Friendly reminder that taxation is theft

Friendly reminder that taxation is theft.

Friendly reminder that you're an idiot.

>taxation is theft.
How would you pay for your country's military?

Hear, hear!

Technically you're right, but I really enjoy driving on roads. At least the robber bought me a puppy with the money he stole after shoving a gun in my face.

Don't you guys have militias that are volountary in the US?

Not organized, not anymore anyways as far as I know. The militia is just the general populace who own firearms now.

>country's

That's just rabble.

don't pay taxes then

No its not. It's a very sophisticated demand of money with menaces.

I see. Maybe they should be allowed to get more and heavier guns and be allowed to organize as they please and you'll have a volountary defense.

Friendly reminder that the fucking pavement you walk on everyday didnt materialize from thin air

You gonna answer the question, cunt?

The technical term you looking for is 'racket'.

I concur lad.

My friend owns a company who build roads. It's not magic and they are not wizards. Anyone can hire them.

You dickhead.

That is his answer.

Anarcho Capitalism dissolves a nation state. There is no such thing as a country any more. You could theoretically, in an An Cap society, secede your garden and claim it a country.

technically more like extortion but we get your drift.

Your question does not address the statement of "taxation is theft."

To the other autists out there, "who will pick the cotton" or "you can't produce cotton without slaves" does not address the point that slavery is immoral.

Taxation is only theft without representation. The fact that our elected officials are all shills at the moment I am inclined to agree with you?

The 2nd amendment, the way it is written and intended fully allows the citizenry of the country to be able to use and own any weapon or arm imaginable, but (((politicians))) have created unconstitutional laws about guns. If it weren't for them I'm sure we'd have better organized militias, maybe even a cheap weaponized vehicle or two.

Oh, so no one is going to defend this land then?
Sounds retarded.

You?

> what are guns

what happens when someone who isn't an ancap retard decides to start their own "democratic" government and they all vote that they have a manifest destiny to occupy your garden?

There is a reason why things are the way they are.

I see. That sounds like the best way to organize it imo.

Property tax is completely legitimate when you realize that territorial integrity gives the state a claim to all property within its borders and you are simply renting out your own piece of it

You can form a militia to defend it.

You kill them?

Ancap here.

So what? Most people, including some ancaps of the consequentialist variety, would argue that theft is morally permissible in some scenarios, such as one stealing a loaf of bread to prevent ones child from starvation.

I'll await your argument/logical proof for why theft is never morally permissible.

hahaha. exactly. and probably the cheapest and most efficient way to do that is through a social compact for common defense.

Just me?
Guns aren't going to defend against tanks, navy, and the airforce of another country.
You mean a nation?

There is no need for taxes to defend it.

Taxation is not theft
Incarceration in case of non payment is inmoral detainment
You should simply be banned from federal property and resources
And if this is not possible deported from said country

Volountary militia.

Or you could give an area to the people who doesn't want to pay taxes and let them manage themselves.

Friendly reminder, the Orbital Ring Space Elevator will actually get you to 0% taxes within a decade. Build Space Elevator, send up solar satellites, create power for 1/10 the cost of coal, sell it to the world, create trillions in free cash flow and mass economic growth.

property tax is legitimate because you are paying the government to recognize your property claim.

You are free not to pay but they are also free not to recognize your property claim.

Income tax is different though because it assumes that the government has a claim to your person, which is just proportional slavery.

That won't be as effective as a formidable army.
They would lose because of less numbers and aren't as organized.

I agree fully. Any taxation other than property taxation is completely illegitimate

>proposes an exponentially worse system than the one in place
>but thats ok our current system is immoral guys

Look, I agree it's theft. But the alternative is a hundred times worse than a world with taxes.

Privatizing the shit people like you propose to privatize will result in monopolies and oligopolies. Just look at internet services and insurance companies.

At that point we literally wouldn't be a goddamn country, the instant a private army popped up and claimed a piece of land as its own country we'd be fucked.

...

...

...

How did that war in Vietnam play out?

That flag is an eyesore

Right. Even a vietkong army runs under taxes. You think we would have done better if we just had a militia?

>government
>maintaining society
First mistake

Well done! You're an ancap with an incorrect conclusion.

I trust you'll figure out why as you continue forward.

