Govt"redistribution of wealth" is no more than theft and distribution of stolen goods

[Kosh]

If the far left had their way all money would go to government and then the government would decide what you are worth to them.

 

[georgephillip]

Such a thing simply isn't possible, which is one reason government should be abolished.

Why not use direct democracy to expropriate all private wealth beyond a certain democratically agreed upon level and fund all elections with public money?

Because I'm opposed to organized plunder. Socialism has never worked and it never will.

There has never been a political economic system in history that has organized plunder as efficiently as capitalism, as proven by the past three centuries-long joy ride experienced by many of us mostly White folks in the affluent west at the expense of millions of brown, black, yellow, and red human beings on the periphery of Empire. Have you not noticed the recent plunder of Iraq for the benefit of Halliburton and Exxon, for example?

"The awarding of development rights over the huge West Qurna oilfield in southern Iraq to Exxon-Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell last Thursday once again underscores the criminal character of the continuing US-led occupation.

"As the direct result of the Iraq war, major American and other transnational energy conglomerates are now gaining control over some the largest oilfields in the world."

The plunder of Iraq?s oil - World Socialist Web Site

Don't whine about the (Socialist) source; refute the content, if you can.

 

[Antares]

How did capitalism cause WWI or WWII?

Perhaps you should start with a more general question.

Under what conditions would capitalism lead to war, if only indirectly.

Answer: Capitalism is the most productive force in history. The rate at which it burns through resources makes it ruthlessly expansionary. Put simply: oil runs out in Texas = boots on the ground in the middle east.

This is also why racism greases the wheels of Empire - because it's easier to justify taking the resources of others if you call them atavistic savages who must be saved by progress.

The point of globalization was to open all the world's wealth producing assets to capital investment. This meant that every corner of the globe needed to be disciplined by neoliberal reforms. Sometimes this lead to direct military conflict, but usually the US found a corruptible faction inside the host nation who was willing to accept a massive IMF Loan for structural improvement (which were fulfilled by US transnationals).

Then, when the host nation strategically defaulted on the loan, said nation would be placed into technical receivership, and its economy would be forced open to predators. Austerity would be imposed on the population which was converted into cheap labor for capital investment. Schools and hospitals in poor neighborhoods would be turned into sweatshops. The wheels of progress would leave the country with polluted rivers and skies . . . along with decimated forests and cropland . . . along with a population of downtrodden serfs living beneath a brutal dictator. Freedom is on the march.

Good lord, Der Commissar please save us.
What a load of Leftwing tripe.

 

[Antares]

Why not use direct democracy to expropriate all private wealth beyond a certain democratically agreed upon level and fund all elections with public money?

Because I'm opposed to organized plunder. Socialism has never worked and it never will.

There has never been a political economic system in history that has organized plunder as efficiently as capitalism, as proven by the past three centuries-long joy ride experienced by many of us mostly White folks in the affluent west at the expense of millions of brown, black, yellow, and red human beings on the periphery of Empire. Have you not noticed the recent plunder of Iraq for the benefit of Halliburton and Exxon, for example?

"The awarding of development rights over the huge West Qurna oilfield in southern Iraq to Exxon-Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell last Thursday once again underscores the criminal character of the continuing US-led occupation.

"As the direct result of the Iraq war, major American and other transnational energy conglomerates are now gaining control over some the largest oilfields in the world."

The plunder of Iraq?s oil - World Socialist Web Site

Don't whine about the (Socialist) source; refute the content, if you can.

Turn loose our own energy resources....oh wait...I know Global Warming and all that crap, you can't.

 

[georgephillip]

Virtually none. In fact, capitalism saved millions of lives. We live a lot longer now because of capitalism. We also work a lot less and enjoy life a lot more.

Are you saying capitalism had nothing to do with WWI and WWII?

"Estimated to be 10 million military dead, 7 million civilian deaths, 21 million wounded, and 7.7 million missing or imprisoned. (in WWI)

"Over 60 million people died in World War II. Estimated deaths range from 50-80 million. 38 to 55 million civilians were killed, including 13 to 20 million from war-related disease and famine.

World War I vs World War II - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

BTW, we work a lot less and enjoy life a lot more today because of the struggle of the working class against capitalism, not because of capitalism.

How did capitalism cause WWI or WWII?

Central Banks on both sides of the First World War invested heavily in the destructive capacity of standing armies.

The Federal Reserve and the income tax law in the US were instituted primarily to "pay" for the US entry into the War to End All Wars; I believe the baby boomer generation finally repaid those loans in this country.

