Debate: Taxation is Legalized Theft
Side: yes

"Yes, by definition, as per this debate, Taxation is not theft, it is Taxation.">>Legalized mandatory extraction of money/goodsTheft > mandatory extraction of money/goodsThe only difference is one is legalized; hence, legalized theft. And 2+2=4."When you are stolen from, you do NOT get anything in return. There's a gulf of difference that you don't seem to be able to grasp for some reason."This isn't as complicated as your making it. If you want to steal from one person, all you need is force, but to control a nations worth of currency you need more than force. You need compliance. you need people to believe in the virtue of taxation otherwise it's impossible. If everyone in the united states decided not to pay their taxes next year the government could do nothing about it.On a small-scale it would be like a thief taking your money, then giving you back some spare change so long as you willingly hand over your money again next time. "As per your purse example, if they are ALLOWING me to take their purse, and I am providing a service in exchange for continued allowance, then I am NOT stealing their purse anymore."You still don't understand. She is only allowing you to take her purse because you will kill and/or kidnap her if she doesn't and the only service she gets in return is the privilege of watching her money get used to create a coercive monopoly on all of the most vital services to a society. You think the government provides police for your benefit? They do it so that they are the only ones in control of police protection. otherwise, why make it a coercive monopoly? If it really is just for our benefit and it really is our best option then there's no reason to make it mandatory. People will willingly pay for it themselves and indeed the very existence of government monopolized services like the police show how high of a demand there is for these services. "If you don't want to pay taxes, DON'T EARN MONEY and DON'T OWN PROPERTY in this country."Well, that's retarded. So your point is that if I really don't like taxation then the reasonable thing to do is damn myself to poverty? I pity anyone whom has honestly sought you out for advice."Move to another country that doesn't charge taxes for anything (protip: there's not one)."I'm beginning to think that YOU don't read what you write. You recognize AND openly admit this point is a non-sequiter, yet you still post it as though it's meant to convince me of something. Have you ever even debated before? I only ask because you don't seem to grasp the subtleties of language and logical fallacies. "Or you could be homeless, or earn so little income that you can afford to rent a crappy house and pay for food and that's it, and you won't be paying taxes under current US law. Actually, other people's taxes will likely pay for quite a large portion of your food."You pretty much already said this about two sentences earlier. I'm beginning to think you're just trying to fill space.Look, I'm not saying that people should dodge taxes, I'm saying there's no need for taxation and that, in fact, people would be better off without taxation."The US Government has never forced me to do anything. "Paying Taxes" is a CONDITIONAL CONTRACT between law abiding citizens and the government."Oh really? I've never signed anything agreeing to this and I don't think you have either. It seems to me that just being born qualifies myself to pay mandatory offerings. I was never given the option to opt out of government services so it can hardly be called voluntary. To me this sounds an awful lot like when my little sister would steal my toys, bring them into her room and state that since they are in her room they belong to her. Didn't make much sense then either. ;) "When you pick up that piece of currency and put it into your pocket, you are acknowledging the powers that be... otherwise, LEAVE THE DOLLAR ALONE."So now because the government has forced a monopoly on means of currency I owe them the value of my labour that they place on their coercively monopolized currency? "Again, tax avoidance:"Again, it's not about tax avoidance. I'm not even sure how you got this out of what I wrote before. My only guess is that you didn't understand what I was talking about thus substituted a straw-man reason onto me so you could "out-debate" me on this topic. "You don't like those things? Everything else that exists here was built by a MAJORITY that agree that pitching in your share of the tax burden is expected, and reasonable. You don't think it's expected and reasonable? Don't use the roads we pay for, don't use the schools we pay for, etc."Well, that pretty much was my whole point. I CAN'T ,I repeat, CAN'T opt out of government services. I can't chose to pay for private school and NOT public schools. I can't choose to pay a privatized hospital and NOT a state-run hospital. Understand, please. You don't NEED taxation to have these things. Look, you pay for roads and police because you want them, right? Would you still pay for them if payment wasn't mandatory? I bet you would. And that's all that is needed. If people are willing to pay for a service then someone will supply it because there's money in it for them. And if there's no monopoly on the service then there will be competition and incentive to improve on the service and make it more affordable.And if paying for the service isn't mandatory then you don't have to pay for things you don't use. So money will ONLY go to were the people want it to go. Now, doesn't that sound better than letting a few politicians take your money and hope for the best?