why do people agree to pay taxes?

[dmeter]

if you will not pay taxes to the government, then there is no police, no court, no law.

Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, History proves it. Not repeating myself with Rothbard's argument, I did not even seen opposed once, just ignored.

If you do not feed your army, then you feed enemy army.

Feeding one ruler instead of another does not mean a shit to me.

you would use the state infrastructure but would not want to pay for the use .

You misunderstood. We are not against paying for services, we are against being forced to pay for a service that is protected from competition.

As I am against, I profit from this system. My main activity is ".NET Development Certified Trainer", and in France I am paid between 800 to 1500€ a day for it, while a school teacher is barely at 150€.
It is not because I am smarter, it is just because in my country, the State subsidies enormous sum of money (and oblige companies to save) for corporate training.
It makes my customers completely insensitive to the price... this money does not got into the well being of my students (employees), if I was paid less, I would still give courses and trainer's would be as good as now.
This money goes into my pocket and training centers one.

You are forced to pay taxes. And I will collect it, if I don't I would be like a milk cow. (the majority)
I don't support such system. But it is always possible to profit from the tax system and not be a milk cow.

Let me quote you : You misunderstood. We are not against paying for services, we are against being forced to pay for a service that is protected from competition. Well said!

Also You misunderstood,you can organize political party,win on election and change tax system.Also you have easy way
For dont  pay tax.Sale all your real estate,car,clothes, quit a job,Registration on social services for food stamps and live free of tax.
Government has its own territory if you wont live on this territory you mast pay tax

[Window2Wall]

Paying taxes is part of a social contract.  I pay taxes and expect several things in return: security and an ever improving way of life, basically.  I had a neighbor that used to complain of paying taxes when the money went to schools and programs for school children.  I could have made the same complaint but you have to think about what that money is doing.  Putting kids through school enables adults to spend more time in the work force.  It educates children.  That's pretty much it.  I mean, that's just one example of many but you get the idea.  Also think about when new technologies such as the internet come along.  The internet is a new attack vector for pedophiles so you need law enforcement to handle it and that costs money.  

Why is it so hard to understand that libertarians are not against paying for services, just against paying by compulsion ?
Let me pay for my school. Let me decide if my child need schools at all.

A contract assume two consenting person. But if you don't consent, you go to jail. This is not what I call a contract.

There are some services that citizens benefit from regardless of if they want it or not. One example of this is national defense. There is no way that only 80% of people can receive this service because the military either defends the entire country or does not defend it at all

[TheButterZone]

LOL @ militaries "defending" countries instead of mostly killing and crippling tons of innocent women and children and non-combatant foreigners.

[grendel25]

Just imagine a world without militaries.  Oh yeah, that's irrelevant, just like posting a hypothetical and idealist world where there has never been a military.  ha!

The best use of a strong military force is to heal nations in need when we are at peace.  Humanitarian missions have saved millions but don't get the attention of errant bombs or drone strikes.

[TheButterZone]

Define "humanitarian mission", as the Third Reich and all other demociding militaries certainly thought they were being humanitarian, as everyone is always doing "the right thing" in their own minds no matter how evil it is.

[twiifm]

Define "humanitarian mission", as the Third Reich and all other demociding militaries certainly thought they were being humanitarian, as everyone is always doing "the right thing" in their own minds no matter how evil it is.

And who stopped the 3rd Reich? That happens to be another military from USA and Russia

Convenient to leave out half the story in your arguments huh?

[TheButterZone]

Define "humanitarian mission", as the Third Reich and all other demociding militaries certainly thought they were being humanitarian, as everyone is always doing "the right thing" in their own minds no matter how evil it is.

And who stopped the 3rd Reich? That happens to be another military from USA and Russia

Convenient to leave out half the story in your arguments huh?

Indeed, it is convenient to leave out the half of history where Hitler self-destructed (in many ways, not just limited to invading Russia), and Japan's war hawks thought they could out-democide the US.

[picolo]

Define "humanitarian mission", as the Third Reich and all other demociding militaries certainly thought they were being humanitarian, as everyone is always doing "the right thing" in their own minds no matter how evil it is.

And who stopped the 3rd Reich? That happens to be another military from USA and Russia

Convenient to leave out half the story in your arguments huh?

It's mostly Russia that stopped the 3rd Reich, not the USA.

