1. Post #361
    Proudly supporting the JIDF
    Dennab
    July 2010
    22,111 Posts
    Wait what, GenPol is for taxation isn't he? Taxes are undeniably coercive. If you don't pay your taxes you get forcibly detained.
    Forcibly detained? This isn't the 1300s where peasants rose up to rebel against taxes and their lords.

  2. Post #362
    SUPER SWELL FELLOW
    Phrozen99's Avatar
    May 2006
    2,359 Posts
    Wait what, GenPol is for taxation isn't he? Taxes are undeniably coercive. If you don't pay your taxes you get forcibly detained.
    Not quite sure, he was just spewing a lot of crap about how taxes are being coerced on us or something.

    Yeah because anyone with a wage lower than $40,000 must be lazy.
    Aren't you one to put words in peoples mouths aren't you? Clearly you live in a different area than me. Where I live, I know over 20 people who do nothing everyday except leech of the welfare and unemployment system. Why should they get healthcare too? Yea, I get it, recession, times are tough.

    But arrogance is at play here too. When my dad's work was slow and was losing money, did he do nothing? No, he got a job that was less than half of his current wage. Why? Because a little money is better than no money at all.

  3. Post #363
    Gold Member
    carcarcargo's Avatar
    October 2007
    15,298 Posts


    Aren't you one to put words in peoples mouths aren't you? Clearly you live in a different area than me. Where I live, I know over 20 people who do nothing everyday except leech of the welfare and unemployment system. Why should they get healthcare too? Yea, I get it, recession, times are tough.

    But arrogance is at play here too. When my dad's work was slow and was losing money, did he do nothing? No, he got a job that was less than half of his current wage. Why? Because a little money is better than no money at all.
    That's pretty anecdotal, a lot of the people on benefits are usually looking for jobs or got kicked out of their jobs, no point ruining it for everyone just because of a lazy few.

  4. Post #364
    Gold Member
    Kentz's Avatar
    August 2007
    2,505 Posts
    people respond to incentives

    if you pay people to be poor they will stay poor

    anyway isn't this starting to become a little bit offtopic?

  5. Post #365
    SUPER SWELL FELLOW
    Phrozen99's Avatar
    May 2006
    2,359 Posts
    people respond to incentives

    if you pay people to be poor they will stay poor
    That's pretty anecdotal, a lot of the people on benefits are usually looking for jobs or got kicked out of their jobs, no point ruining it for everyone just because of a lazy few.
    I know these people, and they aren't trying. Kentz said it perfect. Why should they work when they can get paid 400 a week?

  6. Post #366
    Gold Member
    hexpunK's Avatar
    August 2008
    15,659 Posts
    people respond to incentives

    if you pay people to be poor they will stay poor

    anyway isn't this starting to become a little bit offtopic?
    It's hardly "paying" them to be poor. The money from benefits systems is usually just enough to clothe, feed and house someone. Luxuries aren't exactly commonplace. Though the benefits system in the UK at least is quite easy to abuse as evidenced by most of my town.

  7. Post #367
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,048 Posts
    Forcibly detained? This isn't the 1300s where peasants rose up to rebel against taxes and their lords.
    Huh? If you refuse to pay your taxes, eventually you'd get put in prison... what is that, if not forceful detainment? Taxes are coercive; there's seriously no way of rationally disputing this point.

  8. Post #368
    Gold Member
    Kentz's Avatar
    August 2007
    2,505 Posts
    It's hardly "paying" them to be poor. The money from benefits systems is usually just enough to clothe, feed and house someone. Luxuries aren't exactly commonplace. Though the benefits system in the UK at least is quite easy to abuse as evidenced by most of my town.
    its still free money for not doing anything

    if you have a guy not taking care of his car and you give him a new car he is not going to take of that one either, just doesnt work.

    Edited:

    I know these people, and they aren't trying. Kentz said it perfect. Why should they work when they can get paid 400 a week?

    and then when less people work theres not enough money to supply those who "need it", and the entire system collapses.

    you know of course after they printed fiat money at will and caused inflation

  9. Post #369
    Proudly supporting the JIDF
    Dennab
    July 2010
    22,111 Posts
    Taxes are coercive; there's seriously no way of rationally disputing this point.
    If this is the case, then why do people happily pay taxes to support various services?

