I believe I have figured out Paul's argument.
He starts with a premise that not all taxes are aggression.
He then continues with tariffs are a form of non-aggressive taxes.
Next he concludes that since tariffs are not an act of aggression, they are allowed by libertarian philosophy as they do not contradict the NAP.
If his premises were true his conclusion would be true since his argument is logically valid.
Unfortunately his first premise is false.
By definition:
1. strain: a strain or heavy demand
2. money paid to government: an amount of money levied by a government on its citizens and used to run the government, the country, a state, a county, or a municipality
3. charge paid by members: an amount charged to members of a club or organization to be used for expenses
It is definition number 2 that is relevant here.
lev·y [ lévvee ]
verb (past and past participle lev·ied, present participle lev·y·ing, 3rd person present singular lev·ies)
Definition:
1. transitive verb impose tax: to use government authority to impose or collect a tax
2. transitive verb raise army: to enlist troops for military service, often by force
3. transitive verb declare war: to declare war on somebody
4. intransitive verb seize property to fulfill judgment: to seize property in accordance with a legal ruling
In levy it is definition 1 that is relevant.
So by application of definition taxes are imposed. By extension there is no element of choice in paying a tax.
tar·iff [ tárrif ]
noun (plural tar·iffs)
Definition:
1. duty levied on goods: a duty levied by a government on imported or exported goods
2. list of levies: a list or system of import or export tariffs
3. list of costs: a list of fees, fares, or other prices charged by a business
du·ty [ dtee ] (plural du·ties)
noun
Definition:
1. obligation: something that somebody is obliged to do for moral, legal, or religious reasons
your duties as a parent
2. need to meet obligations: the urge to meet moral or religious obligations
a strong sense of duty
3. allocated task: a task or service allocated to somebody, especially in the course of work
4. economics tax: a tax on goods, especially imports and exports
5. quality: suitability for a particular grade of use ( usually used in combination )
heavy-duty shoes
6. mechanical engineering machine's workload: the amount of work that a machine is designed to do, or a measure of a machine's efficiency
7. agriculture volume of water for irrigation: the volume of water needed to irrigate an area of land in order to cultivate a crop from planting to harvest
So a tariff is a duty, and by #4 above a duty is a tax, and taxes are an involuntary levy upon a group (by extension). If there is an involuntary imposition this is an initiation of force and in violation of NAP. Therefore not libertarian and proves that the first premise in Paul's argument is false. The only way to have a sound argument is to have true premises, valid inference and this will lead to a true conclusion. Use of a false premise invalidates the argument and leads to a false conclusion namely that tariffs are not a violation of NAP or are not an initiation of force.
Now the only way in which Paul can salvage his argument is to show that his 1st premise is actually true. To do that he would have to go against the lexical definitions that I have provides. And since they are lexical they are logically axiomaticly valid, and thus true and correct. It is extremely unlikely that Paul can now continue to truthfully argue his point.
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.
