a tax is owed, if the debt claim. If the government forces someone
to collect the tax that is intation of force, since I have no right
to demand the station, gas wholesaler or refinery supply me with gas
if they collect a gas tax from me they are not intiating force on me
but the government is intation force on which ever company is the tax
collection base, I'm not sure if that is the refinery, the
wholesaler/ tankfarm, the delivery service or the gas station, if it
is the refrenry, then the refinery is not intiating force on the
wholesaler, delevery service, station and customer and neither is
the government, it is the refinery which he intiation of force is
being applied because the government has no right to charge the
refinery a tax unless the refinery has giving true consent to pay the
tax. That is a reason I brought up incorporation, if the refinery
was not forced to incorporate in order to conduct it's business then
the government would not be intiating force by charging a tax, in
fact it would be a fee for voluntery service. Just trading between
two or more voluntery trading partners is a right not a service of
the government, if the trading partners are not asking for a
government service in conducting their trades then the government has
no right to charge them for a service, that would be extortion.--- In
[email protected], "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This of course totally ignores the points I made and gets into
minutia
> that don't matter to the topic at hand. The point is such a tax is
> not an initiation of force because it doesn't tax a right, and it is
> easily avoidable.
>
> Whether you think it could be charged another way better is
irrelevant.
>
> All that matters is it's not force. It's a choice.
>
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "terry12622000" <cottondrop@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Paul, it would be the gas supllier forced to charge, evidence
needs
> > to be shown to the jury why the supllier owes the debt and that
the
> > debt is the amount the supllied. One could argue that a refinery
is a
> > corporation which is a service provided by a state government
that is
> > voluntery, in that case it is strictly a user fee. Corporate
revenue
> > in the US is around 17 trillion to 19 trillion a year so a tax
on
> > corporate gross revenue of less than 1.5% would bring in about
what
> > the federal corporate income tax brings in now around 230 billion
> > dollars but some pay nothing except a high compliance and record
> > costs and most C corporations probally pay more maybe much more
than
> > 1.5% in gross revenue especially counting compliance
> > costs.
> > It would be easier to prove that a corporation must pay the
fee
> > than to prove a small fuel suppler and retailer must charge a
fuel
> > tax. First if it is a common road everyone has a right to use it
to
> > get back and forth to his property, if restrictions or charges
are
> > applied then ownership of the road must be clear. The pavement on
the
> > road may in some cases be enough for ownership and to charge
> > transport that will wear the pavement but that can not be just
> > assumed.--- In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > All taxes are not force. For instance a gas tax. One could
choose
> > > not to use gas. One could use an entirely electric car and
avoid
> > the
> > > tax all together. Therefore it's not force because someone has
> > made a
> > > CHOICE to use gas, and therefore agrees to pay the fee (aka tax)
> > > associated with it. If they choose not to pay it, they can
CHOOSE
> > to
> > > use an electric car or another conveyance.
> > >
> > > A right can not be taxed, but a privilege can be. For instance
the
> > > PRIVILEGE of bringing goods across national borders. This is
not a
> > > right and has nothing to do with the right of property
ownership.
> > It
> > > is a PRIVILEGE offered by governments for a fee.
> > >
> > > If you make a choice to bring those goods across national
borders,
> > > you're CHOOSING to pay the fee associated with them. If you
try to
> > > bring your goods across without paying, you're committing an
act of
> > > aggression in the form of trespass and theft.
> > >
> > > Illigitimate taxes would include a breathing tax, an eating
tax, an
> > > income tax, or a sleeping tax.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "terry12622000"
<cottondrop@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > All taxes are intation of force, otherwise the fees are not
> > taxes.---
> > > > In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > You mean like accurately describing a tariff as not using
the
> > > > > initiation of force? And for those who smuggle goods
across
> > > > national
> > > > > borders of initiating force? And thoroughy proving
logically,
> > > > > reasonably, intelligently, and from a libertarian
perspective
> > that
> > > > not
> > > > > all taxes are theft, and not all taxes amount to the
initiation
> > of
> > > > > force while disproving every inaccurate, false, and
misleading
> > > > > statement you tried to make to the contrary?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In [email protected], <boyd.w.smith@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From: Paul <ptireland@>
> > > > > > > Wrong. Comparing Christianity to Libertarianism is an
> > > > absolutely
> > > > > > > perfect analogy. Christianity has a set belief system
and
> > so
> > > > does
> > > > > > > libertarianism. Christianity has a core belief that
> > separates
> > > > its
> > > > > > > belief system from others. In this case the belief in
> > Jesus of
> > > > > > > Nazareth. In the case of Libertarianism it's the
believe
> > in
> > > > and
> > > > > > > support of the non-aggression principle. If someone
does
> > not
> > > > > > > believe
> > > > > > > in the nap, the term "libertarianism" is as
inappropriate
> > for
> > > > them
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > is "Christianity" for a Satan worshiping.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > All paths do not lead to liberty. Some lead to
aggression,
> > and
> > > > those
> > > > > > > that lead to aggression always lead away from liberty.
> > > > Aggression in
> > > > > > > the name of liberty is like rape in the name of
virginity.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Exactly like supporting tariffs and saying it isn't a tax
> > when it
> > > > > really is. And then denying that fact that all taxes are
> > initiated
> > > > > aggression.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > BWS
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
SPONSORED LINKS
| Libertarian | English language | Political parties |
| Online dictionary | American politics |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
