Portland's Inequality Tax

[countingbeans]

@thunderbolt23

No, it’s a libertarian one, by virtue of applying their logic to real world situations.

Dude… You’re literally making shit up now, and I refuse to entertain make believe. I’ll lay it out one more time for those interested in truth:

1. Consensual sex may lead to pregnancy. Both parties must consent to this outcome in order to engage in the activity. Libertarians don’t deny basic biological function.
2. If that sex leads to a child, you by having the fucking thing, are consenting to take care of.

Full stop
end of discussion.

You’re making up shit to try and poke a hole. A hole much easier made if you continued down the “anti-discrimination” laws path rather than make up absurd theories that aren’t even attributable to any libertarian philosophy.

As a libertarian, one can not create something and leave it for others to be responsible, that is a violation of the NAP. It’s forcing others to do that which you refuse. Therefore if your seed becomes man, you have consented to taking care of it by virtue of making it, intended or not.

Why you refuse to understand this is beyond me.

@thunderbolt23

Is this a serious question?

no, not really.

@thunderbolt23

No offense, but this is just anti-authoritarian ranting, and it doesn’t prove or disprove that taxation is theft.

No offense taken. You can’t offend me man, I respect you too much.

That said, I openly admitted those were the reasons to point out taxation is theft, not proofs of them.

@thunderbolt23

but all sane people agree it isn’t stealing from you.

Because if it is, the government can only fund its services through voluntary payments, and that’d mean the end of stable government.

Right, which is were ancaps lose me.

However, that money is vitally necessary to keep the State afloat doesn’t mean it isn’t taken from you against your will. [quote=“thunderbolt23, post:376, topic:224248”]
so you can’t be serious with this “taxation is theft” stuff.
[/quote]

In principle, sure I’m serious. In reality… nah not serious. On the internet I’ll go through the mental exercise of “taxation is theft”, because property taken from you against your wishes, no matter what it’s used for, even if used for your benefit, is theft.

But in reality, I like that we spend money on the military, and local schools are facilitated via my local government, etc. So I don’t really think taxation is theft, because I’m cool with most of the shit the country spends money on. I think amounts could be lower, and less bloat etc, but in the modern world… You need a larger government than “ancapistan”. IMO

[countingbeans]

@EyeDentist

All I’m trying to do is to demonstrate that you don’t really think taxation is theft. This statement (‘taxation = theft’) is a rhetorical flourish intended to make your argument more appealing, not a statement of actual belief.

Do me a favor. Look at the wall in front of you. Draw a line down the middle. Everything on the left of the line is taxation I have no issue with, and would openly volunteer to pay even if it weren’t compulsory. The left isn’t theft.

Everything on the right is the remaining taxes I’m forced to pay, and it is taken from me against my will. The right is theft.

SOme people’s line is on the left corner of the wall, making all taxation theft of their property, and some people’s on the right corner, making all taxation fun happy times for them.

None of this is cognitive dissonance. This is seeing the issue in shades of grey.

@EyeDentist

It is the equivalent of ‘Abortion is murder’–another statement many people make, but few actually seem to believe. (Hey, you opened that can o’ worms, not me.)

It is murder.

It’s irrefutable scientific fact a unique human being is formed at the moment of conception. The human life cycle begins at conception.

If a third party, whether by choice or assault, destroys that person, or the womb in which it is developing, that person was murdered.

@EyeDentist

In short, the cognitive dissonance created by the simultaneous assertions ‘I believe taxation is theft’ and “I don’t mind paying reasonable levels of taxation” cannot stand.

Sure it can.

I like getting BJ’s, but don’t like giving them…

That I understand property being taken against someone’s will is theft, and that I, personally, don’t mind paying some (but not all) the taxes I have to, isn’t really an issue at all, for anyone to understand.

[EyeDentist]

@countingbeans

SOme people’s line is on the left corner of the wall, making all taxation theft of their property

These are the people who can claim (legitimately) to believe that taxation = theft. Anyone to the right of them making such a claim is simply engaging in rhetoric.

@countingbeans

It is murder.

Really? If you are aware that murders have taken place, and will take place, and you do nothing to stop them, doesn’t that make you an accessory to the crime (morally speaking, that is)? Do you consider yourself to be an accessory to murder? If not, why not?

@countingbeans

The human life cycle begins at conception.

Indeed. But it doesn’t follow that interrupting the life cycle at any and every stage is murder.

@countingbeans

That I understand property being taken against someone’s will is theft, and that I, personally, don’t mind paying some (but not all) the taxes I have to, isn’t really an issue at all, for anyone to understand.

Allow me to re-phrase by simple substitution of your own words:

‘That I understand property being taken against someone’s will is theft, and that I, personally, don’t mind having some (but not all) of my property being taken against my will, isn’t really an issue at all, for anyone to understand.’