  10. Post #370
    Gold Member
    Kentz's Avatar
    August 2007
    2,505 Posts
    If this is the case, then why do people happily pay taxes to support various services?

    if people would pay their taxes happily at will then there is no need to use force

    but oh wait if you dont you are put in jail



    but if you wanted to know why people happily pay their taxes, well i would assume generations of taxes and state propaganda

    its a bit like asking why people prior to late 19th century had no problems with slavery

  11. Post #371
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,048 Posts
    If this is the case, then why do people happily pay taxes to support various services?
    If this were the case the state wouldn't have to use threats of physical violence to make sure you do it... I don't understand why anyone is even trying to contest me. It's an indisputable fact that the state uses coercion to make you pay your taxes. You can't sensibly argue that it doesn't.

  12. Post #372
    Gold Member
    carcarcargo's Avatar
    October 2007
    15,298 Posts
    I know these people, and they aren't trying. Kentz said it perfect. Why should they work when they can get paid 400 a week?
    Nobody gets paid 400 a week its more around 60 a week.

    Edited:

    If this were the case the state wouldn't have to use threats of physical violence to make sure you do it... I don't understand why anyone is even trying to contest me. It's an indisputable fact that the state uses coercion to make you pay your taxes. You can't sensibly argue that it doesn't.
    I love how you use the term "physical violence" to make it sound like they go in an beat people up if they don't pay taxes

  13. Post #373
    Robbi's Avatar
    March 2012
    1,001 Posts
    If this is the case, then why do people happily pay taxes to support various services?
    Are you serious? I don't think a lot of people happily pay a % of their salary for a service they might not even need and why does the government use force if you refuse to pay taxes if everyone is so happy to pay them?

    I love how you use the term "physical violence" to make it sound like they go in an beat people up if they don't pay taxes
    So breaking into my home using violence to pin me down with steel cuffs and dragging me away in a police car to lock me in a cell and then keeping me locked inside a building with the chances of being shot if I try to leave is not physical violence?

    Okay.

  14. Post #374
    Gold Member
    hexpunK's Avatar
    August 2008
    15,659 Posts
    So breaking into my home using violence to pin me down with steel cuffs and dragging me away in a police car to lock me in a cell and then keeping me locked inside a building with the chances of being shot if I try to leave is not physical violence?

    Okay.
    They uhh...they don't "break into" your home and pin you down. They first ask politely that you pay your taxes, fine you, then come to your property to talk to you about it. Eventually you will be arrested, but it's not a vicious beatdown. They request legal permission to enter, if you resist or refuse entry, then yeah, they bust your door down. If you put up a fight, then yeah, you get pinned down. If you don't and just stop being a ~rebel~ for two minutes, you get quite a polite arrest as you aren't a threat to them.

    So sensationalising everything. This is a area of serious, factual debate, sensationalising stuff is the polar opposite.

  15. Post #375
    Robbi's Avatar
    March 2012
    1,001 Posts
    They uhh...they don't "break into" your home and pin you down. They first ask politely that you pay your taxes, fine you, then come to your property to talk to you about it. Eventually you will be arrested, but it's not a vicious beatdown. They request legal permission to enter, if you resist or refuse entry, then yeah, they bust your door down. If you put up a fight, then yeah, you get pinned down. If you don't and just stop being a ~rebel~ for two minutes, you get quite a polite arrest as you aren't a threat to them.
    So you think that if a criminal comes up to you and asks you politely for your wallet you think he is being nice and you should cooperate?

  16. Post #376
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,048 Posts
    I'm gonna turn up at someone's house tomorrow, ask them politely to give me 20% of their earnings (I'll buy them some healthy nutritious food for them and their neighbours, keep enough to pay for my labour time (let's say 7 an hour - basically minimum wage - for my work), and put the rest to cancer research or something. If they refuse, I'll come back in a couple of weeks. Then if they still refuse, I'll tie them up in cable ties and lock them up in my basement for being immoral and refusing to help society, the selfish cunts.

  17. Post #377
    Gold Member
    hexpunK's Avatar
    August 2008
    15,659 Posts
    So you think that if a criminal comes up to you and asks you politely for your wallet you think he is being nice and you should cooperate?
    Hey, if he asks politely first there's less chance I'm going to get stabbed is all I'm saying. If someone is calm enough to ask you politely to do something, then it's more likely they won't cause much more trouble.If you piss someone off by not co-operating they are more likely to get vicious.

    But comparing a arrest to a mugging is fucking retarded anyway. The police are doing their job, a mugger is just after your belongings. Of fucking course I wouldn't comply to a mugger unless he had me by the balls and could severely injure me anyway, I care more about surviving than my money in the long run after all (again thank you universal healthcare for looking after me when the mugger does beat me and take my money).

  18. Post #378
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,048 Posts
    Hey, if he asks politely first there's less chance I'm going to get stabbed is all I'm saying. If someone is calm enough to ask you politely to do something, then it's more likely they won't cause much more trouble.If you piss someone off by not co-operating they are more likely to get vicious.

