7 ms·

This is such a bad faith argument. Society has largely agreed that welfare is a valuable thing to do, from disability to social security. Calling taxation theft

This is such a bad faith argument. Society has largely agreed that welfare is a valuable thing to do, from disability to social security. Calling taxation theft just says that you aren't able to be rational about this.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 7mo ago
> Calling taxation theft From reading their comments here, it seems to me that they are saying the theft occurs when labor is sold for a pittance in foreign markets so that things produced by said labor can be sold at a lower price (as compared to when more expensive labor is hired) in domestic markets. ("Basic income" = other people work as slaves in a factory somewhere so you can sit at home and "discover yourself.") The UBI would logically be an extension of that whereby the UBI program itself can only be funded by this disparity and therefore any beneficiary of such a program must be participating, however indirectly, in that theft. (Perhaps especially if one is a loud proponent of such a program.) Ostensibly, from this perspective, one might consider whether the laborers should benefit more from their labor, rather than the consumers of products which are produced by said labor. It doesn't seem a particularly disagreeable or irrational perspective, at least on its face, though the seemingly disparaging mention of Marxism looks out of place given this perspective is rather Marxist. Of course, whether one refers to that as "theft" is up to them; I'm just offering this alternate perspective since I didn't read it the way the parent did.
- baseballdork 7mo ago
  Not sure how you reconcile this take with "People don't like being robbed, PERIOD, especially not to pay for a bunch of weed smokers to sit at home relaxing on their dime. There will be blood." This person doesn't like taxation. Tough.
  - its_magic 7mo ago
    Jesus Christ didn't like taxation either. He preached that it was theft also. That's one big reason why they murdered him, then sent Paul (aka Saul) along to invent a new 'explanation' of the Parable of the Coin more favorable to the Roman viewpoint. Regardless of whatever pretense you put on, you are in fact a member of a gang of thieves plotting to rob your next victim, just as Lysander Spooner explained in the 1800s: "If any man's money can be taken by a so-called government, without his own personal consent, all his other rights are taken with it; for with his money the government can (and will) hire soldiers to stand over him, compel him to submit to its arbitrary will, and kill him if he resists." - Lysander Spooner "If taxation without consent is robbery, the United States government has never had, has not now, and is never likely to have, an honest dollar in its treasury. If taxation without consent is not robbery, then any band of robbers have only to declare themselves a government, and all their robberies are legalized." - Lysander Spooner "The Rothschilds, and that class of money-lenders of whom they are the representatives and agents -- men who never think of lending a shilling to their next-door neighbors for purposes of honest industry, unless upon the most ample security, and at the highest rate of interest -- stand ready at all times to lend money in unlimited amounts to those robbers and murderers who call themselves governments, to be expended in shooting down those who do not submit quietly to being robbed and enslaved." - Lysander Spooner "But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." - Lysander Spooner Hint: We are now in the "raising of the spirits of the dead" phase of prophecy; the above being an example of what is meant by that phrase. You Are Here.
    - baseballdork 7mo ago
      I guess I'm confused why I ought to care what Christ or Spooner think about taxation?
      - its_magic 7mo ago
        In time you will learn the importance of respecting the lives of others.
        baseballdork 7mo ago
        I’m not sure why you believe I don’t
        its_magic 7mo ago
        The subject of this conversation is your desire to rob me.
        baseballdork 7mo ago
        No, it's about your viewpoint on taxation and how it's a pointless task to try and reason with a person that takes that stance. "Respecting the lives of others" doesn't preclude taxation to any rational person.
        its_magic 7mo ago
        [flagged]
        baseballdork 7mo ago
        You’re proving the point. None of this is rational discourse. “you’re a criminal”, “ you’re a slave”, “you’re a crab”. We get it, you don’t like paying taxes. > The only purpose of your meager existence is to make your owners more wealthy and powerful. Are these the wealthy and powerful pot smokers you’re talking about?
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 7mo ago
    Ah, missed that. For what it's worth, I can kinda read that sentence both ways but it does seem easier to read as being anti-tax. Actually, taking the two quotes juxtaposed like this, their take reads quite a lot like "think of the third-world laborers" in defense of billionaires. Edit: Oh, and their reply.
    - baseballdork 7mo ago
      I still cannot see how you get that impression.
      - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 7mo ago
        I don't see much of a point in replying with this comment. It reads like your point is "I don't understand your perspective so it must be wrong", which is folly. If you're looking for a suggestion of how to gain such an understanding, I've certainly got one of those: put more effort into arguing in favor of perspectives you disagree with. Not only will it help you to understand the disagreeable point of view, it will additionally help you to strengthen your beliefs. I appreciate the added context nonetheless.
        baseballdork 7mo ago
        I’m looking for you to back up your perspective with context in this thread that gave you that perspective.
        lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 7mo ago
        You must have missed it but I already did that; it's in my initial comment.
        baseballdork 7mo ago
        You're right, I completely forgot about what you put in that first comment because it seemed like extremely wishful thinking, bordering on gaslighting. Then, given all the comments since then that have been explicitly about taxation, I assumed that you had reassessed and had something new to contribute given how thoroughly those new comments debunked those original statements. Oh well.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 7mo ago

