[itistoday2]

> Just like, when you sit down at a restaurant and order a meal, you're agreeing to pay for it without negotiation, without a specific contract outlining specifications for the food, etc.

There is a verbal agreement (contract) outlining the specifications of the food. It says "pancakes" in the menu, it shows me the price, and I choose to order the pancakes for that stated price.

That is completely different from how taxes work in the United States. An appropriate analogy would be being born in a restaurant and being forced to pay money for what you have no idea and no say in. There is no menu. What's given to you is chosen by people you don't know and who you've never had a single conversation with. And btw, you can't just "get up and leave" the restaurant either.

When the analogy is this incompatible, you can compare anything to anything else and declare that bananas are just like soap.

If you can't see the difference, you are deluding yourself.

[Frondo]

Again, your parents made the decision for your citizenship when you were a child and they had custody of you.

As an adult, you can revoke your consent and leave.

You keep telling me how:

1) Other countries don't offer what you want, 2) It's expensive to move to another country, 3) Many countries won't grant you citizenship,

And so on.

None of those mean that you can't leave and go somewhere else. They just mean that wherever you go, you'll have to make a compromise.

Being forced to make a compromise elsewhere does not mean that taxation here is theft.

None of your claims support the false assertion that "taxation is theft".

I really don't understand what part of this you're missing. I really don't get what part of this plain language is in dispute.

[itistoday2]

> As an adult, you can revoke your consent and leave.

To revoke consent I would have had to have been of a mind to have given it in the first place.

My parents payed taxes when I was a child. I did not. I then grew into a situation where I had to make money to stay off the streets and was forced to pay this government.

Maybe this isn't so black and white. I would be willing to agree that your point of view carries more weight the longer I stay here in a capacity where I am capable of moving to another country.

However, it starts out as theft and remains so until I have no excuse remaining for not leaving, and then it's only if there is a fair alternative available.

If there's some country out there that doesn't have an income tax but rapes its citizens 12 hours out of the day, that can't be counted as a fair alternative. It would still be extortion then ("pay us or get raped!").

[Frondo]

No, taxation does not start out as theft.

The government provides you services, and you consent to paying for them by continuing to live here.

Before you were old enough to give consent, your parents made that decision for you. As an infant, you weren't capable of making such decisions, and as your guardians, your folks made it for you.

Now that you're (presumably) old enough to give consent, you are doing so by remaining here.

The government isn't forcing you to stay, even if you can't afford to leave right now. If your finances don't permit it, then I would suggest you save up until you can afford a bus ticket to Canada or Mexico, and then emigrate. Our government won't stop you at the border. (Canada or Mexico might, but that's them, not us.)

That you don't like the other countries out there (they aren't "fair alternatives") does not mean that, suddenly, taxation here is actually theft. It means you're picky, or you don't want to compromise, or whatever.

It doesn't change the fact that, as long as you're here, you're obligated to pay for a small share of the government's cost of doing business.

You may not like that obligation--it's still not theft. You may disagree with how tax dollars are spent--it's still not theft. You may dislike how you never signed an "I agree to pay taxes" contract--it's still not theft.

[itistoday2]

You're just repeating yourself now. You are not making logical arguments or responding to arguments made before.

> That you don't like the other countries out there (they aren't "fair alternatives") does not mean that, suddenly, taxation here is actually theft.

Yes, it does. The word for it is extortion.

1. No consent existed to begin with and money was taken forcibly. Theft. By definition. Go argue with a dictionary.

2. An alternative presents itself but the alternative is rape and so the choice is between theft or rape. This is called extortion. By definition. Go argue with a dictionary.

[Frondo]

I'm repeating myself because taxation isn't theft, and you keep coming up with a variety of statements that don't actually support the false assertion that it is.

You also keep ignoring the facts that: 1) You consent to taxation by living here, 2) And your parents consented for you when you were too young to do on your own.

You keep saying "no consent existed" but it has existed all your life, first by your legal guardians, and now by you.

[itistoday2]

> You consent to taxation by living here

Why this is wrong was addressed previously so not gonna repeat myself.

> And your parents consented for you when you were too young to do on your own.

Your parents cannot give this consent for you. Can they consent for you to be raped? Would their approval of you being raped suddenly make it not rape?

No. You're arguments are nonsensical. Go home. I'm done here.