Bernie To Introduce New Bill: College Should Be Free Just Like Germany and Nordic Countries

Both rely upon unauthorized taking. In one instance you like the outcome so you rename the action as taxation. In another when theft occurs that you don't like, say a mugging, you agree to call it theft.
What do you get in return when someone mugs you?

What do you get in return when you pay taxes?

You are a child
 
What do you get in return when someone mugs you?

What do you get in return when you pay taxes?

You are a child


In both instances you get a gun in your back don't you?

When somebody has an idea so good you have to be forced to pay for it, does that tell you anything?

Your view relies on the idea that force is acceptable when you like the result, even if the people you are forcing would prefer not to be involved. How does that make you any different from the mugger?
 
...an idea so good you have to be forced...Your view relies on the idea that force is acceptable when you like the result, even if the people you are forcing would prefer not to be involved.

some people, like jesus, just wanted to walk the earth freely.

what would happen if jesus wandered onto robroy's property?

14316335754994_zpsk4fadh4p.png
 
In both instances you get a gun in your back don't you?
No, the US government will never threaten to kill you if you don't pay your taxes
When somebody has an idea so good you have to be forced to pay for it, does that tell you anything?
I just brought up half a dozen good ideas that don't get properly funded because of retarded personal and/or religious beliefs
Your view relies on the idea that force is acceptable when you like the result, even if the people you are forcing would prefer not to be involved. How does that make you any different from the mugger?
There is no force, you are paying (taxes) for a service (government) just like you would if you went to any business establishment. If you went to a bar with a 2 drink minimum and a door charge, and you didn't want the drinks, did the bar "force" you to pay the door charge?

You came in the bar, you're required to pay the door charge whether you drink your 2 drinks or not. If you don't like the door charge, why wouldn't you just go to another bar without one? Or with a lower one?
 
No, the US government will never threaten to kill you if you don't pay your taxes

I just brought up half a dozen good ideas that don't get properly funded because of retarded personal and/or religious beliefs

There is no force, you are paying (taxes) for a service (government) just like you would if you went to any business establishment. If you went to a bar with a 2 drink minimum and a door charge, and you didn't want the drinks, did the bar "force" you to pay the door charge?

You came in the bar, you're required to pay the door charge whether you drink your 2 drinks or not. If you don't like the door charge, why wouldn't you just go to another bar without one? Or with a lower one?

A service cannot exist if the "customer" is made to purchase it under duress. So I go to your house, take $500 from you and leave a 1/4 ounce of shitty weed on your kitchen table and tell you to have at it. Did I just provide you a service?
 
A service cannot exist if the "customer" is made to purchase it under duress. So I go to your house, take $500 from you and leave a 1/4 ounce of shitty weed on your kitchen table and tell you to have at it. Did I just provide you a service?
Your analogy falls flat on its face, I didn't agree to have my house broken into, you did agree to the terms and services by living in the land, whether you believe you did or not is irrelevant

And if a service cannot exist if the customer is made to purchase it, what's your explanation for car insurance? That's actually a really great analogy. You agree to drive the car, you have to pay for the insurance; you agree to live in the US, you have to pay the taxes

I'm guessing you're against car insurance, too, right?
 
Your analogy falls flat on its face, I didn't agree to have my house broken into, you did agree to the terms and services by living in the land, whether you believe you did or not is irrelevant

And if a service cannot exist if the customer is made to purchase it, what's your explanation for car insurance? That's actually a really great analogy. You agree to drive the car, you have to pay for the insurance; you agree to live in the US, you have to pay the taxes

I'm guessing you're against car insurance, too, right?

I am against coercion and against changing the meaning of some words depending upon who is deriving the benefit from the outcome.
 
Back
Top