Now, is it really the case that you ‘don’t mind’ your property being stolen? Because if so, I’d like to borrow your lawnmower.

[anon50325502]

Dear sweet baby Jesus, all wrapped up in your manger, please give me the strength to avoid yet another abortion argumemt. Amen.

[EyeDentist]

He was a grown man! He had a beard!

[countingbeans]

@EyeDentist

Anyone to the right of them making such a claim is simply engaging in rhetoric.

Or you know, defining the situation as it is.

Didn’t know I, myself, needed to fit every aspect of a situation to define it. You’re not really clear on the whole consent thing are you?

@EyeDentist

If you are aware that murders have taken place, and will take place, and you do nothing to stop them, doesn’t that make you an accessory to the crime (morally speaking, that is)?

There is nothing within my power to stop them that I don’t already do… Do I wish I could do more? Sure. Can I? No.

@EyeDentist

Do you consider yourself to be an accessory to murder? If not, why not?

Sure. If you want to see it that way, I’m fine that.

Am I morally tainted because I’ve “implied my consent” to infanticide by being born in America during this time period, like I “implied my consent” to taxation by the same? Fine.

I’ll pay my price with whatever may judge me for the part I play in the activity. (I have a lot to make up for in this area as is, I was a mouth foaming, raving pro-abort up until about 5 or 6 years ago…)

Is there blood on my hands via society’s actions? If I need to believe that for people to understand essential and basic biology and start protecting the rights of all people, sure then I am.

I’ve not been the father of an aborted child, nor ever brought a woman to a clinic, but when I was younger I urged a couple women to get them. And defended abortion, a lot. So, sure. I’m whatever you want to call me when it come to it.

@EyeDentist

But it doesn’t follow that interrupting the life cycle at any and every stage is murder.

By a third party? Sure it is. Outside of self defense, wartime and actual accidents, when is killing a person not murder? Shit even in accidents you can face manslaughter charges.

@EyeDentist

don’t mind having some (but not all) of my property being taken against my will

That’s not what I said. I said I don’t mind paying the taxes I consent to. I just consent to a whole lot more than your typical AnCap or most libertarians. Doesn’t mean they are wrong that taxation without consent is theft.

[countingbeans]

@anon50325502

Dear sweet baby Jesus, all wrapped up in your manger, please give me the strength to avoid yeat another abortion argumemt. Amen.

Not happening, and you know it.

ED is new around here. We’re going to have to have all the same arguments all over again, lol.

[EyeDentist]

@countingbeans

There is nothing within my power to stop them that I don’t already do

I think you mean, there’s nothing else you’re willing to do. Big difference, yes?

@countingbeans

Outside of self defense, wartime and actual accidents, when is killing a person not murder?

Slow your roll. Since when did an embryo, zygote, etc, become a person??!!

@countingbeans

I said I don’t mind paying the taxes I consent to.

I’m trying to understand you here. Are you saying you don’t mind being robbed, so long as the money is going to what you consider a worthy cause?

[Aragorn]

@treco

But not one person having 30 pies, while dozens share the crumbs that are brushed off the lap. Ii will also acknowledge the mistake of expanding the natural obligation of society taking care of the weakest members (elderly widows, orphans) into a permanent welfare of able bodied in violation of “If a man will not work, he shall not eat.”

Failure of any of the three - one getting too much, not caretaking defenseless, or able not contributing - upset the contract.

I can agree with this in principle. And i also think beans is being unfair to you, as much as i like him, because I know you are significantly conservtive in standing.

However, I don’t share the thought that taxing the rich ala an “Inequality tax” will fix this, and I dont share the view that the pie is limited in size and things are a zero sum game. Its not, and can’t be. You have to hold the position that taxing Bill Gates or Sam Walton at 100% would fix the problem, but it doesn’t–it gives workers a bare 5 cent/hour raise in most cases. That doesn’t solve anything and the concept is flawed, not to mention wrong in principle (in my opinion).

The other thing is that I don’t agree that 30 people share crumbs with 1 robber baron lording it over them. Further, I don’t see how the concept of taxation to level the playing field works if 1–people don’t live within their means and refuse to do so (the tax money will do nothing to raise their state because they refuse to save or be responsible, even IF it was sufficient in quantity to alleviate the pain, and its not) 2–there can never be a perfect solution, as you yourself have said looking at 6000 years of history 3–you believe in individual rights and private property.

Our job as a society is to minimize the amount of people begging in the streets, but we can’t do that by enabling them or robbing the top of everything. It is also to take care of those who cannot help themselves, but that has never been accomplished thru taxation to a large degree, nd “inequality taxes” will do the least good as they end up in some slush fund for politicos, or wasted.

[EyeDentist]

@countingbeans

ED is new around here. We’re going to have to have all the same arguments all over again, lol.

It’s @anon71262119’s fault; she’s the one who tricked me into coming over here.