Mid-way through that conflict it appeared there would be no clear winner; hence bankers like Morgan and Rothschild would lose billions of dollars without an obvious loser to plunder.

Woodrow Wilson solved that problem when he reneged on a campaign promise and plunged the US into a war primarily to repay US bankers who had financed his political career.

In effect, the bankers had been waiting since 1887 for the US to enact a central bank so they could finance a war among European nations whom they had already bankrupted with armament and "defense" programs.

Sound familiar?

CHAPTER EIGHT World War One [SECRETS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE By Eustace Mullins]

 

[georgephillip]

Because I'm opposed to organized plunder. Socialism has never worked and it never will.

There has never been a political economic system in history that has organized plunder as efficiently as capitalism, as proven by the past three centuries-long joy ride experienced by many of us mostly White folks in the affluent west at the expense of millions of brown, black, yellow, and red human beings on the periphery of Empire. Have you not noticed the recent plunder of Iraq for the benefit of Halliburton and Exxon, for example?

"The awarding of development rights over the huge West Qurna oilfield in southern Iraq to Exxon-Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell last Thursday once again underscores the criminal character of the continuing US-led occupation.

"As the direct result of the Iraq war, major American and other transnational energy conglomerates are now gaining control over some the largest oilfields in the world."

The plunder of Iraq?s oil - World Socialist Web Site

Don't whine about the (Socialist) source; refute the content, if you can.

Turn loose our own energy resources....oh wait...I know Global Warming and all that crap, you can't.

How about wind and solar, or maybe there isn't sufficient profit in metering the sun?

 

[editec]

How can one worry about the redistribution of goods to the poor when it is so very very obvious that the money migrates in exactly the opposite direction?


One can either be a fool or tool, that's how.

 

[RightDown]

It's obvious to any numskull that government redistributes income. It takes from some so it can give to others. Only the ignorant believe private property didn't exist before government. The Iroquois each had their own plot of land to farm on which they grew corn and other crops. They had no formal government. Did their land have no value? All the archeological evidence shows that farming originated before government. How would that be possible if farmers didn't own their land?

Ignoramuses often believe that the way things work now is the only way they can work. Comprehending that other solutions may be feasible is beyond their limited intellectual capacity.

In the USA, all property rights are created by the government. That's a fact.

Oh, I forgot, you live in the Iroquois nation. hahahaha

But you don't. and the rest is just more of your meandering ramblings.

The Government creates nothing. All law in this Republic is derived from We the People....not the Government. That includes both tax law and basic property rights. Taxation as a form of wealth redistribution is either implied in the Constitution or directly approved by We the People. As a result it is not theft if We the People sanctioned it.

If We the People don't like how the Government is taxing us (ex. Obamacare) we can vote the bastards out. I think many will get voted out next November. That is how our system of Government works. So I guess to sum up, I sort of half agree with you.

In the US, the government is by and for the people. The government creates all rights and laws.

 

[National Socialist]

Boss sits on his ass doing nothing but collecting money off of others hard work.

This is one of the more common fibs that socialists use to justify the theft that's at the core of their agenda - the silly notion that bosses do nothing.

The socialists and other liberals in this thread, are finding an amazing number of ways to change the subject and not talk about the actual topic of the thread.

Back to the subject:
Government redistribution of wealth is where the govt takes money from people who earn more, and give it to people who did not earn it.

If a government has no authorization to spend tax money by handing it to people who did nothing to earn it, is the act of doing that, any different from "theft and distribution of stolen goods", in any important way?

If the workers are the ones selling the stuff they should get a large part of the profit instead a lousy minimum wage while their "supervisors" who did less of the work get nice bonus's and higher wage.

 

[Antares]

There has never been a political economic system in history that has organized plunder as efficiently as capitalism, as proven by the past three centuries-long joy ride experienced by many of us mostly White folks in the affluent west at the expense of millions of brown, black, yellow, and red human beings on the periphery of Empire. Have you not noticed the recent plunder of Iraq for the benefit of Halliburton and Exxon, for example?

"The awarding of development rights over the huge West Qurna oilfield in southern Iraq to Exxon-Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell last Thursday once again underscores the criminal character of the continuing US-led occupation.

"As the direct result of the Iraq war, major American and other transnational energy conglomerates are now gaining control over some the largest oilfields in the world."

The plunder of Iraq?s oil - World Socialist Web Site

Don't whine about the (Socialist) source; refute the content, if you can.

Turn loose our own energy resources....oh wait...I know Global Warming and all that crap, you can't.

How about wind and solar, or maybe there isn't sufficient profit in metering the sun?

