Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 30 Jul '10 18:53 / 1 edit
    are NOT property rights fundamentalists?

    Is there anyone here who simply wants to make a case for reducing the size and scope of government without it becoming an argument about how all taxation amounts to "theft"?

    the only ones I can think of are Hugh Glass and sh76. And maybe Whodey
  2. 30 Jul '10 18:55
    Originally posted by zeeblebot
    you might have said: The income tax is a tradeoff vs. the right to keep the money you earn.
  3. 30 Jul '10 18:57
    but, i think we could do away with income and property taxes and finance sufficient government with microtaxes on sales and transactions, after first doing away with paper money.
  4. 30 Jul '10 18:57
    okay -- I'll add zeeblebot to the list -- anyone else?
  5. 30 Jul '10 18:57
    the key word being "sufficient".
  6. 30 Jul '10 19:37
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    are NOT property rights fundamentalists?

    the only ones I can think of are Hugh Glass and sh76. And maybe Whodey
    What about generalissimo?
  7. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    30 Jul '10 20:19
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    are NOT property rights fundamentalists?

    Is there anyone here who simply wants to make a case for reducing the size and scope of government without it becoming an argument about how all taxation amounts to "theft"?

    the only ones I can think of are Hugh Glass and sh76. And maybe Whodey
    Government is a non-profit organization that provides some useful services like police, defense, and the courts. Taxes are need to pay for those services. That's not theft.

    But if I was a supporter of a non-profit organization that was: a) running a massive deficit and refusing to consider reducing spending, and b) sending me notice after notice to send more money 'or else', then I think I'd be ready to say, 'time to change the board of directors.'
  8. Standard member StarValleyWy
    BentnevolentDictater
    30 Jul '10 20:26 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    are NOT property rights fundamentalists?

    Is there anyone here who simply wants to make a case for reducing the size and scope of government without it becoming an argument about how all taxation amounts to "theft"?

    the only ones I can think of are Hugh Glass and sh76. And maybe Whodey
    The way you state the question is dishonest.

    Are there any progressives in these forums who are NOT for taking other peoples property by force?

    If you are even a bit sincere about debating communism you should have opened the thread as "As a good communist, I want to know if there are any of you conservatives who will agree that we commies know what is best for you. Are there any of you who disagree that we are indeed smarter than you?"
  9. 30 Jul '10 20:36
    Originally posted by spruce112358
    Government is a non-profit organization that provides some useful services like police, defense, and the courts. Taxes are need to pay for those services. That's not theft.

    But if I was a supporter of a non-profit organization that was: a) running a massive deficit and refusing to consider reducing spending, and b) sending me notice after notice to s ...[text shortened]... oney 'or else', then I think I'd be ready to say, 'time to change the board of directors.'
    What if most of the shareholders disagree?
  10. 30 Jul '10 20:52
    Originally posted by StarValleyWy
    The way you state the question is dishonest.

    Are there any progressives in these forums who are NOT for taking other peoples property by force?

    If you are even a bit sincere about debating communism you should have opened the thread as "As a good communist, I want to know if there are any of you conservatives who will agree that we commies know what is best for you. Are there any of you who disagree that we are indeed smarter than you?"
    the way you define Communism means that the great majority of Americans and Europeans are Communists. Fine. If you think we're all Communists, then I guess we're all Communists. But you won't find any of us carrying pictures of Chairman Mao.
  11. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    30 Jul '10 20:58
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    the way you define Communism means that the great majority of Americans and Europeans are Communists. Fine. If you think we're all Communists, then I guess we're all Communists. But you won't find any of us carrying pictures of Chairman Mao.
    'Cuz that ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow.
  12. Subscriber Wajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    30 Jul '10 21:01 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    What if most of the shareholders disagree?
    Sell your shares.

    Do you see the difference, it's a thing called CHOICE. It's what makes humans humans, acting on our ability to reason, grass doesn't have a choice it just grows where it can, it doesn't know why, dumb beasts act on instinct. Humans have this thing sitting on our shoulders that distinguishes us from all the rest. The more choices that are taken from us and made by others reduces humans from what they are.
  13. 30 Jul '10 21:01
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    'Cuz that ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow.
    yeah....lots of Americans are fans of Groucho and John.
  14. 30 Jul '10 21:08 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    the way you define Communism means that the great majority of Americans and Europeans are Communists. Fine. If you think we're all Communists, then I guess we're all Communists. But you won't find any of us carrying pictures of Chairman Mao.
    Each Communist country has its own Chairman Mao. North Korea has Il whatever. Cuba has Castro. Venezuela has what's his face. Viet Nam has Ho Chi Min. Russia of course had Stalin, now Putin.


    As for Taxes, they are necessary to run the government. The government has the job of protecting the country, making laws the citizens live by and developing infrustruction. These things cost money. What conservatives wonder about is all the extra money the government needs to run all the other things that this governmetn does, but isn't what a government should be dong at all.
  15. Standard member StarValleyWy
    BentnevolentDictater
    30 Jul '10 21:13
    Originally posted by Melanerpes
    the way you define Communism means that the great majority of Americans and Europeans are Communists. Fine. If you think we're all Communists, then I guess we're all Communists. But you won't find any of us carrying pictures of Chairman Mao.
    Are you saying that Mao isn't a good communist? He seems pretty average as a commie. I mean... he killed as many of his own as most commies do.

    Besides, who needs pictures of Mao when we have Che Guevara t-shirts and posters? Now THAT is a commie! He was such a hero. And he really didn't live to be old enough to become a "mass" murderer. A few thousands. Tens of thousands at the most. But - Oh! What a hero!