Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 10, 2014, 02:07:18 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on March 10, 2014, 01:56:40 AM

Quote from: wachtwoord on March 10, 2014, 01:32:02 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on March 10, 2014, 01:14:24 AM

Quote from: Richy_T on March 10, 2014, 12:58:06 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on March 10, 2014, 12:40:43 AM

Also, I would NOT categorize taxation as an involuntary taking.... ... even though there are some difficulties in electing within which society (community) and set up that we want to live. The role of government tends to be a complicated topic... and such topic has been especially inflammatory from time to time....

Try not paying and see what happens. Just because a gang outnumbers you does not make the robbery any the less.

I prefer NOT to get into drawn out discussion about the role of government, and/or the extent to which there is a consensual nature to being governed or being a part of a society.

Nonetheless, I am suggesting that equating individualized theft (or being robbed by a corporation or being defrauded) with taxation will cause considerable oversimplification about the differing concepts and differing dynamics.

Viewing taxation as theft (or as an involuntary taking) is bringing the wrong framework b/c questions about taxation are a lot more complicated than theft or other categories of involuntary takings. For example, you mention the size of the gang... and this seems to be fuzzy logic to view government as a gang.. .. as if you are being ganged up upon and that government is something apart from one's self... even though there remain tensions between community and self, theft is different.

It actually is the exact same thing. It's just that in the case of taxation the group doing the taken are much more powerful and at the same time believe (for the most part) that they are morally in the right (which they aren't in my opinion).

You as a citizen have a role in government, and you have a choice in where to live.

Government is not Other people ganging up on you - even though frequently, it may seem as if an individual cannot do much to change the society in which s/he lives, but government is NOT the same as a thief.

I have already made my point several times that a person asserting that the government is the same as a thief is failing to recognize complexity.. and chooses to simplify to the point of losing the point.. and if you keep repeating it over and over that government is the same it is the same, that does NOT prove any point. Accordingly, there is NOT much use of continuing such a conversation in which I am saying that government is different from a thief.. and you (and others) are saying that government is the same as a thief.. We are NOT getting anywhere... and probably, it does NOT matter too much to the subject of this thread or the original point that was being made, which I believe was involving Mt. Gox taking BTC from customers.

Yes, I do have a role in government, and that role is to dismantle it or more accurately to allow it to dismantle itself as it is currently doing at an accelerated pace. Society needs governance, but that governance must comply with the values of the society itself, which in the West means consent of the governed. The American revolution was an attempt at governance with consent, but it was shortly hijacked (around 1787) when the constitutionalists nullified the Articles on Confederation. Clearly neither the Aritcles nor the Constitution were capable of embodying the ideals for which the war was fought. Back then the technology to implement truly distributed governance was not available. It now is. Monopoly governance is not as Thomas Paine suggested a necessary evil. It is not necessary at all, at least not anymore.

I doubt that we are, in any time soon, going to achieve a world in which government is completely unnecessary. That seems to be pie in the sky thinking. It is possible that bitcoin can move us in a direction in which the role of government (and its money) is completely changed; however, in the short term, we are NOT going to be "saved" from government.

Surely, I have NO problem with guys having visions about ways in which we can improve society; however, some kind of cold turkey abolition of government does NOT seem to be ANY kind of meaningful or realistic solution. There are too many vested interests and too many people would be hurt with such radical measures.

Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 10, 2014, 02:15:38 AM

To suggest that a complex theft is not a theft merely because of the complexities involved is laughable. It's like arguing that a Boeing 747 isn't an airplane.

It appears that you have a passion to argue about this kind of a topic, and possibly accomplishing such by merely continuing to reassert your same argument over and over that government taxation is theft. That is NOT a meaningful argument.

When I mention complexities, I am NOT wanting to get into this topic b/c there are a lot of governments - national, state and local, and government serves a wide array of functions - military, policing, regulatory, social benefits, economic. Yes, theft may occur within government; however, when the topic of theft came up, we were referring to the actions of GOX. Gox is NOT a government as far as I know. Gox was NOT engaged in taxation... So to compare the thievery activities of GOX to taxation is taking us far afield from the original point(s) being made.