Taxation is theft

In your opening paragraph, you state that we are discussing "the morality of taxes". Debating whether taxes are "immoral" is off topic according to the title of the debate, "Taxation is theft". Taxation is in no way theft. You keep going back to the argument to say that "the government's need for violent tactics to enforce taxation does not make that violence (or threat of violence) moral. I am sure you would not argue that any action that is "necessary" is by default moral." What are we debating? Are we debating whether taxes are theft or whether the use of violence (or the threat of violence) to enforce law is moral? It is blatantly obvious this is how government works, and we"ve clearly established this. The government is not exempt for morality at all, but you breaking the law is in clear violation of the laws you agree to follow simply by living under that government. You obviously don"t live in any country, or any place for that matter, for free. As I"ve repeatedly stated, your duties as a citizen (you have duties as a citizen because that"s how society works) of the country you live in are to abide by the laws and pay taxes, and when you infringe on what the governing body requires you to do to live and be a citizen of their country, then they have every right to enforce their laws accordingly, but you"re quick to say that that"s immoral because the government has to use force when the governed won"t comply. "You conclude that taxation is not theft, yet we have failed to uncover a single variable which would give a government the moral exemption to make that so." Taxation is not theft. Do you feel entitled to the land that you live on for free? Do you feel the government should protect you from other countries and criminals for free? Freedom is not free. You can"t just live in any country for free because the government pays to keeps its citizens safe, educated, informed, and so on. The government has every right to tax its citizens due to the obvious fact that the citizens use services, roads, schools, and many more that the government pays to provide to them. How do you not see this? We"ve clearly stated that if the government didn"t enforce tax laws that no one would follow them, meaning the government wouldn"t have adequate funds to function at any level. How in any way is this immoral? Just because you as an individual don"t want to abide by law, it doesn"t mean the government is immoral just because they have to use force to enforce written law that is subject to everyone. "However, we discussed earlier how without consent, the taking of money or property by force must still be theft; regardless of what the law says, how badly the money is needed by the person or persons doing the steeling, and whether or not the money is used in part to improve the life of the person from whom it was taken. Without consent? Your consent is being a citizen of that country. Law is law, and it doesn"t become effective just because you consent to it. If you feel that laws are immoral due to the "threat of violence" to enforce them, then I"m sorry, you don"t have any idea at how simple law enforcement works. Even you stated in your own words that "without the use of force, the government would have no recourse when people disobey their laws". You argue that its immoral like there"s something else anyone can do about it. When you have an effective solution to the problem then maybe we can have this debate again, but as of now, the use of force is the only way to get criminals to comply with law, regardless if the law is a tax law, theft, or murder. Morality is defined simply as right versus wrong, so how is it immoral that a government needs to enforce law to protect and provide for its citizens? Obviously, government in the past has gone down a dark path, but where do you see people"s natural rights being violated because they don"t pay taxes? I simply don"t see the immorality in a governing body requiring its subjects to pay them in exchange for many things, I just don"t it. You keep wanting to go down the path that the government shouldn"t use force to enforce laws because in a way it"s "immoral". Literally the root of the word "enforce" is force. It"s called justice, not immorality. You keep trying to bring examples of atrocities committed by governments in the past to try to say that I"d be in support of that. Examples such as genocide of entire races and groups of people, death in large numbers, and famine induced by poor government are irrelevant in a discussion in whether taxes are moral or immoral. You keep trying to imply that I don"t recognize the difference between legal and moral, which is absurd. I follow the laws of my land and experience no forms of immorality from the government. Criminals are punished through justice, but you"re wanting to say that their punishments are immoral rather than justice in action. Using your logic, there is no effective way to implement law morally. I"ll conclude by simply stating taxation is simply not theft, due to numerous examples I"ve provided. As a citizen you are required to comply with law, and the government has the right to enforce its laws accordingly. You say the use of force to implement law is immoral, even when the word force is the root word of enforce. The definition of theft is "the action or crime of stealing", but the government isn"t stealing your money at all, just like a landlord isn"t stealing from you when you pay rent.