    But comparing a arrest to a mugging is fucking retarded anyway. The police are doing their job, a mugger is just after your belongings. Of fucking course I wouldn't comply to a mugger unless he had me by the balls and could severely injure me anyway, I care more about surviving than my money in the long run after all (again thank you universal healthcare for looking after me when the mugger does beat me and take my money).
    They're just "doing their job" which entails coercively restraining people. "Doing your job" isn't any justification for anything.

  19. Post #379
    Gold Member
    carcarcargo's Avatar
    October 2007
    15,298 Posts
    They're just "doing their job" which entails coercively restraining people. "Doing your job" isn't any justification for anything.
    Yeah but they do it because without taxes people like you would leave people to die without healthcare so I'd say it's fairly justified.

  20. Post #380
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,048 Posts
    I'm not sure why you think I'd leave people to die... I've stated on numerous occasions that I'd be happy to pay a voluntary healthcare tax if I had the income. I'd do my bit, but I don't want to be part of a system where we coerce everyone else into conforming to the same values as me.

  21. Post #381
    The Union Jack would look a shit ton better with a Hammer and Sickle in the middle of it
    Bobie's Avatar
    November 2007
    7,291 Posts
    I'm not sure why you think I'd leave people to die... I've stated on numerous occasions that I'd be happy to pay a voluntary healthcare tax if I had the income. I'd do my bit, but I don't want to be part of a system where we coerce everyone else into conforming to the same values as me.
    sacrifice is a big part of helping others. there are those that would rather work to help others than to help themselves, and vice versa. this entire debate really is down to how much you're willing to give to help another, and as far as i'm concerned i would give everything away to help another human on this planet.

  22. Post #382
    Robbi's Avatar
    March 2012
    1,001 Posts
    sacrifice is a big part of helping others. there are those that would rather work to help others than to help themselves, and vice versa. this entire debate really is down to how much you're willing to give to help another, and as far as i'm concerned i would give everything away to help another human on this planet.
    What if someone doesn't want to help people. Why should they be forced to pay?

  23. Post #383
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,048 Posts
    sacrifice is a big part of helping others. there are those that would rather work to help others than to help themselves, and vice versa. this entire debate really is down to how much you're willing to give to help another, and as far as i'm concerned i would give everything away to help another human on this planet.
    Well people should have the freedom to sacrifice themselves if they really want to. But forcing everyone else on the planet to do it too is an entirely different proposition.

  24. Post #384
    Gold Member
    Lonestriper's Avatar
    September 2008
    5,793 Posts
    its a bit like asking why people prior to late 19th century had no problems with slavery
    You actually made a comparison between supporting slavery and taxation, wow.

    Edited:

    What if someone doesn't want to help people. Why should they be forced to pay?
    Because everything they have done and achieved has been made possible through the help of other people, whether it be indirectly or directly. A brazen refusal to help others is pretty indicative of being sociopathic.

    Edited:

    Also stop with the ridiculous hyperbole when trying to compare taxation to things

  25. Post #385
    Gold Member
    sgman91's Avatar
    July 2006
    4,298 Posts
    You actually made a comparison between supporting slavery and taxation, wow.
    God I hate when people say things like this. If you think the comparison is crazy than it should be easy to show how it doesn't work.

  26. Post #386
    Gold Member
    Lonestriper's Avatar
    September 2008
    5,793 Posts
    The commodification of a person as a good to be bought and sold does not equal a system whereby a portion of everyone's labour is used for the upkeep of society. Any resemblance between the two is wholly contrived.

  27. Post #387
    Robbi's Avatar
    March 2012
    1,001 Posts
    Because everything they have done and achieved has been made possible through the help of other people, whether it be indirectly or directly. A brazen refusal to help others is pretty indicative of being sociopathic.
    So what? Maybe I want to hoard all my money to my self and only support my self. Why should I not be able to do that? Does it matter if its sociopathic?

  28. Post #388
    Gold Member
    Lonestriper's Avatar
    September 2008
    5,793 Posts
    So what? Maybe I want to hoard all my money to my self and only support my self. Why should I not be able to do that? Does it matter if its sociopathic?
    You can do that to a degree, but seeing as any wealth earned was done so through the help of others and therefore can be seen as the wealth of everyone it only makes sense to contribute back to the system which creates this wealth, whether it be forced or not. Having citizenship of a country which outlines the governments rights to taxation in its constitution is further indicative of why you shouldn't be allowed to not, seeing as you are bound to it as long as you maintain citizenship in that country.