>Thinking Ancaps have a problem with this scenario.

...

Yes you would have done better with a militia since you woulnd't have been able to use it in offensive wars to fuck shit up.

So is taking the commons away from the peasant farmers. But turning common land into property produces economic benefit, as does taxation.

Homesteading will never not be complete and utter bullshit. Even if it wasn't a priori bullshit, most land has been stolen over and over again through history ... so even if it wasn't a priori bullshit, homesteading theory can not be used to justify claiming as property the vast majority of land.

Your moral framework is built on quicksand, just as everyone else's.

...

How's that libertarian conversion going stormbruder make sure you post hoppean snake memes and pictures of half naked women in wheat fields.

helicopters hahaha, amirite?

Collectivists are willing to die for their nation/group. They win by default because you can't compete with that kind of determination and self sacrifice.

This could work
the group of people could buy it
but almost any goverment would not cead sovereignty like this

Sometimes I have stupid ideas too

I'm saying a militia would fail to even a low life army such as Vietnam.
Imagine if they invaded us and we only had militia.
Imagine if Germany had invaded Russia and Russia only had a militia.

there is the ethical vacuum that you cant stop unethical non NAP violating ppl

Like shilling against the Space Elevator.

HAHAHAHAHAHA, no.

Why do they hate roads, borders, military, public utility, etc?

Autist.

Whomever first creates an objective link between himself and a property owns it and can do with it as he pleases as long as it does not violate another's property.

If not, enjoy your might is right bullshit. If you don't accept my moral framework then I'll give you yours faggot.

>retarded ancaps actually believe this.
Have fun being a corporate slave.

So you be saying we should go ancap? Here's what I'd do. I'd get a bunch of guys I find agreeable, hire them to build modern amendments that meet their needs, then start charging them for staying on my property, then hire a security force to keep unwanted people off my property. If the people I'm renting to get rowdy then that same security force can throw them out if the deterrent of the security force being able to do so isn't enough. Wait, that's pretty much a nation state. Except now I, as the guy who "put in the initial investment" am now pretty much the de facto dictator. Sure the people are free to fuck off, but isn't that the case in most nation states today? And moreover, why would they, unless the living standards in my personal fiefdom were markedly lower than in nearby countries?

Thus, "anarchocapitalism" makes a great case for "free range dictatorship" where you're free to leave but not free to disagree..

Yea its more like extortion, not theft

>you secede from the state
>state declares war on you the next moment

>When your worst case scenario is a better version of what we have now

It isn't really that different though, maybe the size of communities would be a bit smaller and the rule of those with capital would be a bit more direct, but that's about it. Maybe some city state solution ruled by a few rich families might even be preferable.

It isn't really a worst case scenario, either. I think mine is pretty level-headed. A worst case scenario would be something like a super rich asshole buying every road leading to a city and charging exorbitant tolls on them.

>insurance companies

health insurance is successfully privatized here

>a super rich asshole buying every road leading to a city and charging exorbitant tolls on them
just make your own road, idiot

this

Ancaps will just lead to a renewal of Traditionalism, they just don't see it yet

Skip the ancap utopian bullshit and go straight for Enlightened Monarchism

i am sure the guy with all the money would happily allow this and that the rich super villain buying all roads wouldn't mind some competition.

>land and roads are infinite

that's the problem with infrastructure, there's only a finite amount of possible applications of it, you can't really make it competitive

There's only so many routes you can use to build a road between points A and B, and only one of them can take the shortest path.

>what is vertical construction
Literally every major city proves you wrong

yeah I'm sure that guy that owns the land will allow you to build over his property

fucking retard

>>what is vertical construction
Something that in an ancap world would require the consent of the guy who owns the land that the road is built on. The "but muh private roads" meme is probably the stupidest one since in order to circumvent abuse of private roads in an ancap society you'd probably have to invent affordable flying cars.

> Whomever first creates an objective link between himself and a property owns it and can do with it as he pleases as long as it does not violate another's property.

Only one person can be first, the original ownership chains have been lost to time and almost all land has been stolen multiple times by now. So how do you declare anyone to have moral ownership of land at this point?

>you can own the sky

>you can build in the sky without structural support columns

don't be an idiot

whoever owns it now, owns it