Is taxation theft?

Maybe

Taxing richfags I couldn't care less about though

No due to social contract.

No, only ancap retards believe this.

I don't remember signing or agreeing to anything.

...

It is implicit contract that your forefathers signed you on somewhere between start of agricultural revolution and mercantile capitalism.

I bet you fucking love science too

Could you show me it?

No, since its implied contract at this point of society.

you stayed on the communities property when you knew you were going to turn 18. Do my parents not own there house because I stayed there until I turned 18? I didn't agree it was there house, I didn't agree to be born there.

You didn't sign a contract for talking to me creep

besides, property is violence anyway.

So not a contract then

wtf pervert you first

Well if is common ownership nobody outside of that common ownership, and absolutely everything is enforced through violence. This is not something we are against.

The social contract was an "occurrence" during which individuals came together and ceded some of their individual rights so that others would cede theirs (e.g. person A gives up his/her right to kill person B if person B does the same). This resulted in the establishment of the state, a sovereign entity like the individuals now under its rule used to be, which would create laws to regulate social interactions.

You volunteered by living under the state.

You could just move out into the wilderness, right? :^)

I never signed anything though.

You don`t understand the concept of implied contract? It does not require your consent at this point anymore. It might have required it when humanity started to build more advanced civilization form hunter-gatherer society but that right to cede form this contract is long gone.

can you edit this sentence for grammar so I can understand it?
so you admit the NAP is BS and just for pr purposes?
also, answer this
you weren't a full fledged adult until 18 or so, so you were under stewardship of your parents. If you didn't consent to the social contract, you could have left before or upon turning 18.
If disney owned most of florida under ancapism, and you were born in their territory– er– property, you would also be subject to there laws— er –terms of service, and have to pay taxes— er— rent
Are states cool if they control an arbitrarily small area and they can only punish you through exile?

ARE YOU BEING DETAINED

this is going to be good.

yeah, you agreed by staying until adulthood. Just like I agree to follow the rules in my parents house by staying there until I'm an adult. I never signed anything saying I agreed it was their property, it was their property before I was born.
Could a state exist that was consistent with the NAP if a gov colonized mars, declared it all as it's property, and than anyone living there is just renting?
would taxes be theft if there was a fine print written on them saying,
"ALL USERS OF THIS PRIVATE PROPERTY OF THE GOVERNMENTtm AGREE THAT ACCEPTANCE OF CURRENCY DOES NOT IMPLY OWNERSHIP, BUT TEMPORARY AND TRANSFERABLE RENTAL"
then taxes would be "voluntary"

written on currency*

Yes

That's why there will be no taxes under communism because there will be no state

An implied contract is no valid contract

If it is common ownership nobody outside this common ownership can claim anything
The NAP is against the initiation of force, it is not a pacifist concept

I'm glad you all agree with the volunteer argument because you've essentially destroyed Marxist ideology (and lolibertards) in one swoop. The workers do not live in "muh slavery" like leftards here like to parrot because slavery is involuntary. You volunteered for the career. One would say it's far more free than a state because choosing a job (or joblessness) of your own free will is far easier than choosing a state and even worse you can barely choose statelessness in the world compared to being jobless/unemployed.

Never once did I call myself ancap but you fell for it. Let everyone browsing bear witness to leftist stupidity and doublethink in its purest form.

You're all morons lol

defense of property is the initiation of force. Unless you take property as an extension of the self, which we would claim there is no basis for
And property is (or relies on) an implied contract

Validly over states sovereignty is not for you to decide. You never have held sovereignty in relations to state, and you never will long as states will continue to exists. Your self-interests are protected by the self-interests of state that created social contract for your benefit.

Those conditions are not imposed by social contract in capitalist states, therefor this argument is not intellectually honest. This however would be the case in socialist society.

Tell that to the sulphur miners in indonesia. They have one choice work or starve

youtube.com/watch?v=YgHNtzxO0y8&t=0m26s

I don't even know which person in this thread you are?
And yeah, it's fun to point out by the logic of anti-statists (you can't feasibly leave the territory of the state without destroying your life so it's not a free choice) also would apply to wage-laborers under capitalism (work or starve), but leftists don't really require the voluntary state argument to justify taxation, because we aren't propertarians in the first place.

Social Democrats are capitalist, dingus

There's no Marxists or Anarchists taking part in this discussion, we're watching in amusement