If 100% Tax is Slavery, Then at What Percent Are You Not a Slave?

[nbruno322]

Interesting article:

You are technically a slave when 100% of the fruits of your labor is taxed or otherwise confiscated by force. So, at what percentage are you not a slave?

When you consider the totality of the countless direct and indirect taxes on the local, state, and federal levels, as well as the pernicious effects of inflation, the hidden tax, many of us are at least already half way to 100%.

Though, some in France have recently reached this grim milestone.

It was reported that more than 8,000 French households had tax bills that exceeded 100% of their income in 2012. This occurred due to a so-called "one-off levy" imposed by the socialist president in an attempt to "offset" previous tax breaks. Ouch

More...

http://www.internationalman.com/78-g...tax-is-slavery

[talkingpointes]

Interesting article:

You are technically a slave when 100% of the fruits of your labor is taxed or otherwise confiscated by force. So, at what percentage are you not a slave?

When you consider the totality of the countless direct and indirect taxes on the local, state, and federal levels, as well as the pernicious effects of inflation, the hidden tax, many of us are at least already half way to 100%.

Though, some in France have recently reached this grim milestone.

It was reported that more than 8,000 French households had tax bills that exceeded 100% of their income in 2012. This occurred due to a so-called "one-off levy" imposed by the socialist president in an attempt to "offset" previous tax breaks. Ouch

More...

http://www.internationalman.com/78-g...tax-is-slavery

Anyone ever heard of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomperipossa_in_Monismania

"The story of “Pomperipossa in Monismanien” was front-page material that rocked Sweden and its Socialistic government. The government decides to go on offensive attack in the first round – minister of finance refuted Astrid Lindgren in scornful terms – that would prove itself to be one serious and fatal mistake. First later on they admitted that Astrid Lindgren had pointed out a mistake that was to be corrected. But their credibility was long gone for Social Democrat Astrid Lindgren, and the battle billowed on. Now between her and the social democracy – and the general election just got closer. In the press Astrid was both described as the witch that guards her gold and very brave and truthful."

She still remained a socialist till she died. I'm sorry but what a very dim broad she was. The took 107% in taxes from this woman, called her all sorts of nasty things and still...

[VoluntaryAmerican]

I disagree with the 100%...

People are slaves if they are systematically treated like property, in a non-consensual forced arrangement. It doesn't matter what % is taken. No money could be taken, if you are systematically controlled/forced to do something without your consent it's the same thing.

[talkingpointes]

I disagree with the 100%...

People are slaves if they systematically treated like property, in a non-consensual forced arrangement. It doesn't matter what % is taken.

That doesn't make too much sense. Do you just mean any forms of extraction, or just people that are easily pliable?

[surf]

If 100% Tax is Slavery, Then at What Percent Are You Not a Slave?

zero

[shane77m]

Interesting article:

You are technically a slave when 100% of the fruits of your labor is taxed or otherwise confiscated by force. So, at what percentage are you not a slave?

When you consider the totality of the countless direct and indirect taxes on the local, state, and federal levels, as well as the pernicious effects of inflation, the hidden tax, many of us are at least already half way to 100%.

Though, some in France have recently reached this grim milestone.

It was reported that more than 8,000 French households had tax bills that exceeded 100% of their income in 2012. This occurred due to a so-called "one-off levy" imposed by the socialist president in an attempt to "offset" previous tax breaks. Ouch

More...

http://www.internationalman.com/78-g...tax-is-slavery

Our taxes are not confiscated by force. They are voluntary.

[PaulConventionWV]

I disagree with the 100%...

People are slaves if they are systematically treated like property, in a non-consensual forced arrangement. It doesn't matter what % is taken. No money could be taken, if you are systematically controlled/forced to do something without your consent it's the same thing.

There is more than one meaning for the term "slave". I won't point them all out, but I think 100% taxation is the same as being a slave, just as 0% taxation with 100% control would also be a slave. Most people don't even think of the taxation scale, though. Many people would say that anything less than 100% makes you not a slave because obviously the government has a right to your money and if they let you keep any of it, that makes you someone who makes an income, which in turn makes you greedy and selfish.

