The Accumlation of Wealth is not protected by the Constitution.

[JBeukema]

They may have taken more than their share, I agree with you, and work within the rule of law to change it.

Man is bound by the Law only insomuch as the Law is good and reflects what is right, for it is what it right, not to what is lawful, to which man is bound.

That is a fantastic argument for limited Government. I too have a great respect for Thoreau.

If one were to tell me that this was a bad government because it taxed certain foreign commodities brought to its ports, it is most probable that I should not make an ado about it, for I can do without them. All machines have their friction; and possibly this does enough good to counterbalance the evil. At any rate, it is a great evil to make a stir about it. But when the friction comes to have its machine, and oppression and robbery are organized, I say, let us not have such a machine any longer. -Thoreau Thoreau's Civil Disobedience - 1

Never actually got around to reading Thoreau, bit I hear good things.

My statement above is based on a simple premise: would you turn in Anne Frank because it is the law?

If you say yes, you are a statistic pig to be slain

If you say no, then you agree with my statement

 

[boedicca]

Commerce isn't accumulation of wealth. We were discussing, or rather YOU were discussing "The accumulation of wealth".

People accumulate wealth through commerce.

not the same things. Different things.

Wrong as usual. Most people's wealth is earned from their own efforts by engaging in some form of commercial activity.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Not so many years ago, our city voted to raise sales tax

That doesn't make it consensual.

Everyone who voted 'yea' didn't consent in their so doing?


Wow.. so all sex really is rape

What about those who voted No? Do they get to opt out?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Wrong, you can leave.

And you already DID consent when you signed for your tax payer identification #.

I would still be taxed by the U.S. government if I left. Something I had no choice in signing doesn't make it consensual.

to consented to signing it, you consent to staying.

If I have no choice but to sign it then it isn't consensual.

 

[JBeukema]

No, it doesn't. People voluntarily paying me to provide a good or service, thus causing me to accumulate wealth, does not aggress against the rights of anybody.

Commerce isn't accumulation of wealth. We were discussing, or rather YOU were discussing "The accumulation of wealth".

People accumulate wealth through commerce.

Not necessarily.

Read a history some time.

 

[boedicca]

Not so many years ago, our city voted to raise sales tax

That doesn't make it consensual.

YES IT DOES! VOTED being the operative word!

No - such taxes are just what Tocqueville called "The Tyranny of the Majority".

 

[Sallow]

That doesn't make it consensual.

Everyone who voted 'yea' didn't consent in their so doing?


Wow.. so all sex really is rape

What about those who voted No? Do they get to opt out?

That's not the way it works. Or should work.

 

[Intense]

Some would say property is theft

In this lexicon>? Some would be wrong.

I never said I agreed with the statement. Just pointing out that there on the other side just as adamant as KK- and, I would argue, just as wrong in their fundamentalism.

But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men,(4) I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.

[4] After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule, is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases cannot be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience? — in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right. It is truly enough said that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience. Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice. Thoreau's Civil Disobedience - 1

 

[loosecannon]

People accumulate wealth through commerce.

not the same things. Different things.

Wrong as usual. Most people's wealth is earned from their own efforts by engaging in some form of commercial activity.

eat me, they are totally different things.

 

[JBeukema]

That doesn't make it consensual.

YES IT DOES! VOTED being the operative word!

No - such taxes are just what Tocqueville called "The Tyranny of the Majority".

I wonder how you feel about the government operating in English

or elections to determine representatives

or congress voting on bills

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Everyone who voted 'yea' didn't consent in their so doing?


Wow.. so all sex really is rape

What about those who voted No? Do they get to opt out?

That's not the way it works. Or should work.

Then it's not consensual. If it's consensual I have the right to say no.

 

[JBeukema]

That doesn't make it consensual.

Everyone who voted 'yea' didn't consent in their so doing?


Wow.. so all sex really is rape

What about those who voted No? Do they get to opt out?

They may freely go elsewhere

In the real world, every human being will never agree on so much as the colour of the sky at any one time.

 

[loosecannon]

I would still be taxed by the U.S. government if I left. Something I had no choice in signing doesn't make it consensual.

to consented to signing it, you consent to staying.

If I have no choice but to sign it then it isn't consensual.

You HAD a choice, to sign your social contract and assume the rights and responsibilities involved or not to sign. You consented to taxation when you applied for and signed for a taxapayer identification #. If you didn't want to pay taxes why did you voluntarily sign?

 

[JBeukema]

What about those who voted No? Do they get to opt out?

That's not the way it works. Or should work.

Then it's not consensual. If it's consensual I have the right to say no.

You're free to leave.

Or to not work.

Just as I am free to say no to your existence in my community and leave for someplace you are not.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Everyone who voted 'yea' didn't consent in their so doing?


Wow.. so all sex really is rape

What about those who voted No? Do they get to opt out?

They may freely go elsewhere

In the real world, every human being will never agree on so much as the colour of the sky at any one time.

No, they obviously can't.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

to consented to signing it, you consent to staying.

If I have no choice but to sign it then it isn't consensual.

You HAD a choice, to sign your social contract and assume the rights and responsibilities involved or not to sign. You consented to taxation when you applied for and signed for a taxapayer identification #. If you didn't want to pay taxes why did you voluntarily sign?

If I don't sign on to pay taxes then I cannot legally work.

 

[loosecannon]

That's not the way it works. Or should work.

Then it's not consensual. If it's consensual I have the right to say no.

You're free to leave.

Or to not work.

you are really ******* with his assertion that the constitution guarantees his right to accumulate wealth via commerce that it also doesn't mention.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

That's not the way it works. Or should work.

Then it's not consensual. If it's consensual I have the right to say no.

You're free to leave.

Or to not work.

Just as I am free to say no to your existence in my community and leave for someplace you are not.

However, the government has no right to tell me that I can't legally work. And as I've already pointed out, I can't leave because the federal government would still assume it has the right to tax my income.

 

[boedicca]

If I have no choice but to sign it then it isn't consensual.

You HAD a choice, to sign your social contract and assume the rights and responsibilities involved or not to sign. You consented to taxation when you applied for and signed for a taxapayer identification #. If you didn't want to pay taxes why did you voluntarily sign?

If I don't sign on to pay taxes then I cannot legally work.

And good luck moving if you haven't been able to earn and Accumulate Enough Wealth to relocate elsewhere.

 

[Sallow]

When you pledge allegiance to the country..you basically give your support of it. That includes part of what you earn.