Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

"First and foremost, without its legal context, there is no such thing as theft."Oh, so because YOU seem to be incapable define theft for yourself, that means everyone else should do the same and is wrong in how they use words unless the go about doing so in the same way you do? =/It seems I'm only as "ignorant" as you are arrogant."First and foremost, without its legal context, there is no such thing as theft."So, if the state collapsed tomorrow and I decided to just walk into your home and take everything I could carry it would NOT be stealing just because a bunch of guys in suits of whom proclaim themselves judges wouldn't be around to tell you it's theft?Besides, have you not already stated that, "it's not the referring to its illegality, but the omission of consent that makes it theft and distinguishes theft from, for example, a loan or taxation." and now you are once again making the claim that theft is based on legality, hmm.you're being inconsistent. Perhaps it would be more true to say that YOU are only as ignorant as you are arrogant."The act of theft is not predicated on the use of force."1. This is only how YOU define it and means nothing outside of your own head unless whomever you're talking to (myself in this case) agrees to use the word in the same way. You have no monopoly on the use of words and I am equally free to define them as you are. 2. I say any act the uses force/ the threat of force in order to extract what another persons goods and/or money is theft. "The term "theft" only describes the taking of someone's property without their consent."Again, according to you. Not necessarily the way anyone else does or should define theft as. "For example, if someone leaves their IPod on a restaurant chair to go to the bathroom, and someone else picks it up and keeps it, then that person has committed theft. If that person uses violence to attain that same IPod, then it's not longer "theft", it actually becomes "robbery". But either way, by giving consent, you have necessarily precluded any legitimate allegation of theft."And if you're only consenting in the chance your life will be sparred, is it theft then?"And consent does not simply mean acquiescing to demands made of you."Only if you are so discriminant in YOUR personal definition of the word consent that it excludes acts of or the threat of violence and in this case even I cannot find a dictionary that backs you up on this. That's fine, you are free to use words however against the grain you want, but understand that this is just YOUR definition and not a universal standard that anyone else needs to have. "There's also one more, and probably more important reason why taxes don't constitute theft. Taxation is a form of debt repayment. You owe the government money for your continued use of the public goods and services that the government provides, and you may not be able to benefit from individually - the very things that allow you to maximize your productive capacity."Bullshit. I don't "owe" the government for forcing a coercive monopoly on the services it has done so on. That's retarded and up until now I thought you were at least somewhat intelligent, but your as big of a fool as everyone else I've debated thus far.Do you need a lesson on economics or are you going to admit to making a stupid mistake on this point? =/