Why does liberal government use guns and jail to "collect" their money while

Discussion in 'Politics' started by EdwardBaiamonte, Mar 22, 2012.

  1. EdwardBaiamonte
    Offline

    EdwardBaiamonte Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    27,564
    Thanks Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +3,053
    Why does liberal government use guns and jail to "collect" their money while the rest of us must collect our money in peaceful voluntary relationships?? If government is so naturally violent why do we have so much of it, and so little peaceful libertarian government? How did they make liberals think violence was natural?
     
  2. The T
    Offline

    The T George S. Patton Party Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    48,072
    Thanks Received:
    5,473
    Trophy Points:
    1,773
    Location:
    What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
    Ratings:
    +5,502
    One word...CONTROL (over the masses)...

    The people in thier eyes are too stupid to have liberty.

    The Founders had a term for them...Tyrants.
     
  3. ladyliberal
    Offline

    ladyliberal Progressive Princess

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,253
    Thanks Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +291
    Well, first I would note that violence is natural, and many animals experience much more violent lives than the average human.

    As to why government is generally ultimately backed by force, I'm not sure what other way there is to govern. Governing someone is impossible unless one can make that person do things they don't want to do. Nonviolence is great, but as far as I know no nonviolent movement has ever governed a nation-state (even Vatican City has its Swiss Guard and an armed police force: Corps of Gendarmerie of Vatican City - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).
     
  4. ladyliberal
    Offline

    ladyliberal Progressive Princess

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,253
    Thanks Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +291
    The founders so far as I know did not generically label the collecting of taxes backed by armed might tyranny. Indeed, each new state collected taxes in this manner, and the US Constitution was written largely so that the federal government could collect taxes to pay down its war debt.
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2012
  5. EdwardBaiamonte
    Offline

    EdwardBaiamonte Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    27,564
    Thanks Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +3,053
    yes, imagine your neighbor coming to you with a gun and forcing you to contribute to some cause he liked. But, when liberals do that through government it somehow becomes peaceful, legitimate, and a sign of their moral superiority? How on earth?????
     
  6. EdwardBaiamonte
    Offline

    EdwardBaiamonte Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    27,564
    Thanks Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +3,053
    but you leave out that the entire idea was to limit government tax violence and use what little revenue they collected for basic purposes, not charity, entitlements, or to buy votes!!

    "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
    -Benjamin Franklin

    James Madison: "The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specific objectives. It is not like state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2012
  7. ladyliberal
    Offline

    ladyliberal Progressive Princess

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,253
    Thanks Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +291
    I don't mean to avoid such topics, but I understood you original post to be about the legitimacy of taxation without regard to where the money was spent. I certainly agree that there are some things the government spends money on that they shouldn't. In any event I think the main purpose of taxation was to get money the government could spend on things. If their primary goal was to minimize "tax violence" they could have simply not collected taxes.
     
  8. EdwardBaiamonte
    Offline

    EdwardBaiamonte Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    27,564
    Thanks Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +3,053
    they were not anarchists, they were libertarians. Do you understand the difference?
     
  9. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    56,105
    Thanks Received:
    9,340
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +24,578
    I get felt up and nude photos taken of me at the airport when I travel. As a Verizon customer, my phone records have been scoured by the government to see if I have made any calls to Osama bin Laden. If I made an overseas phone call, the government may have been listening in, without a warrant. At the local library, the FBI scours lists of books we have checked out and made the librarians sign NDLs, telling them that if they tell anyone they have been there, they will put those librarians in prison.

    If an American citizen is merely suspected of being a "terrorist" (which has a looser and looser definition as time passes), they can be disappeared without a trial. Ever.

    A man who told Vice President Cheney he did not like his Iraq policy was arrested by the Secret Service. For speaking to a public official?

    All courtesy of George W. Bush.

    So what was that you were saying about tyranny?
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2012
  10. ladyliberal
    Offline

    ladyliberal Progressive Princess

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,253
    Thanks Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +291
    I do generally understand the difference between the terms, and I agree that the latter describes the Founders better than the former.

    I would say that your apparent suggestion that taxes backed by the threat of force are inherently illegitimate seems a more anarchist than libertarian sentiment. The Libertarian Party, for example, calls only for the repeal of the income tax and not the elimination of all taxation (Platform | Libertarian Party). Anarchists in contrast generally argue for a stateless and therefore tax-less society.
     

Share This Page