Neither has proven to be a viable alternative on a macro scale, pretty simple.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Again, there is no theft involved here between me and the group. We both agreed beforehand what we would do, both sides stuck to the deal, both are happy with the exchange.

Strange that you have no problem at all where YOUR MONEY was REDISTRIBUTED as "tax cuts" to the wealthy elite "job creators". Furthermore none of the "jobs" that they were supposed to "create" ever materialized either. So basically the wealthy elite have stolen $1+ Trillion of YOUR MONEY and given you NOTHING in exchange.

Why aren't you holding them accountable for stealing from you?

 

[Antares]

Again, there is no theft involved here between me and the group. We both agreed beforehand what we would do, both sides stuck to the deal, both are happy with the exchange.

Strange that you have no problem at all where YOUR MONEY was REDISTRIBUTED as "tax cuts" to the wealthy elite "job creators". Furthermore none of the "jobs" that they were supposed to "create" ever materialized either. So basically the wealthy elite have stolen $1+ Trillion of YOUR MONEY and given you NOTHING in exchange.

Why aren't you holding them accountable for stealing from you?

Why aren't you holding Obama accountable for it?

 

[NYcarbineer]

In the USA, all property rights are created by the government. That's a fact.

Looks like we have another liberal who disagrees with the Declaration of Independence, which says we have certain unalienable rights, and that they come from our Creator.

When is your flight leaving for Cuba, France or Iran? They disagree, too. You'd be right at home there.

Back to the subject:
If a government has no authorization to spend tax money by handing it to people who did nothing to earn it, is the act of doing that, any different from "theft and distribution of stolen goods", in any important way?

Since no 'Creator' is on record ever establishing and delineating any inalienable rights, the statements in the D of I are nothing more than opinions and wishes.

As to the authorization of the government to spend tax money -

we have a government of the People, and that is in the actual governing document, and therefore the People hold the power and the right to authorize the government to raise and spend taxes as the People see fit.

That is irrefutable fact.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Again, there is no theft involved here between me and the group. We both agreed beforehand what we would do, both sides stuck to the deal, both are happy with the exchange.

Strange that you have no problem at all where YOUR MONEY was REDISTRIBUTED as "tax cuts" to the wealthy elite "job creators". Furthermore none of the "jobs" that they were supposed to "create" ever materialized either. So basically the wealthy elite have stolen $1+ Trillion of YOUR MONEY and given you NOTHING in exchange.

Why aren't you holding them accountable for stealing from you?

Why aren't you holding Obama accountable for it?

The OP is talking about holding accountable the people who took his money and reneged on their side of the exchange.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

1.) I'm not a libertarian.

2.) Does anyone have any comments that are actually related to the subject of the thread (govt redistribution of wealth being theft, and examples showing theft and non-theft)?

That's funny, you make the same exact arguments as the Von Mises crowd.

So what exactly is government redistributing? Is it apples? I hate to repeat myself but you've gone to the Arthur Murray school of debating. Tap dancing around the subject matter.

The farmers deed to his property has value b/c the US government makes it so. No deed. No ownership.

I have yet to see you counter this simple observation: But for the federal government and US constitution and laws thereof, your farmer has no property rights, no farmland, no apples to sell.

RightDown, your are right on.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

The fact that you have decided to remain a citizen of a land where the Supreme Law of the Land authorizes the government to collect taxes, means that you HAVE agreed to that taxation..

Wrong. As I said previously, the federal government doesn't own the United States. Living in a given location doesn't constitute consent to anything, especially to third parties. When you rent an apartment, you sign a lease. You give your consent explicitly to pay rent. The kind of "consent" you are talking about is what a Mafioso extortion racket enforces. It claims a business "consents" to pay for "protection" because it decided to locate on the turf of the extortion racket. Your theory of "consent" is indistinguishable from the Mafioso definition of the term. It's the ethical system of a criminal enterprise.



Yes, those are the choices the government extortion racket imposes on me. However, they still do not constitute any form of consent. What you're saying is that if a mugger gives you a choice of handing over your wallet or taking a bullet, then you have consented to taking a bullet when you decline to hand over your wallet.

Again, that's the ethical system of organized crime.

Would you call the entire Constitution null and void, since it was written and ratified before you (and any other American citizen alive today) were born, and so did not get your personal blessing?

Yes, I would call it null and void. No person in this country is ethically bound by any terms in the Constitution. I never consented to it. How could I? I wasn't even born when it was adopted.

If you would like more information on this subject, read "Constitution of no Authority" by Lysander Spooner.

You are a typical libertarian freeloader. You want all the benefits of US citizenship without paying.

