- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
So it's wrong to take money from people who didn't necessarily earn it, but it's fine to let people die by withholding help from those who didn't necessarily earn their problems? Great logic there Joe.
So basically you want the freedom to let everyone else die?
Because the amount of income you receive is not directly proportional to the amount of work you do. A farmer who works all day cleaning, lifting, caring for animals, maintaining equipment, nurturing crops, but only does so for a very small income (as most farmers do), works harder than a public school toff who has inherited millions from his deceased father's company. The farmer might be on 20k for ten hours of various forms of labour a day, but the Eton boy might only have to go to a meeting every week and earn 500k just for inheriting the company.
I wouldn't consider myself a liberal, I would say I'm more of a classical anarchist, but I believe that property can't exist without coercion, and that acquiring property through coercion is theft, therefore property is theft, therefore, redistributive taxation is redistribution of stolen property.
This definitely has a strong element of truth to it, as much as I hate anecdotal evidence, my mother used to work in a care unit where the residents were boys aged 11 to 18 who exhibited sexually harmful behaviour. Most of them were also abused as children, their families used them as prostitutes, made porn with them in, raped them, whatever.