I am allowed to rob you.

[apdst]

Democracy can feel cumbersome and downright oppressive if you don't agree with the majority. But it's far better than the alternative, yes?

The United States isn't a democracy.

 

[Robertinfremont]

To lay taxes? Yes. To establish an agency under Executive Branch authority to collect taxes? Yes. To do it by themselves? Theoretically, sure. Congress could pass a law authorizing and requiring members of Congress and their staff to personally collect taxes instead of the IRS or other executive branch agency.

Why, what role do you think the President has in taxation, other than signing, vetoing, or refusing to sign tax legislation?

Quickly , your first line. So you approve laying taxes. But does that imply others must also agree?

 

[Robertinfremont]

The United States isn't a democracy.

Correct. It definitely is not a democracy.

 

[Robertinfremont]

This video is a prime example of what is wrong today, another in an endless series of "taxes is theft" type arguments that result in... absolutely nothing.

I am struggling to understand why so many hate the Constitution.

When whiners fight against Trump, lord knows i want the same question answered. Why do Democrats hate the lawful president? if they love taxes, they should love Trump.

 

[Sweden]

Robertinfremont just posted a video of a guy literally claiming the constitution is evil.

I see you make a habit of pointlessly tossing around the word 'literally'.

 

[pinqy]

Quickly , your first line. So you approve laying taxes. But does that imply others must also agree?

Others should agree that Congress has that power: it’s a fact. If they don’t think Congress should have that power they have the right to vote for representatives that agree with them. Same for if they disapprove of any particular tax or use of tax revenue.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Oh, now we're cool to argue again? Damn, bud, this is a confusing conversation.

Contrary to whatever preconceived notions you have, many progressives have open minds...or are at least disciplined enough to hear out their opponents fully before jumping into tactics and nonsense. I'll hear you out...I just don't find anything of value in this video. Not because of a knee jerk reaction I'm "supposed" to have, but because it's silly - in general I find modern day libertarianism all a bit silly, if I'm honest.

Watch this one more time Olnate. It does not say what you said it says.

Olnate, if I could get Democrats to do that too, we would be able to argue.

Olnate, you have nothing at all at stake in any of this.

Thank you for your opinion of Progressives. Nate, what the hell are progressives?

Here is what I believe. Progressives are actually communists.


Say Olnate they get what they want. Do you think as progressives they flip flop and change their minds to revert to the original?


I probably confused you.


X= law

Py=Progressive law

Progressive law by definition has to change either to the original or what? If it stands on its own Py, then is is conservative. See my point?

 

[Sweden]

Correct. It definitely is not a democracy.

The US is not a perfect democracy but nor is anywhere else. No one has ever discovered how to organise one. As an outsider I would, though, say that the US deserves high marks for trying - at least up to quite recently.

If you feel like it you might tell us what your idea of a democracy would look like.

 

[lwf]

The so called majority does not agree with Trump and sure, it is oppressive.

What did you come away with in the Larken Rose video?

I disagree with him. While it is obviously true that no one person can unilaterally give himself the right to rob another, a consensus of people living together in a society can absolutely get together and agree to contribute to a common fund to be used to pay a few of them to maintain various aspects of a society for the rest, and this agreement can absolutely include empowering people to enforce consequences for those who refuse to pay their fair share.

If we the people decide that we have the right to take and use a portion of your income to pay others to help maintain our society, then we have that right, and you do not have the right to refuse. That is democracy.

 

[Irwin Corey]

Is Trump allowed to rob me? What about Biden? What about Schumer?

Here the concept the authority is allowed to rob you is examined.

The difference, ?why anyone has to explain this to an adult? ??? but I'll play along ... Government at all levels, in These United States derives it's authority from documents approved by a majority of their citizens. OUR Constitution, for example was written, debated and approved by ratification of the States, the States derived their power by an approval process that required the assent of the people of the state as do counties, cites towns ...

