(05-26-2018, 04:11 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(05-26-2018, 03:10 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: Because, again, your "no government equals no freedom" is a false statement. Basing your greater ideas on that faulty premise leads to wrong conclusions.  I'm glad that you're beginning to understand where you're mistaken, I'll try to help you along this path of learning.

As far as your next response to TP, the questions about caring for others depend on you telling me how much I'm obligated to care for other people. You take my taxes to provide for weaker people whether I want to or not. Really sounds like you're ok with restricting my freedom to use my earned money as I choose to so that you can use my money how you choose, do you agree?

Both of our statements are correct within each of our definitions of freedom. If you judge my statement on your definition of freedom it is incorrect. If I read your statement based on my definition of freedom your statement is also incorrect.
I don't take your taxes you can you should stop making this personal. Even if I was the president of the United States I would not be the one taking your taxes. Even if I was the County Tax Collector, I might be taking that money, but I would have no control over how it got spent. The taxes go to an abstract entity called the government that we all get to vote for.

And we were doing so well then you have a regression. No, it's not relative, you don't get to use "your" definition of the word to make your position work. And taxes are extremely personal, they are the confiscation of the personal labor you expend to create wealth; ie parts of your life that other people feel entitled to take for their own use.

---