Are taxes a kind of theft?

I look at it like this if you rounded up everybody on ATS and went to a nice Steak House for dinner you wouldn't expect one person to pay the entire bill would you?? I know thats a little different but the principal is still the same. More than likely everyone would pitch in their fair share to pay for their meal. If taxes are theft I haven't noticed it I've been paying them all my life and don't mind doing it. I feel like some tax is justifiable.

Technically, of course taxes are theft. As has already (to deaf ears and blind eyes) been stated, if I earn money and I tell somebody-- ANYBODY-- that I don't want to give them any of that money, but they take it anyway, that is clearly theft. Whether it's justified or not, whether it's valid or not, whether it's necessary or not-- taking money from somebody else against their will and under threat of force is theft. Obviously. While it might be argued that some taxation is necessary, it should never be forgotten that it is indeed theft. The notion that taxes are right and good is just as dangerous as the notion that censorship or domestic espionage are right and good-- it basically grants the government free rein to do as it pleases. Taxes, like censorship or espionage, should be viewed, at best, as a necessary evil simply in order to ensure that they are kept to the bare minimum.

Personally, I would hazard a guess that if those who draw a government paycheck-- that is, those whose income is derived directly from my taxes-- were barred from arguing this issue, there would be little argument left.

I look at it like a road in the old days before there were bulldozers. Lets just say a wagon load of people are traveling on this old dirt road and they come to a place where there are several trees down and there is no other way to pass. They decide to all band together and move the trees so it looks like they are going to be there a few days. More and more people come along and pitch in to restore the road back to normal. Once it is restored the people that come later did nothing to help upkeep the road. Now days its handled and everyone pays something for the use of that road.

Not sure how it is in the States, but in the UK, Income tax was introduced to pay for the Napoleonic Wars...Problem is, it was never repealed after we kicked his Corsican behind and the Government got used to the extra income.

Tax is justifiable, in my opinion, but on a simplistic and historic level it can be viewed as theft. However, the Dictionary describes theft as:

theft

n : the act of taking something from someone unlawfully;
Source

Notice the "lawfully" part. Seeing as tax is "lawful" (notice you can't spell Lawful without awful!!) then it cannot technically be theft.

Originally posted by cavscoutLike I said before, even you (or everybody) thinks taxation provides "vast contributions" that does not mean it is not theft.

No, but the fact that you couldn't make the money in the first place if a portion of it weren't taken in taxes, does.

You make the money you do in the context of a society under the rule of law. Absent such a society, you couldn't. To argue that the government is "stealing" your money, is to argue that you would have more of it if the government didn't levy taxes. You wouldn't. You'd have less.

What, I am not entitled to the full wages I work for?

Correct.

That society owns the product of my labor?

Only a part of it.

I enter into a contract of taxation when I agree to work?

Yes, implicitly. That's because you don't just "agree" to work, you sign a binding, legal contract that is also binding on your employer. Your employer doesn't just voluntarily pay your salary, your employer is legally obligated to pay it for any work you do. Such a contract is meaningless in the absence of enforceable law, and there is no enforceable law without taxes. So taxes are an implied clause of your work agreement, that doesn't need to be spelled out specifically because it's a part of ALL contractual agreements.

No... Taxes aren't theft. They are needed to function in modern society. The debate comes in when talking about what is to much taxation and what is to little. Also, what to spend our money on. It started out with just being taxed enough so the government could keep its citizens safe. Then government decided it needed to stabilize our economy. Then it decided it needed to provide health care and wellfare... All this lead to more taxes. Next thing you know our government officials drive around in stretch limos and... Gah... I'm ranting now.

Anyway... No, taxation isn't stealing. though sometimes I feel like I am getting ripped off these days.

Remember the Boston Tea Party? The Americans finally got fed up with all the taxing and took matters into their own hands.

Now Americans are taxed quite a bit more than England had expected back then. The only difference is that we're all brainwashed into thinking it's ok.

So if theft is taking something away "unlawfully", what happens when the "law" is corrupt? Seems to me, the law is written by those in control. Whether it be run by saints or criminals.

Originally posted by Kruel
Remember the Boston Tea Party? The Americans finally got fed up with all the taxing and took matters into their own hands.

Now Americans are taxed quite a bit more than England had expected back then. The only difference is that we're all brainwashed into thinking it's ok.

So if theft is taking something away "unlawfully", what happens when the "law" is corrupt? Seems to me, the law is written by those in control. Whether it be run by saints or criminals.

Just because taxes aren't theft doesn't mean all taxes are fair or right, and it doesn't mean you can't question, argue, protest, vote, and rebel. You can do all of these without being an anarchist. Samuel Adams, who led the Boston Tea Party, wasn't one.

Originally posted by city trader
I discovered that we were then paying a graduated income tax, which was imposed by the bankers as one of the conditions for lending the Government money.