So "his" supposition is horse **** and his document isn't even good for TP without being approved by a majority of his friends (not that he probably has many) and neighbors. By residing in whatever area his home does he is subject to the local and state laws regarding theft. For instance, in Colorado a traffic ticket says at the bottom in red letters; "This offense or offense's has been committed against the peace and dignity of the people of Colorado. Most people never read that; but I did and beat a ticket arguing that what had happened had nothing to do with the "peace and dignity of the people". I doubt that this knucklehead could rob someone and claim it wasn't an offense against his community.

Everyone understands that Government costs money and acquiesce, if even reluctantly, to pay that cost in taxes. In fact we all agree to government to protect ourselves from ID 10 T's like this.

 

[Sweden]

The United States isn't a democracy.

Is anywhere a democracy? Please do not say 'The Democratic Republic of the Congo'.

 

[lwf]

The United States isn't a democracy.

Of course it is. The United States is a representative democracy.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Others should agree that Congress has that power: it’s a fact. If they don’t think Congress should have that power they have the right to vote for representatives that agree with them. Same for if they disapprove of any particular tax or use of tax revenue.

OK, would you say a Democrat Governor is superior or that a republican governor is superior?

The way you argue is not clear at all. It comes in bits and pieces.


Take just statement 1. "Others should agree that Congress has that power: it’s a fact."

Congress had the power over laying taxes yet did not approve income taxes. That is a fact for the Washington, government of 1800 and earlier.

 

[Irwin Corey]

When whiners fight against Trump, lord knows i want the same question answered. Why do Democrats hate the lawful president? if they love taxes, they should love Trump.

Only you could conflate love, taxes and Donnie Dugout.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Of course it is. The United States is a representative democracy.

That is not democracy.


As much hassle as we get over the Electoral college, one does not expect your argument at all. Democrats argue all the time that the Electoral college, eg representative government is flat out wrong.

 

[Robertinfremont]

Only you could conflate love, taxes and Donnie Dugout.

Oh lord no. Millions believe as I believe. It is why Trump will again win.

 

[Robertinfremont]

The difference, ?why anyone has to explain this to an adult? ??? but I'll play along ... Government at all levels, in These United States derives it's authority from documents approved by a majority of their citizens. OUR Constitution, for example was written, debated and approved by ratification of the States, the States derived their power by an approval process that required the assent of the people of the state as do counties, cites towns ...

So "his" supposition is horse **** and his document isn't even good for TP without being approved by a majority of his friends (not that he probably has many) and neighbors. By residing in whatever area his home does he is subject to the local and state laws regarding theft. For instance, in Colorado a traffic ticket says at the bottom in red letters; "This offense or offense's has been committed against the peace and dignity of the people of Colorado. Most people never read that; but I did and beat a ticket arguing that what had happened had nothing to do with the "peace and dignity of the people". I doubt that this knucklehead could rob someone and claim it wasn't an offense against his community.

Everyone understands that Government costs money and acquiesce, if even reluctantly, to pay that cost in taxes. In fact we all agree to government to protect ourselves from ID 10 T's like this.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ awful argument^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ too much jingoism. Too many insults. it leads to the claim said reply is smug snobbery.

 

[lwf]

That is not democracy.

As much hassle as we get over the Electoral college, one does not expect your argument at all. Democrats argue all the time that the Electoral college, eg representative government is flat out wrong.

A representative democracy is a democracy.

 

[Robertinfremont]

I disagree with him. While it is obviously true that no one person can unilaterally give himself the right to rob another, a consensus of people living together in a society can absolutely get together and agree to contribute to a common fund to be used to pay a few of them to maintain various aspects of a society for the rest, and this agreement can absolutely include empowering people to enforce consequences for those who refuse to pay their fair share.

If we the people decide that we have the right to take and use a portion of your income to pay others to help maintain our society, then we have that right, and you do not have the right to refuse. That is democracy.

If you can agree with the constitution, why can't you agree with trump who holds a constitutional valid office?


Here are the facts of life for all Democrats. Since 2017, all they did is attack Trump. To me this is attacking the constitution.

it says go to hell constitution and by god I the Democrat authority know a hell of a lot better than you republicans know.

When Rose challenged the constitution you went wild. When you challenge the same document, you approve.

 

[Robertinfremont]

A representative democracy is a democracy.

Actually it is not.


