Taxation is theft

Pro did ask the question, so can not fault Con for answering since that is what Pro wanted. Perhaps Pro should not question until they want them answered. The central question of is taxation theft and I did state my opinion on it. Just because you don't like the response does not mean it was not addressed. Pro lacks the insight to see that taxes are not theft and even posted definitions initially showing they are not theft and admitted, "I would agree the definitions themselves don't prove my claim that taxation is theft". Definitions matter. This libertarian argument that Pro is attempting to make has been shown historically to not work and shows lack of thought on Pro's side when considering history... "As centuries of history show, the natural state of an unregulated economy is not free competition, but stifled and constrained competition. Large, established powers, if given the chance, will do everything they can to suppress competition " whether through means fair or foul. From medieval guilds to industrial robber barons, the tactics are always the same: seizing the distribution channels, the infrastructure, the intellectual property, or the sources of raw material. Governments want to control vital resources in the name of national security; industry groups may take a hand in designing regulations that make it all but impossible for new players to enter the field. Outright intimidation, fraud and violence are often used against those who refuse to play along. Even the staunchly libertarian Cato Institute admits this: It is no surprise, then, that throughout U.S. history corporations have been overwhelmingly hostile to the free market. To maintain the preferable state of a free market, we need structure and regulation from the government. Taxation provides, among other things, the resources that are necessary to keep the free market running." (http://www.patheos.com...) Pro seems to like to link this to slavery when it is anything but and a really terrible comparison. " I would ask Con to demonstrate how the definition of theft implies that you get nothing in return." I will. When you steal from someone, that person doesn't say "Oh, you took some money from me? Let me build this bridge for you or repair this road to make your life easier" When I stated the theif gets nothing in return I was using your line of thinking that the government is stealing. If that were the case, we would not see our taxes go to use, would we? "Con here fails to see any other method by which that duty can be fulfilled other than the violation of one's property rights by forcible taking of a person's money or property." Your property rights aren't being violated and you really need to stop assuming what I think or see. There could be other methods, I do not put on blinders to that as you clearly do when viewing taxes. I must ask Pro what he thinks other methods are that can fufill what taxes do, that can supplement and replace them? Pro: Do not put words in my mouth. "Essentially, Con is asking "If we abolish slavery, who will pick the cotton?" Pro seems to like to be hyperbolic and ignores history and facts we know. Pro continues to use the worn out argument that taxes are akin to slavery and this is just not true. It is hyperbolic speech and in no way true. It is actually laughable to compare it to slavery as if you are forced to go work in a field. Pro is aware this is not the case, but continues to assert it. Taxation is not theft, theft is the action of stealing. Taxation is the act of levying a tax, fee, or fine. Pro is welcome to miscontrue and claim it is theft just because they don't agree with it, but definitions matter and taxation is not theft.