    Also this has taken the predictable turn of not being about UHC but rather anarcho-capitalism and its ideological tenets. Please present to me why whatever system you are pressing would be more beneficial than UHC, which I remind you, is a proven and tested system which works even in 3rd world countries.

  29. Post #389
    Gold Member
    Kentz's Avatar
    August 2007
    2,505 Posts
    You actually made a comparison between supporting slavery and taxation, wow.

    Edited:



    Because everything they have done and achieved has been made possible through the help of other people, whether it be indirectly or directly. A brazen refusal to help others is pretty indicative of being sociopathic.

    Edited:

    Also stop with the ridiculous hyperbole when trying to compare taxation to things

    i was trying to say that the reason why people have no problems paying their taxes is because its such a thing we've been doing in the west for a very long time and everybody takes it for granted

    like people did with slaves in the early days

    I am not saying that taxation equals slavery

  30. Post #390
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,048 Posts
    I absolutely hate it when people say "YOU'RE COMPARING X TO Y? YOU'RE A MORON!" Normally when somebody makes a comparison of something to something way worse, it's supposed to sound absurd and crazy. That's why it's called reductio ad absurdum. There's some lousy debaters on here.

  31. Post #391
    Gold Member
    Lonestriper's Avatar
    September 2008
    5,793 Posts
    There's some lousy debaters on here.
    Yeah I know they're not even talking about what this thread is about anymore what is up with that?

  32. Post #392
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,048 Posts
    Yeah I know they're not even talking about what this thread is about anymore what is up with that?
    I don't see off-topicness being a huuge issue, the main problem is people failing to recognise valid argumentative techniques, like reductio ad absurdum.

  33. Post #393
    Gold Member
    carcarcargo's Avatar
    October 2007
    15,298 Posts
    I don't see off-topicness being a huuge issue, the main problem is people failing to recognise valid argumentative techniques, like reductio ad absurdum.
    Reductio ad absurdum isn't valid, that's why it's called a logical fallacy


    At least in regards to a strawn man type argument, which is what we've seen here plenty of times.

  34. Post #394
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,048 Posts
    Reductio ad absurdum isn't valid, that's why it's called a logical fallacy


    At least in regards to a strawn man type argument, which is what we've seen here plenty of times.
    Erm... it's not a logical fallacy... A straw man argument is basically reductio ad absurdum gone wrong. However reductio is a logically valid argument form.

    http://www.iep.utm.edu/reductio/

    It's valid.

  35. Post #395
    Gold Member
    carcarcargo's Avatar
    October 2007
    15,298 Posts
    Erm... it's not a logical fallacy... A straw man argument is basically reductio ad absurdum gone wrong. However reductio is a logically valid argument form.

    http://www.iep.utm.edu/reductio/

    It's valid.
    Yes yes I found out shortly after posting it, my mistake.

  36. Post #396
    Audio-Surfer's Avatar
    February 2008
    268 Posts
    It gives more reason to maintain a healthy population rather than just saying "not my problem" as society collapses.

  37. Post #397
    The Union Jack would look a shit ton better with a Hammer and Sickle in the middle of it
    Bobie's Avatar
    November 2007
    7,291 Posts
    So what? Maybe I want to hoard all my money to my self and only support my self. Why should I not be able to do that? Does it matter if its sociopathic?
    not if your selfishness results in the deaths of others.

  38. Post #398
    Gold Member
    sgman91's Avatar
    July 2006
    4,298 Posts
    not if your selfishness results in the deaths of others.
    You living on more than bare necessities results in the deaths of others because you could theoretically give it all to starving African people.

  39. Post #399
    The Union Jack would look a shit ton better with a Hammer and Sickle in the middle of it
    Bobie's Avatar
    November 2007
    7,291 Posts
    You living on more than bare necessities results in the deaths of others because you could theoretically give it all to starving African people.
    there's a difference there, choice and environment. with such a logic, simply being born in a western nation results in the deaths of starving africans. i can't stop global manufacturing procedures and change the global economy as an individual, but i can give as much money to charity as i can and i can pay taxes towards the NHS to aid the free healthcare system we have over here.

    i'm not rich - i don't have much money at all - i was born in a pretty shitty area as well, but it boils down to how much of a materialist you are, and how much you value things that give you no sense of accomplishment, achievement, pride or sense of being. i'd rather be 'poor' and know everyone (including myself) were happy than be incredibly rich and effect the well being of others for a false sense of power.

  40. Post #400
    Gold Member
    carcarcargo's Avatar
    October 2007
    15,298 Posts
    You living on more than bare necessities results in the deaths of others because you could theoretically give it all to starving African people.
    So you feel that because in the current system some people die, it's A-okay to let even more people die?