Stefan MolyneuxVerified account

It’s been easier to convince people to hand over half their income, their children to war, and their freedoms in perpetuity, than to engage them in seriously considering how roads might function in the absence of taxation.

It would be easier to engage people if you didn’t make disingenuous arguments like this one throughout the discussion. Nobody wants to listen to your propaganda. Talk to people in a way they’re comfortable with. Legalize weed, not taxation is kidnap and torture and armed robbery.

Progress requires discussion about uncomfortable subjects.

An excellent example of disengenity, by the way. Taxation is usually simple theft, although it can be kidnapping, torture, and armed robbery.

Right, that's the type of thing you guys say if people engage you. And people don't want to hear that because you sound batshit crazy and intelligent people avoid those that sound batshit crazy. What you mean, I know, is that you don't support taxation. Which is fine. Say that...

Taxation is literally theft by definition. Is it a necessary evil? Perhaps. That's the argument to be had. But You CANNOT argue that taxation ISN'T literal theft. A group of people are taking resources from you at the threat of punishment. What does that sound like?

This is why people avoid the discussion. Because they don't care to engage in a ridiculous argument over your definition of a word, which differs from the definition in the dictionary. The dictionary defines theft as being illegal. Taxation is not illegal.