[KingNothing]

You are technically a slave when 100% of the fruits of your labor is taxed or otherwise confiscated by force. So, at what percentage are you not a slave?

I push the "taxation is theft" line all the time, but it is certainly not slavery.

If you're free to leave in order to avoid the theft, you are not a slave. I disagree with the premise of this article.

[KingNothing]

There is more than one meaning for the term "slave". I won't point them all out, but I think 100% taxation is the same as being a slave, just as 0% taxation with 100% control would also be a slave. Most people don't even think of the taxation scale, though. Many people would say that anything less than 100% makes you not a slave because obviously the government has a right to your money and if they let you keep any of it, that makes you someone who makes an income, which in turn makes you greedy and selfish.

I think we should just roll with the definition that already exists.

slave [sleyv] Show IPA noun, verb, slaved, slav·ing.
noun
1.
a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another; a bond servant.

[A Son of Liberty]

Our taxes are not confiscated by force. They are voluntary.

I'd love for a tax protestor to cite this commentary by Harry Reid as evidence that he is not required to pay taxes in that they are voluntarily submitted and as such has chosen to NOT do so.

[Warlord]

10% is what they paid in biblical times to the temple/church.

[A Son of Liberty]

I push the "taxation is theft" line all the time, but it is certainly not slavery.

If you're free to leave in order to avoid the theft, you are not a slave. I disagree with the premise of this article.

When you're surrounded by tax farms with just as if not more ruthless overseers, "leaving" is an option in theory only.

[tangent4ronpaul]

0%

-t

[shane77m]

I'd love for a tax protestor to cite this commentary by Harry Reid as evidence that he is not required to pay taxes in that they are voluntarily submitted and as such has chosen to NOT do so.

Probably would be a better chance of Obama being impeached than that argument succeeding.

[A Son of Liberty]

Probably would be a better chance of Obama being impeached than that argument succeeding.

I'd also like to see the story hit the mainstream media. I understand those odds rival the aforementioned.

That being said, maybe there would be a possibility that the point would open a logical paradox in the head of the judge, or the IRS, or Harry Reid himself, and the ensuing vacuum would swallow the federal leviathan into the abyss?

[Nate SY]

I push the "taxation is theft" line all the time, but it is certainly not slavery.

If you're free to leave in order to avoid the theft, you are not a slave. I disagree with the premise of this article.

How many people in the United States are truly free to leave though? Consider the immense cost and difficulty of moving to a country outside of the united states. The only place that is remotely simple (for a majority of Americans) would be Canada. Plus, where can someone move to avoid forced taxation? I'm not well versed in foreign taxes but I doubt there are many (if any) places you can move to and just avoid taxes.

I agree that taxation is theft, however I also consider it a certain degree of slavery. Slaves were "given" food and shelter in exchange for their works, which I find fairly easy to compare to the income left over at a certain point. On a much more personal level I consider any situation where you are forced to work for the benefit of another slavery, regardless of how many scraps they let you keep.

[KingNothing]

When you're surrounded by tax farms with just as if not more ruthless overseers, "leaving" is an option in theory only.

Agreed, but you're taking this to a meta-level and if you're venturing down that path you should also consider that as taxes/oppression increases in one arbitrary plot on a map, people will find it less livable and move to more tolerable locations. The oppressive capacity of a government is bounded by what the people under it are willing to endure.

As it stands right now, people are free to chose their master. We can "freely" move across boarders, for the most part. Were American slaves freely able to move from one plantation to another, in search of more favorable conditions?

[heavenlyboy34]

"Free range slavery" is more accurate. Unless you're well-connected and/or know how to game the system, you're a slave to the extent that the regime owns the fruits of your labor and can control what you can/can't do. There's just enough freedom in 'murica to prevent slave uprisings.

[A Son of Liberty]

Agreed, but you're taking this to a meta-level and if you're venturing down that path you should also consider that as taxes/oppression increases in one arbitrary plot on a map, people will find it less livable and move to more tolerable locations. The oppressive capacity of a government is bounded by what the people under it are willing to endure.

