The Evil of Being Wealthy

[Bob Hubbard]

Steal: (steal) take without the owner's consent; In criminal law, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent.

See taxes aren't stealing, because the government gave themselves permission to do so, rendering it legal.
Now if they hadn't given themselves permission, it would be illegal.

 

[granfire]

Steal: (steal) take without the owner's consent; In criminal law, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent.

See taxes aren't stealing, because the government gave themselves permission to do so, rendering it legal.
Now if they hadn't given themselves permission, it would be illegal.

:lfao:

 

[Bob Hubbard]

larceny: the act of taking something from someone unlawfully;

theft : the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent. ...

Illegal: prohibited by law or by official or accepted rules;
Unlawful: Not conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules

So, as long as they pass a law, it's legal. The idea of income taxes has been hashed out deeply, and until they amended the US Constitution, those -were- illegal. But, with the hole plugged, it's totally legal for the government to take a portion, or all in fact, of your income, to take your property if you don't give them your cash, to deprive you of your freedom should you not give up your earnings. Hell, buried in the tax code somewhere it's probably ok for a man in a hood to lop off your goolies and serve them for tea.

 

[Makalakumu]

The idea that theft is defined by legality only means that the thieves need to become politicians in order to be legitimate.

This question strikes at the very root of what this thread is about and what the Occupy Wall Street protests are about. We are watching our society fall apart because the worst elements of society have become "legitimate" by taking over the government and legally using to to murder and steal. There is nothing evil about being wealthy, if you generated your wealth without coercion. I applaud that. However, if you generate your wealth because you used the force of law to create a monopoly for yourself, well, that is evil.

It's all related and it all goes back to the nature of the system. If violence and coercion is involved, it only leads to more violence and coercion until the system eats itself from within like a cancer. As soon as we allow for the use of violence and coercion to solve our problems, other "problems" will be found that need to be solved with violence and coercion. It cannot be stopped. It cannot be limited. For example, the US Constitution was an experiment in trying to limit violence and coercion in our society and it failed.

The best parable I can think of is the One Ring from Lord of the Rings. Great beings can attempt to use Sauron's ring for good, but his spirit infects everything it touches until the striving for good becomes evil.

Admitting that taxation is theft is akin to throwing the Ring into the Crack of Doom. When we can acknowledge that taxation is force, that it is stealing, we will grow into a sustainable and just society. Until then, history will rhyme and rhyme and rhyme with the past.

 

[Makalakumu]

Without taxes, there is no nation.

Why?

 

[Flying Crane]

Why?

how do you envision a nation would operate without a source of revenue? Or what would be an alternative source of revenue?

 

[Twin Fist]

still trying to float that old lie i see


I know better, save your time. As long as money goes top planned parenthood, our taxes are going towards abortions

Well, you taxes don't pay for abortions.

 

[Makalakumu]

how do you envision a nation would operate without a source of revenue? Or what would be an alternative source of revenue?

Couldn't one choose to pay for things in which they agree? Why does a gun need to be involved?

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk

 

[Flying Crane]

Well, you taxes don't pay for abortions.

Hi Gran,

actually, I would have no problem at all with public healthcare funds being used to pay for abortions. It's a legitimate health issue for women, and there's no reason to exclude it from being provided. Anybody who thinks they have the right to deny legitimate healthcare to a woman is an idot and a bully. The scare tactics, the notion that women use abortion as a first line of birth control are nonsense. The cases of that happening are rare and probably involve someone who is mentally ill or a drug addict. Anything can be abused, but the possibility of abuse is no reason to eliminate it for all. By and large, nobody wants an abortion. Nobody sees it as a "good" thing to do, something to look forward to. But it's a viable and legitimate option that ought to be made available to someone making a tough decision. I'd rather have it done safely with good medical facilities and well trained medical personnel, then see it go underground where it will not be safe.

On that note, there are so many highly effective forms of preventative birth control that there is really very little reason for abortions to be necessary, if the preventative methods are made easily available and people are educated on their use, and people are not made to feel shame or embarrasment if they seek them out. Pushing for this would drastically reduce the number of abortions performed, and ought to be a front-line issue for anyone concerned with abortions and women's reproductive health.

 

[Flying Crane]

Couldn't one choose to pay for things in which they agree? Why does a gun need to be involved?

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk

It's kind of a nice idea, if we could state that we don't want our taxes to pay for X or Y. Maybe we could un-fund the military that way, scale it back to a size where it is only useable for DEFENSE of this nation, rather than pushing our agenda on the entire globe.

I don't know how that could be implemented and I highly doubt it tho.

 

[granfire]

Hi Gran,

actually, I would have no problem at all with public healthcare funds being used to pay for abortions. It's a legitimate health issue for women, and there's no reason to exclude it from being provided. Anybody who thinks they have the right to deny legitimate healthcare to a woman is an idot and a bully. The scare tactics, the notion that women use abortion as a first line of birth control are nonsense. The cases of that happening are rare and probably involve someone who is mentally ill or a drug addict. Anything can be abused, but the possibility of abuse is no reason to eliminate it for all. By and large, nobody wants an abortion. Nobody sees it as a "good" thing to do, something to look forward to. But it's a viable and legitimate option that ought to be made available to someone making a tough decision. I'd rather have it done safely with good medical facilities and well trained medical personnel, then see it go underground where it will not be safe.