Give you an example. Trump cut taxes. Deny you hated that. And he did it with your representational democracy.

 

[pinqy]

I did not ask you to barrage me with opinion and many topics on your mind.

You asked me a question, and I answered that question. My response was not an opinion, but fact, and stuck to the topic at hand.

When Congress agreed that slavery was legal, why did the war have to be fought by Lincoln when Congress said slavery was legal?

I’m not sure what that has to do with taxes, but the war was fought because some (but not all) slave owning states believed that the Lincoln government would not support slave owners rights and decided to secede. In the process, a U.S. military installation was attacked, which constituted either treason and rebellion (if one does not accept secession as legitimate) or an act of war against the U.S. (if one does). While the issue of slavery was the cause of the war, the legality of slavery at that time was not. Slavery remained legal in Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware, and Tennessee throughout the war.

These are not random questions. They involve congress and the constitution.



Trump has signed into law tax levies. As Congress proposed. But you see Democrats going batcrazy against Trump over guess what? Taxes. They whine about taxes a lot.

Everybody whines about taxes. But opposing particular taxes or complaint about the tax rate is not the same as saying the government does not have that authority.

 

[lwf]

If you can agree with the constitution, why can't you agree with trump who holds a constitutional valid office?


Here are the facts of life for all Democrats. Since 2017, all they did is attack Trump. To me this is attacking the constitution.

it says go to hell constitution and by god I the Democrat authority know a hell of a lot better than you republicans know.

When Rose challenged the constitution you went wild. When you challenge the same document, you approve.

Disagreeing with something Trump mandates is not the same thing as claiming that Trump has no right to mandate it. I would obey a law the current government put into effect even if I didn't want to because the government has the right to make legislation. Similarly, you pay your taxes even if you don't want to because the government has the right to collect your taxes.

 

[Robertinfremont]

The US is not a perfect democracy but nor is anywhere else. No one has ever discovered how to organise one. As an outsider I would, though, say that the US deserves high marks for trying - at least up to quite recently.

If you feel like it you might tell us what your idea of a democracy would look like.

Right here.

Athenian democracy - Wikipedia

Athenian democracy developed around the sixth century BC in the Greek city-state (known as a polis) of Athens, comprising the city of Athens and the surrounding territory of Attica. Athenian democracy is often described as the first known democracy in the world. Other Greek cities set up democracies, most following the Athenian model, but none are as well documented as Athens' democracy.

Athens practiced a political system of legislation and executive bills. Participation was far from open to all residents, but was instead limited to adult, male citizens (i.e., not a foreign resident, regardless of how many generations of the family had lived in the city, nor a slave, nor a woman), who "were probably no more than 30 percent of the total adult population".[1]

Solon (in 594 BC), Cleisthenes (in 508/7 BC), and Ephialtes (in 462 BC) contributed to the development of Athenian democracy. Cleisthenes broke up the power of the nobility by organizing citizens into ten groups based on where they lived, rather than on their wealth. The longest-lasting democratic leader was Pericles. After his death, Athenian democracy was twice briefly interrupted by oligarchic revolutions towards the end of the Peloponnesian War. It was modified somewhat after it was restored under Eucleides; the most detailed accounts of the system are of this fourth-century modification, rather than the Periclean system. Democracy was suppressed by the Macedonians in 322 BC. The Athenian institutions were later revived, but how close they were to a real democracy is debatable.

 

[lwf]

Actually it is not.

Give you an example. Trump cut taxes. Deny you hated that. And he did it with your representational democracy.

This makes no sense. How does an elected leader cutting taxes disprove that the country is a representative democracy?

Are you saying if an elected leader does something I disagree with, then he must not have been democratically elected?

 

[Robertinfremont]

Disagreeing with something Trump mandates is not the same thing as claiming that Trump has no right to mandate it. I would obey a law the current government put into effect even if I didn't want to because the government has the right to make legislation. Similarly, you pay your taxes even if you don't want to because the government has the right to collect your taxes.

We have had since January of 2017 open rebellion against the Trump Government and all of his appointed people.

And you say that rebellion is just? But nobody can rebel against unjust taxes?