As it stands right now, people are free to chose their master. We can "freely" move across boarders, for the most part. Were American slaves freely able to move from one plantation to another, in search of more favorable conditions?

I agree with you that modern statist taxation does not reasonably equate to historical chattel slavery, in the sense that you describe and also that, generally speaking the "tax slave" is not subject to arbitrary, summary beatings and killing (although at least with American chattel slavery it was not technically permissable to summarily kill a slave, according to my recollection). Also, the "tax slave" is not [openly] considered to be the physical property of the state. However, when one does not have control of his own labor under threat of violence from a monopolistic, geographically defined entity which for all intents and purposes claims ownership of the natural resources (i.e., that with which one mixes his labor), it is undoubtedly a form of slavery.

[heavenlyboy34]

When you're surrounded by tax farms with just as if not more ruthless overseers, "leaving" is an option in theory only.

Don't you love the "love it or leave it" fallacy?

[A Son of Liberty]

Don't you love the "love it or leave it" fallacy?

"If you don't like my protection rates, you're free to uproot your business and take it to the next town... where my cousin Tony will be happy to shake you down."

[ObiRandKenobi]

If 100% Tax is Slavery, Then at What Percent Are You Not a Slave?

Good point.

[Anti Federalist]

"Free range slavery" is more accurate. Unless you're well-connected and/or know how to game the system, you're a slave to the extent that the regime owns the fruits of your labor and can control what you can/can't do. There's just enough freedom in 'murica to prevent slave uprisings.

"Free Range Slavery"...I like that term...is it orginal?

[heavenlyboy34]

"Free Range Slavery"...I like that term...is it orginal?

No, it's been used by several others before me (Larken Rose, Molyneux, and a number of others going quite far back into the 20th century). I wish I could claim credit for it, though.

[shane77m]

"Free range slavery" is more accurate. Unless you're well-connected and/or know how to game the system, you're a slave to the extent that the regime owns the fruits of your labor and can control what you can/can't do. There's just enough freedom in 'murica to prevent slave uprisings.

"Free Range Slavery"...I like that term...is it orginal?

No, it's been used by several others before me (Larken Rose, Molyneux, and a number of others going quite far back into the 20th century). I wish I could claim credit for it, though.

RACISTS!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Christian Liberty]

I push the "taxation is theft" line all the time, but it is certainly not slavery.

If you're free to leave in order to avoid the theft, you are not a slave. I disagree with the premise of this article.

I agree. If you're forced to work (And I mean literally forced here, not the commie definition of "Forced") and are paid for it, its still slavery. If you're taxed 100%, but can still refuse to work, all your profit is being stolen but you're still not TECHNICALLY a slave.

That said, the taxation is slavery line of thinking still has some merit. I'm really not sure we've made a TON of progress just because we don't have slavery when the government claims it owns virtually everything.

[heavenlyboy34]

RACISTS!!!!!!!!!!!!

<~~~thought criminal

[heavenlyboy34]

I agree. If you're forced to work (And I mean literally forced here, not the commie definition of "Forced") and are paid for it, its still slavery. If you're taxed 100%, but can still refuse to work, all your profit is being stolen but you're still not TECHNICALLY a slave.

That said, the taxation is slavery line of thinking still has some merit. I'm really not sure we've made a TON of progress just because we don't have slavery when the government claims it owns virtually everything.

But even people who chose not to work are taxed. It's called inflation. (and those who are poor or can't/won't work are hit hardest by this tax)

[wizardwatson]

On a related note I always wondered who had first rights on your money the state or the fed.

If it's the state, then they could just tax you 100% to take power away from the fed.

Not realistic but you get the point. I just wonder if someday it will be decided, assuming tax rates keep going up, who exactly gets priority.

[heavenlyboy34]

On a related note I always wondered who had first rights on your money the state or the fed.

If it's the state, then they could just tax you 100% to take power away from the fed.

Not realistic but you get the point. I just wonder if someday it will be decided, assuming tax rates keep going up, who exactly gets priority.

A 100% tax wouldn't take power away from the FED. They could just "print" more money. It wouldn't take much power from the regime either as they can borrow on the credit of the United States (that is, the legal entity called "The United States") thanks to the CONstitution.