Not credible. Banks have no incentive to demand a graduated income tax. On the contrary, they have the opposite incentive, since bankers are generally wealthy and will pay more in taxes under such a system.

Further research revealed that private banks had been given the privilege of creating all new money. The banks have a monopoly on the practice of issuing new money as credit.

Not completely familiar with English fiscal law, but in the U.S. banks issuing credit are strictly circumscribed by the Federal Reserve and banking regulations, hence this "privilege" is one that carries no power (although considerable profit potential). It would surprise me greatly if something similar did not obtain in the U.K., and hence:

Whosoever creates and issues a Nations currency has Supreme Power over that nation and is above the Law and above Parliament.

This becomes a false statement, and:

Therefore when we restore to Government the sole right to create and issue new money, and instruct the Government how to do so correctly, we shall have a huge reduction in taxation

This becomes unlilkely in the extreme.

First, my hat is off to you Dr. Roberto. What a great thread--much needed debate.

Second, my apologies to the international set for my jingoistic American interpretation. I noted with interest similar statements in England but representing a longer time period.

Here's my take. We are somewhere in the "yes it is theft" position by now, on a sliding scale of ever increasing out of control spending on the part of REPUBLICANS. And no, I am not a Democrat either.

I tried pasting the below info with a table but it did not paste in well, so here is the text version:

NO Theft-PHASE I 1776
$ 0 tax
NO Tax
High return on earnings / citizen
Fraud can only be against one’s self.
The individual is totally free no government interference
No insurance, roads(horse trails only), no trains, planes or automobiles, no running water or toilets.

PHASE II Nineteenth Century 1800’s
Roads get repaired
Minimum social needs
Some social programs
Nation expands like a weed.
Taxes begin to kick in at a low rate.

PHASE III Twentieth Century 1900’s
International expansionism
Pork barrel spending
Low return on earnings / citizen /public abuse /fraud /corruption
Entitlements begin
Century ends with combined taxes around 55%

MAXIMUM THEFT PHASE IV 2000’s
Massive entitlements, collapse of the state.
Collapsing economies.
Imprisonment of the individual.
Failure of Civilization
Revolution, Continuous World War
HIGH Tax = Socialism
Government Theft
Combined state, federal, property, city, state and alien anal probe tax more than 70%
Everybody has a gold plated toilet.
The second coming, Jesus waives his hand and all the bad persons are sucked into a dark black hole the size of the head of a pin.


[edit on 3/1/06 by dogberts not]

[edit on 3/1/06 by dogberts not]

[edit on 3/1/06 by dogberts not]

Originally posted by city trader
After failed attempt of world war one for leauge of nations the second world war finnaly got through the united nations, world bank, and imf. In 1946 the bank of england was nationalised and issuance of money went to other private banks, owned by the same hidden hand.

Maybe all this belongs in the ATF forum . . .

I will make you a promise:
When you perserve, and come to understand money clearly, and without passion or confusion

That happened quite a number of years ago. I still disagree with you.

Originally posted by dogberts notNO Theft-PHASE I 1776
$ 0 tax
NO Tax

Untrue.

High return on earnings / citizen

Sometimes true.

Fraud can only be against one’s self.

Untrue.

The individual is totally free no government interference

Untrue.

No insurance

Untrue.

[no] roads(horse trails only), no trains, planes or automobiles, no running water or toilets.

True, and all that did reduce the need for taxes (but not to zero).

PHASE II Nineteenth Century 1800’s
Roads get repaired
Minimum social needs
Some social programs
Nation expands like a weed.
Taxes begin to kick in at a low rate.

True.

PHASE III Twentieth Century 1900’s
International expansionism
Pork barrel spending
Low return on earnings / citizen /public abuse /fraud /corruption
Entitlements begin
Century ends with combined taxes around 55%

That figure is too high. However, it is true that the 20th century saw an increase in need for government services (a consequence of urban living), and also a greatly expanded military as a result of our "international expansionism." All of this required increased taxes.

MAXIMUM THEFT PHASE IV 2000’s
Massive entitlements, collapse of the state.
Collapsing economies.
Imprisonment of the individual.
Failure of Civilization
Revolution, Continuous World War

Gloomy predictions. They may come off, sort of, although I fundamentally disagree with your explanations of why they may. Rather, I would say it is the inherent instability of empire, combined with our collision with natural limits.

HIGH Tax = Socialism

Untrue, and our own highly-taxed society shows it; we are not implementing these taxes or this government spending for socialistic purposes.

The second coming, Jesus waives his hand and all the bad persons are sucked into a dark black hole the size of the head of a pin.

Nice. Was your whole post as tongue-in-cheek as that sentence? If so, I apologize for taking you seriously.

taxes are like everything else in government from president to local cop (its all about the shakedown)every penny you got!!!