On that note, there are so many highly effective forms of preventative birth control that there is really very little reason for abortions to be necessary, if the preventative methods are made easily available and people are educated on their use, and people are not made to feel shame or embarrasment if they seek them out. Pushing for this would drastically reduce the number of abortions performed, and ought to be a front-line issue for anyone concerned with abortions and women's reproductive health.

Been partly regurgitated in a past thread, with the usual players turning 2 or more deaf ears to the facts of life. I could not agree with you more.

 

[Sukerkin]

Couldn't one choose to pay for things in which they agree? Why does a gun need to be involved?

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk

I might have believed in such a utopian ideal when I was eighteen, Maka ... thirty years on then, I'm sorry, you want to play in the house you pay the rent or you're out on your ear.

Now that's an idea I could get behind, deportation and seizure of assets for non-payment of taxes. More than a little rough on private citizens but fabulous for getting corporations to toe the line they otherwise ignore.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

You dont have to tax income to fund a nation. But, someone has to pay for all the things government does.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/numbers/revenue.cfm

 

[Twin Fist]

dude

you are either stoned or joking

there are PLENTY of reason to be anti abortion


I happen to be pro choice, but there is NO reason that abortions should be funded with tax dollars and trust me, there MOST abortions are birth control. Nurse. I know the numbers

Hi Gran,

actually, I would have no problem at all with public healthcare funds being used to pay for abortions. It's a legitimate health issue for women, and there's no reason to exclude it from being provided. Anybody who thinks they have the right to deny legitimate healthcare to a woman is an idot and a bully. The scare tactics, the notion that women use abortion as a first line of birth control are nonsense. The cases of that happening are rare and probably involve someone who is mentally ill or a drug addict. Anything can be abused, but the possibility of abuse is no reason to eliminate it for all. By and large, nobody wants an abortion. Nobody sees it as a "good" thing to do, something to look forward to. But it's a viable and legitimate option that ought to be made available to someone making a tough decision. I'd rather have it done safely with good medical facilities and well trained medical personnel, then see it go underground where it will not be safe.

On that note, there are so many highly effective forms of preventative birth control that there is really very little reason for abortions to be necessary, if the preventative methods are made easily available and people are educated on their use, and people are not made to feel shame or embarrasment if they seek them out. Pushing for this would drastically reduce the number of abortions performed, and ought to be a front-line issue for anyone concerned with abortions and women's reproductive health.

 

[Sukerkin]

Serious question, John. Is that your religion talking or do you truly know that to be a fact?

After all, birth control is readily available and everyone with a brain (who is not drunk) knows the consequences of 'unprotected' sex, so I find it hard to imagine that more than a minority of abortions are retroactive birth control.

Of course, I can only speak for myself and the people I know on such a matter, so I am hardly an authority.

 

[granfire]

dude

you are either stoned or joking

there are PLENTY of reason to be anti abortion


I happen to be pro choice, but there is NO reason that abortions should be funded with tax dollars and trust me, there MOST abortions are birth control. Nurse. I know the numbers

Score one for personal attack and one for trying to heave this train of the track.....

And no, tax money still does not go towards abortion. nurse know thy numbers.
(and I doubt you work in the gynocologist's office)

 

[Twin Fist]

Mark, I am pro choice, in fact, i go and give the people picketing clinics a hard time. I would FIGHT to keep abortion legal


that being said, it should never be paid for with tax money.

and yeah, i know this for a fact. I have talked to the nurses and doctors that perform them, I have been in the room for several as part of my training. I have SEEN the results of the proceedure. And I have read and reviewed the charts of the pt's

• Fifty-four percent of women who have abortions had used a contraceptive method (usually the condom or the pill) during the month they became pregnant.



YOU GET THAT?? the MAJORITY were failed birth control

wanna retract that crap?

more:

Among those women, 76% of pill users and 49% of condom users report having used their method inconsistently, while 13% of pill users and 14% of condom users report correct use.[8]
• Forty-six percent of women who have abortions had not used a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant.

Of these women, 33% had perceived themselves to be at low risk for pregnancy, 32% had had concerns about contraceptive methods, 26% had had unexpected sex and 1% had been forced to have sex.[8]


• Eight percent of women who have abortions have never used a method of birth control; nonuse is greatest among those who are young, poor, black, Hispanic or less educated.[8]
• About half of unintended pregnancies occur among the 11% of women who are at risk for unintended pregnancy but are not using contraceptives. Most of these women have practiced contraception in the past.[9,10]

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html


also


Seventeen states use public funds to pay for abortions for some poor women, but only four do so voluntarily; the rest do so under a court order.[18] About 20% of abortion patients report using Medicaid to pay for abortions[6] (virtually all in states where abortion services are paid for with state dollars).[19]

 

[Twin Fist]

WRONG AGAIN

dont you get embarrassed being so totally, and reguarly proven wrong?

Score one for personal attack and one for trying to heave this train of the track.....

And no, tax money still does not go towards abortion. nurse know thy numbers.
(and I doubt you work in the gynocologist's office)

 

[Sukerkin]

Gently, my friends.

Emotive issues sometimes spawn strong words, I know - I'm as guilty of it as anyone .

But when we've been around for a while on the boards then we have to make allowances for each other as we learn how our 'Internet voice' comes across. Once we start to 'shout' then most hope for a sensible conversation evaporates and often-times the thread goes to hell in a handcart.

 

[Twin Fist]

when people tell me i dont know what i do in fact know, i admit to taking some pleasure in rubbing thier noses into it.

what can i say, it is a character flaw