You live in the US. You're protected by its military, clean air regs, clean water regs, you have roads, your internet, you have cell phones, you have public education, libraries, inoculations, a criminal justice system, a post office, student loans, the g i bill, hell even the very money you carry is government issued, etc, yet you waltz in here like the world is your oyster and you're owed everything for free.

Stop being a selfish teenager and pay your dues like the rest of us.

Yup, and stay the hell away from Yellowstone Park. And Yosemite too. Sure hell as don't go to Rapid City, SoDak and no Grand Canyon. No national parks for BritPat. He probably would like to sell them all off to foreign investors.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The simple fact that government takes your money without your personal consent makes taxation theft. the only valid "authorization" for taking my money is my personal authorization.

The fact that you have decided to remain a citizen of a land where the Supreme Law of the Land authorizes the government to collect taxes, means that you HAVE agreed to that taxation..

Wrong. As I said previously, the federal government doesn't own the United States. Living in a given location doesn't constitute consent to anything, especially to third parties. When you rent an apartment, you sign a lease. You give your consent explicitly to pay rent. The kind of "consent" you are talking about is what a Mafioso extortion racket enforces. It claims a business "consents" to pay for "protection" because it decided to locate on the turf of the extortion racket. Your theory of "consent" is indistinguishable from the Mafioso definition of the term. It's the ethical system of a criminal enterprise.

As I said in the OP, you have the choice of petitioning to have that changed, and/or electing representatives who will work to change it etc.

If you didn't, then you have agreed to it as it is, and it is not theft.

Yes, those are the choices the government extortion racket imposes on me. However, they still do not constitute any form of consent. What you're saying is that if a mugger gives you a choice of handing over your wallet or taking a bullet, then you have consented to taking a bullet when you decline to hand over your wallet.

Again, that's the ethical system of organized crime.

Would you call the entire Constitution null and void, since it was written and ratified before you (and any other American citizen alive today) were born, and so did not get your personal blessing?

Yes, I would call it null and void. No person in this country is ethically bound by any terms in the Constitution. I never consented to it. How could I? I wasn't even born when it was adopted.

If you would like more information on this subject, read "Constitution of no Authority" by Lysander Spooner.

That has to be the DUMBEST response I have ever seen in this forum. Just how stupid does someone have to be to believe that simply because laws were enacted before they were born they don't apply to them?

 

[WelfareQueen]

If you're an America Citizen everything in the Constitution applies to you. Also, all taxes were approved and passed by the Legislative Branch of Government and signed into Law by the President. If you do not like how you are being taxed, and the folks that represent you voted for things you do not like (e.g. Obamacare) work to vote the bastards out. That is your only recourse. Otherwise, the laws apply to you, whether you were alive or not.

The Government has the power to tax anyway they like under the Commerce Clause. We the People ratified that power under the Constitution. Sorry if you don't like it, but that is the way it is.

 

[Derideo_Te]

If you're an America Citizen everything in the Constitution applies to you. Also, all taxes were approved and passed by the Legislative Branch of Government and signed into Law by the President. If you do not like how you are being taxed, and the folks that represent you voted for things you do not like (e.g. Obamacare) work to vote the bastards out. That is your only recourse. Otherwise, the laws apply to you, whether you were alive or not.

The Government has the power to tax anyway they like under the Commerce Clause. We the People ratified that power under the Constitution. Sorry if you don't like it, but that is the way it is.

According to bripat he doesn't have any 2nd amendment rights because he never personally consented to the terms of the Constitution therefore We the People can take away his guns. Bet he never thought of that when he made that inane post. However if he has ever registered to vote, nevermind actually voted, he has tacitly accepted the social contract as defined by the Constitution and is thereby bound by the terms and conditions.

 

[WelfareQueen]

If you're an America Citizen everything in the Constitution applies to you. Also, all taxes were approved and passed by the Legislative Branch of Government and signed into Law by the President. If you do not like how you are being taxed, and the folks that represent you voted for things you do not like (e.g. Obamacare) work to vote the bastards out. That is your only recourse. Otherwise, the laws apply to you, whether you were alive or not.

The Government has the power to tax anyway they like under the Commerce Clause. We the People ratified that power under the Constitution. Sorry if you don't like it, but that is the way it is.

According to bripat he doesn't have any 2nd amendment rights because he never personally consented to the terms of the Constitution therefore We the People can take away his guns. Bet he never thought of that when he made that inane post. However if he has ever registered to vote, nevermind actually voted, he has tacitly accepted the social contract as defined by the Constitution and is thereby bound by the terms and conditions.

Yeah...it's not like ordering from a restaurant menu. You can't pick and choose which laws you want to apply to you and which ones you don't.