Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Right, and simply stating that taxes constitute theft isn't an argument either.

1. I made observation X.

2. You argue observation X is wrong because Y and Z.

3. I claim arguments Y and Z don't negate observation X

4. You claim I don't offer any arguments besides "waaah taxes"

I just want you to realize how ridiculous your method of communication is. Your communication style reveals that you're more interested in being "right" than understanding why an argument is made. That's fine, but I'm not really interested in scoring fake debate points here. This isn't a debate -- and if it was, you would be in trouble. Instead of asking why I hold an observation to be true (thus, allowing me to make an argument for it), you immediately go on the offense, forcing me to rebuttal your arguments. I stopped responding because it became clear you're here to reaffirm your own ideology rather than discuss ideas.

X = If you do it, it's theft. If they do it, it's a tax.

Y = I will personally buy you a plane ticket to Somalia (or any other place with limited government)

Z = Imagine if the government hadn't invested it's tax revenue back into national defense and infrastructure for the past three centuries.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: