Where does the state derive this obligation to memorialize people/places/things?

So what you are saying is that you WANT to force other people to pay for something you believe is noble and good rather than letting individuals freely choose what they would like to give to?… Read More

Taxes are taxes. Some are just more sinister than others. A sales tax is generally a flat tax levied equally on all based on consumption. There are excise taxes on specific products and goods, and tariffs. Our income tax is a progressive tax, taking from some and giving to others….”from each according to his ability, to each according to their need” type a thing. Thomas Jefferson once wrote about this type of tax in relationship to the general welfare clause of the constitution:

“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, “to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”

Prior to the ratification of the 16th Ammendment the only income tax that was levied on the people of this nation was done so in order to pay for the enormous debt caused by Lincoln’s war. After the war was over it was quickly repealed. Another income tax was attempted in the 1890s and found to be unconstitutional. Then came the so-called progressive era and the ratification of the 16th Ammendment and the beginings of the modern welfare/warfare state. Then there is the regressive tax generate by the Federal Reserve through inflation that impacts everyone but primarily those on fixed incomes but that is another story.

Income taxation is not voluntary. We do not choose to sanction the government and give them our money: they demand it from us based on where we live, and if we refuse to give it up, they use their own laws and guns against us. No other organization uses such strong-arm tactics, except perhaps the mafia.

The legal definition of extortion: The use, or the express or implicit threat of the use, of violence or other means to cause harm to person, reputation, or property as a means to obtain property from someone else with his consent. – United States Code, Title 18

If you refuse to pay your taxes, if you do not consent to the government’s claim over you, then the government (more specifically, the IRS) may perform armed raids on your property, and will threaten you with harm to your property through politely-worded letters. Taxation, therefore, seems to fit the definition of extortion approved by the government itself.

Lysander Spooner said it best “The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: ‘Your money, or your life.’ And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat. The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the roadside, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful.”

Long story short….. If I go around with a gun telling people to surrender part of their income so I can use it to what I consider noble purposes, I would be considered a gangster and a criminal. Now if extortion is evil, and stealing is evil. Since government (however small) cannot exist without some form of taxation, then doesn’t it stand to reason that government is evil.

I use words like “theft”, “point of a gun”, “larceny” to refer to government like it is a criminal organization because held to even the lowest of societal standards GOVERNMENT IS A CRIMINAL ORGINIZATION. Washington would put it this way, “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master.”

You never answered my question: Which is of these is moral, compulsory support of a peice of granite (as you coldly put it) with the point of a gun, or FREE voluntary support absent force and coercion?

I find it funny that everything the government does is “at the point of a gun” and “larceny” and “theft.” You treat the government as one big criminal organization. But the government is the one thing that is SUPPOSED to do things at the point of the gun (In Romans, Paul calls it wielding the sword). Would you rather the government NOT control society? Would you rather have several rival centers of authority all taking things at the point of a gun? If government doesn’t control things, and yes control at the point of a gun, then it is not government. Taxes are a part of government! You can’t have a government without them! When something is paid for with taxes, that doesn’t make it evil! The government is supposed to pay for good things with taxes. This particular memorial park is a good thing, the government has already collected the taxes. Why can’t we put those two things together? I’m also confused as to why one form of taxes is evil while another form (the kind you don’t directly see on April 15th) is not evil. Taxes are taxes.

And as for monuments: Temple of Democracy, man. Pierre L’Enfent. Washington DC was supposed to be an impressive city, not just a functional one. That’s a memorial right there. And that includes almost all the founders…. Read More

Also, I would rather you question my common sense than to connect me with statist socialism. Some things are more insulting than others.

My references to taxation have been limited to the Personal Income Tax which didnt come into exsistence until 1916 during the “Progressive Era.” I do believe a compulsory tax upon an individuals Income to be immoral (since 1916 it has been constitutional, but that does not make it moral).

My analogy to people using SS and Medi to support thier case for public option, were in reference to your rationing more legal larceny based upon past uses of legal larceny…. Read More

Your brand of loose interpretation of the Constitution is precisely what has created the Nationalism that we currently find ourselves in. Do you honestly believe that, aside from Hamilton, any of our founding fathers intended for the Federal government to, by cumpulsory force, take the property of private citizens to pay for building a monument?

To me this discussion is not about the monument, but more about the principle behind it. You are okay with theft as long as that theft is spent in reasonable, responsible way on say, your wars or your “Temples of Democracy” while I am not okay with THEFT.

As for Government and its monopoly on FORCE, it should be checked at every level by the States, and bound and constrained by a Constitution (that you see fit to stretch to fit your argument), and tolerated rather than celebrated.

As for my aparent lack of “common sense,” I will leave the personal attacks alone….

It’s a memorial. When Congress first decided to build the Capitol, they wanted it to be a “Temple of Democracy,” which is more than just the “needful building” that the Constitution states is allowed in Article I section 8. Memorializing things is something so simple, and basically so harmless, that nobody I’ve ever come across (before you) has ever thought to challenge it on Constitutional grounds.

Fine if you want to say that this event is not WORTH memorializing, but to say that all memorializing whatsoever is a statist power grab? What? It’s a piece of granite! It’s an empty piece of land! And you’re comparing this to the creation of Social Security and Medicare!? What? It’s not like we’re creating a memorial bureaucracy! We’re creating a national park so that people will remember private citizens who saved this country from disaster. What is this statism that you keep seeing? Its connection to taxes!? We’ve had taxes since the beginning (with the colonies and states, BEFORE the beginning) of this country! You’re not even complaining about too many taxes, or taxation with representation, you’re attacking the very idea of taxes. What?

But that’s an argument from common sense. Here’s an argument from the Constitution. Article I Section 8 says that Congress may “make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” Memorializing citizens who gave their lives is not NECESSARY, but it most certainly is PROPER. The Department that this clause references is the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, which takes care of our national park system. The appropriation of money is a LAW, which this section of the Constitution clearly authorizes. BOOM. It’s Constitutional.

Also, side notes: Yes, government has a monopoly on force. That’s a good thing. That way you don’t have to defend your life an your property on a daily basis from competing power seekers. The right thing to do isn’t complain about the fact that the government HAS that monopoly; we’re supposed to make sure it’s using it properly. When government acts properly, it’s doing a good thing. I don’t know if you want the government to do ANYTHING, because now even the things the Constitution authorizes the government to do are off limits due to the indelible connection to statist tax power.