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

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Mitt? is that you?

liberal afraid to take bet so changes the subject thinking no one will notice

Yes that's it.

no, he didn't take the bet because he didn't need the money and he didn't mind looking foolish.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

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?

Because of cheats like you that want to take without giving.

if you have evidence of this I'll pay you $10,000. Bet or admit to being a liberal

Taxes are what we pay for civilization.

dear, taxes support government, and government has been the enemy of civilization. Thats why Jefferson gave us freedom from government and why, thanks to freedom from government, we have the most civilization in human history!! Welcome to your first lesson in political philosophy.

 

[uscitizen]

"we have the most civilization in human history!!"

Incorrect there are far more Indians or Chinese than us.
You lose again.

 

[ladyliberal]

I would say that your apparent suggestion that taxes backed by the threat of force are inherently illegitimate

I'd say as our founders did that tax collection is inherently violent and coercive, and as such should be mimimized in a peaceful free country. Under capitalism you earn your money in peaceful voluntary relationships.

As a liberal you would have no issues with the majority taking everyone's money by governmental violence. A liberal has no answer to the question of how big is big. That is why a liberal will be inherently brainless.

Tax collection is certainly coercive, and depending on one's definition one could certainly call it violent. Those are both good reasons to try to keep it low.

I don't have an inherent problem with the government collecting money from people, and as far as I can tell you don't either (you and I both want to "minimize" it, depending on definitions, but neither of us wants to eliminate it).

How big is big? It depends on the context, and your question lacks an evident one. In any event, I don't like to ask the binary "is this big?" when I can ask the less reductive "how big is this?"

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

"we have the most civilization in human history!!"

Incorrect there are far more Indians or Chinese than us.
You lose again.

dear I said the most civilization, not the most people. See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow? Is any other conclusiion possible?