or more innocent citizens?




Shall we repeat the tragedies of Germany, Italy, Russia, China, Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, El Salvador, Honduras, Iraq...

the list just goes on and on and on where "The REAL Socialism will be tried THIS time, and it won't be like that!"






Or perhaps you state that we haven't seen THE REAL Socialism in America, because I'm still FREE to use the internet forums criticize it?



We have seen enough utterly failed attempts at implementing utopian socialism, though the years since Karl Marx, that today any American's who support socialism have to be one of two things;

incredibly ignorant of the history of Socialism,

or

brutally mercenary about using political revolution to enrich and empower yourself.





If you really are that Ignorant, then I suggest you start with a Local, on this Forums Resource:


http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...s-collectivism-implemented-mere-humanity.html





So when you state we have seen Socialism in America yet, you must mean that we have gotten to the part where it all falls apart due to Socialism's inherent fatal flaws...

Or MAYBE, just maybe... it just comes down to the fact that you and your ilk are not yet in total power and riches?


-

 

Because we've never had both of the two factors that socialism requires in order to be socialism: social ownership and cooperative control of the means of production,

No, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the philosophy of socialism.

None of which had anything to do with socialism.

No, I'm saying you haven't seen socialism period, especially in America, because we lack the two factors that make socialism socialism. America is the most hardcore capitalist nation in the world, and has been since the Industrial Revolution.

And once again you display your ignorance about socialism.

No, I mean what you call "socialism" is not socialism because it lacks the two things that make socialism socialism. What you have is capitalism, and a particularly bad model of it.

My "ilk" have never been in any sort of power in America. Senator Bernie Sanders is the only known socialist in Congress.

 

How does that work? Please explain in more detail, because it seems like naive childish nonsense, but I want to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Next, your point about the threat of violence means that no formal official social enforcement can exist. Contract law, which I know libertarians tend to think of as quite ok, only exists because of the threat of force. Contracts are enforced by the state, and in the absence of a state would be enforced by some entity other than the state. In what way are can they be enforced other than through force or the threat of force?

What is the difference between that and taxation? Taxation is a payment for services rendered by government. The contract is implicit, and the question should not be whether government taking taxes to provide for the services they provide is legitimate, most people can agree that it is. The important question, is what are the legitimate functions of government, and what should we as voters allow the state to use our tax money to do? That is a very important question, which actually matters. The whole taxation is theft argument is silly, unimportant, and will be completely ignored by anyone that matters. So why waste time banging your head against the wall. Instead try to do something about the things you can influence, like how tax dollars are spent.

 

No…. No…. America hasn’t yet experimented with Socialism at all.

Really?!

How about we Review a few cases of American Government Control:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Motors: http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/261459-gm-going-bankrupt-again.html
--------------------------------------------------------------

U.S. Postal Service: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/31/postal-service-default_n_1725263.html
--------------------------------------------------------------

FannyMae/FreddieMac: http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/16/news/fannie_freddie_delisting/index.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------

Social Security: http://articles.cnn.com/1996-10-03/..._1_payroll-taxes-securitys-ious-when?_s=PM:US
--------------------------------------------------------------

Solyndra: http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/30/technology/solyndra/index.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------

Gulf Oil Development: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203863204574346610120524166.html
--------------------------------------------------------------

Quantitative Easing of the Federal Reserve: http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/02/news/economy/fed-stimulus-john-taylor.moneymag/index.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------

Medicare : http://www.gaypatriot.net/2012/08/14/what-is-the-democratic-plan-to-prevent-medicare-bankruptcy/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Yeah! Yeah…. We should hire the guys who brought all of this to control even MORE of our countries Means of Production!

 

Apparently not. He shares that label with 69 other people.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/35733956/...oter-Democratic-Socialists-of-America-10-1-09