> Calling taxation theft From reading their comments here, it seems to me that they are saying the theft occurs when labor is sold for a pittance in foreign markets so that things produced by said labor can be sold at a lower price (as compared to when more expensive labor is hired) in domestic markets. ("Basic income" = other people work as slaves in a factory somewhere so you can sit at home and "discover yourself.") The UBI would logically be an extension of that whereby the UBI program itself can only be funded by this disparity and therefore any beneficiary of such a program must be participating, however indirectly, in that theft. (Perhaps especially if one is a loud proponent of such a program.) Ostensibly, from this perspective, one might consider whether the laborers should benefit more from their labor, rather than the consumers of products which are produced by said labor. It doesn't seem a particularly disagreeable or irrational perspective, at least on its face, though the seemingly disparaging mention of Marxism looks out of place given this perspective is rather Marxist. Of course, whether one refers to that as "theft" is up to them; I'm just offering this alternate perspective since I didn't read it the way the parent did.

baseballdork 7mo ago
Not sure how you reconcile this take with "People don't like being robbed, PERIOD, especially not to pay for a bunch of weed smokers to sit at home relaxing on their dime. There will be blood." This person doesn't like taxation. Tough.
- its_magic 7mo ago
  Jesus Christ didn't like taxation either. He preached that it was theft also. That's one big reason why they murdered him, then sent Paul (aka Saul) along to invent a new 'explanation' of the Parable of the Coin more favorable to the Roman viewpoint. Regardless of whatever pretense you put on, you are in fact a member of a gang of thieves plotting to rob your next victim, just as Lysander Spooner explained in the 1800s: "If any man's money can be taken by a so-called government, without his own personal consent, all his other rights are taken with it; for with his money the government can (and will) hire soldiers to stand over him, compel him to submit to its arbitrary will, and kill him if he resists." - Lysander Spooner "If taxation without consent is robbery, the United States government has never had, has not now, and is never likely to have, an honest dollar in its treasury. If taxation without consent is not robbery, then any band of robbers have only to declare themselves a government, and all their robberies are legalized." - Lysander Spooner "The Rothschilds, and that class of money-lenders of whom they are the representatives and agents -- men who never think of lending a shilling to their next-door neighbors for purposes of honest industry, unless upon the most ample security, and at the highest rate of interest -- stand ready at all times to lend money in unlimited amounts to those robbers and murderers who call themselves governments, to be expended in shooting down those who do not submit quietly to being robbed and enslaved." - Lysander Spooner "But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." - Lysander Spooner Hint: We are now in the "raising of the spirits of the dead" phase of prophecy; the above being an example of what is meant by that phrase. You Are Here.
  - baseballdork 7mo ago
    I guess I'm confused why I ought to care what Christ or Spooner think about taxation?
    - its_magic 7mo ago
      In time you will learn the importance of respecting the lives of others.
      - baseballdork 7mo ago
        I’m not sure why you believe I don’t
        its_magic 7mo ago
        The subject of this conversation is your desire to rob me.
        baseballdork 7mo ago
        No, it's about your viewpoint on taxation and how it's a pointless task to try and reason with a person that takes that stance. "Respecting the lives of others" doesn't preclude taxation to any rational person.
        its_magic 7mo ago
        [flagged]
        baseballdork 7mo ago
        You’re proving the point. None of this is rational discourse. “you’re a criminal”, “ you’re a slave”, “you’re a crab”. We get it, you don’t like paying taxes. > The only purpose of your meager existence is to make your owners more wealthy and powerful. Are these the wealthy and powerful pot smokers you’re talking about?
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 7mo ago
  Ah, missed that. For what it's worth, I can kinda read that sentence both ways but it does seem easier to read as being anti-tax. Actually, taking the two quotes juxtaposed like this, their take reads quite a lot like "think of the third-world laborers" in defense of billionaires. Edit: Oh, and their reply.
  - baseballdork 7mo ago
    I still cannot see how you get that impression.
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 7mo ago
      I don't see much of a point in replying with this comment. It reads like your point is "I don't understand your perspective so it must be wrong", which is folly. If you're looking for a suggestion of how to gain such an understanding, I've certainly got one of those: put more effort into arguing in favor of perspectives you disagree with. Not only will it help you to understand the disagreeable point of view, it will additionally help you to strengthen your beliefs. I appreciate the added context nonetheless.
      - baseballdork 7mo ago
        I’m looking for you to back up your perspective with context in this thread that gave you that perspective.
        lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 7mo ago
        You must have missed it but I already did that; it's in my initial comment.
        baseballdork 7mo ago
        You're right, I completely forgot about what you put in that first comment because it seemed like extremely wishful thinking, bordering on gaslighting. Then, given all the comments since then that have been explicitly about taxation, I assumed that you had reassessed and had something new to contribute given how thoroughly those new comments debunked those original statements. Oh well.