[countingbeans]

@EyeDentist

I think you mean, there’s nothing else you’re willing to do.

No I mean, there is nothing more in my power that I can do.

@EyeDentist

Since when did an embryo, zygote, etc, become a person??!!

We’ve been over this. Conception. It is irrefutable scientific fact that unique human being is formed at conception, and that conception is the beginning of the human life cycle.

@EyeDentist

Are you saying you don’t mind being robbed, so long as the money is going to what you consider a worthy cause?

I’m saying I don’t mind being robbed by the State through confiscation of my wages because I live in reality, and there is no escaping it. So… I don’t stress it.

Plus the more you guys pimp taxation, the more I get paid, lol.

[countingbeans]

@Aragorn

And i also think beans is being unfair to you, as much as i like him, because I know you are significantly conservtive in standing.

Am I being unfair?

Well I apologize if I’ve been rude or offensive in my speech, but I don’t think it’s fair for me to dictate what anyone but myself makes for a salary, unless I’m hiring them.

I also don’t think it’s fair to make histrionic statements about “one person having all the pie”. Because it’s wrong, very very wrong.

[countingbeans]

@EyeDentist

It’s @Powerpuff’s fault; she’s the one who tricked me into coming over here.

HAHA.

I look forward to you posting here to be honest. You’re a bright dude.

[EyeDentist]

@countingbeans

No I mean, there is nothing more in my power that I can do.

If that means you’re covertly sabotaging abortion clinics–or more–then I accept your answer. If not…

@countingbeans

We’ve been over this. Conception. It is irrefutable scientific fact that unique human being is formed at conception, and that conception is the beginning of the human life cycle.

Words matter. Allow me to demonstrate.

I’m sure you would agree that a boy is not a man. Given time and nurturing, a boy will eventually become a man. But a boy is not a man.

Likewise, a conceptus is not a person. Given time and nurturing, a conceptus will eventually become a person. But a conceptus is not a person.

[treco]

@Aragorn

taxing the rich ala an “Inequality tax” will fix this,

My stance is not formed at taxing sam or bill to oblivion.
More along the lines of looking into a VAT to replace our current system. We are about the only ones not using it or the Metric system,
Also Corporate Taxation (maybe cancelling), using more of our own energy by slowing down the EPA, streamlining other forms of regulation companies are subjected to, reforming the banking system so regional banks can form again to actually do banking rather than equity market hi jinks like Wall St.

I am a broken record on the dozen ideas to ‘share the wealth’, but somehow my beard gets longer and German / Russian get more proficient with every post. I hate to have to find my post that says Capital must equal Labor. Why? I’ve never said it. I have had a couple of hundred employees over the years, and guess what - I profited from their labor in excess of my compensation to them.

The pie has gotten larger, along with now neither the king nor peasant defecate on the ground, HOWEVER if a base dollar value is not used nor population considered, how is that objective measurement?

[treco]

@countingbeans

I like getting BJ’s, but don’t like giving them…

Am not going to ask,

[Aragorn]

@EyeDentist

Slow your roll. Since when did an embryo, zygote, etc, become a person??!!

No no no no no…no.

Please let’s not go there on an economic thread.

And in any case, you are defining “personhood” (i.e. “personhood under the law”) and beans is defining “human life”. There is zero scientific doubt about when a human life cycle begins.

[Aragorn]

@EyeDentist

It’s @Powerpuff’s fault; she’s the one who tricked me into coming over here.

Sneaky!!

You’re an intelligent dude though. Welcome to the gutter! lol. Here’s some whiskey. You’re going to need it.

[Aragorn]

@countingbeans

Well I apologize if I’ve been rude or offensive in my speech, but I don’t think it’s fair for me to dictate what anyone but myself makes for a salary, unless I’m hiring them.

I also don’t think it’s fair to make histrionic statements about “one person having all the pie”. Because it’s wrong, very very wrong.

I don’t think you’re wrong in your position on salary etc. I did think you were a bit hard on him re: language. I think that is because 1–the issue is a hot button (of sorts) to you and 2–he differs with you on economic points. Hey, I can’t cast stones. I practically crucified some people in the vaccinations thread among some others on science. on edge was a pretty level poster for the most part and I recall pretty much Hulking out on him. We all have our buttons lol.

That seems to be a huge stumbling block here on the ol’ interwebz. Something about lack of body language etc…

[EyeDentist]

@Aragorn

Please let’s not go there on an economic thread.

OK, no problem.

@Aragorn

And in any case, you are defining “personhood” (i.e. “personhood under the law”) and beans is defining “human life”. There is zero scientific doubt about when a human life cycle begins.

But you just said…In any case, I don’t think I’m defining personhood under the law. Rather, I’m pointing out that personhood does not necessarily adhere to a conceptus. The fact that a blob of cells is on the life cycle doesn’t make it a person.