[Nicolas Dorier]

Government has its own territory if you wont live on this territory you mast pay tax

This is where we differs. Who owns the land ? is it government or individual ? If you think that you have your word to say about what type of crops a farm man can grow on his own land (assuming no pollution impact in the broader sense), then you consider government as ultimate owner.
This is the main difference between capitalist and socialist thinking, and why we live in a socialist world while pointing its flaws as capitalist greed.
But let's assume that some land are private and some land are public (which is not true because of expropriation) and that you must pay for the public as well as for the private.

Public : The state got it by force through taxation or expropriation.
Private : The owner got it by exchanging his own work against it, with a buyer, both voluntarily.

There are some services that citizens benefit from regardless of if they want it or not. One example of this is national defense. There is no way that only 80% of people can receive this service because the military either defends the entire country or does not defend it at all

The nice thing about Rothbard is that he lets no zone in the dark.

The national defense is here not to defend his inhabitant but to defend his government.
Conscription or civil wars are living proof of it. As an individual we have no incentive to kill someone we don't even know.
But each soldier do it because if he doesn't, he get killed by his own government.
As westerners, we are concerned about the military crackdown on protesters during the arab spring, while forgetting "our defense" would do the same.

Quoting Rothbard commenting on the state wars of todays compared to the middle age :

It was not always thus. During the Middle Ages, the scope of wars was far more limited. Before the rise of modern weapons, armaments were so limited that governments could – and often did – strictly confine their violence to the armies of the rival governments. It is true that tax-coercion increased, but at least there was no mass murder of the innocents. Not only was firepower low enough to confine violence to the armies of the contending sides, but in the premodern era there was no central nation-state that spoke inevitably in the name of all inhabitants of a given land area. If one set of kings or barons fought another, it was not felt that everyone in the area must be a dedicated partisan. Moreover, instead of mass conscript armies enslaved to their respective rulers, armies were small bands of hired mercenaries. Often, a favorite sport for the populace was to observe a battle from the safety of the town ramparts, and war was regarded as something of a sporting match. But with the rise of the centralizing State and of modern weapons of mass destruction, the slaughter of civilians, as well as conscript armies, have become a vital part of inter-State warfare.

For the interested, here is the full link on the foreign policy of the libertarian by Rothbard at http://archive.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard84.html

In other words, merchant could continue their commerce with the enemy, and not being killed. The only thing that change for farmers and merchant is the person to which they will give their taxes.
Why should they fight for the king ?
Which is the real ultimate difference between 2 states.

[Silverspoon]

Let me decide if my child need schools at all.

I'm starting to understand.  Your parents, the "Libertarians," decided in their wisdom that you didn't need no schoolin' at all.
Let me take up the slack and do some remedial schoolin' here.
Your illiteracy and ignorance hurt others around you.  You become what's colloquially known as "an embarrassing burden to society."  The likes of you do not contribute to economy but drain it - living on the fringes and at the expense of mankind.'

TL;DR: Education is required to get a jerb in this, the year of our Lord 2 naught candlestick 4. Without it, you wind up pretty much where you are now - spending your dole on Beanie Babies because freedoms.

[Nicolas Dorier]

Let me decide if my child need schools at all.

I'm starting to understand.  Your parents, the "Libertarians," decided in their wisdom that you didn't need no schoolin' at all.
Let me take up the slack and do some remedial schoolin' here.
Your illiteracy and ignorance hurt others around you.  You become what's colloquially known as "an embarrassing burden to society."  The likes of you do not contribute to economy but drain it - living on the fringes and at the expense of mankind.'

TL;DR: Education is required to get a jerb in this, the year of our Lord 2 naught candlestick 4. Without it, you wind up pretty much where you are now - spending your dole on Beanie Babies because freedoms.

My parent are statists, it is not until soon that I became libertarian and cared a minimum to economics. (Bitcoin drew me in the rabbit hole as well on the technical side than on the economic belief of some of its supporters)
I did not knew what was a libertarian at the start of 2014, and did not even know I could consider myself "statist" at this time.

Being a burden to society, means that you are living off subsidies and not providing any value.
Which is far from being my case. I live thanks to subsidies though.
I am an independent developer, largely self taught. My customers hire me not because they are obliged to, not because I am protected from competition, but because I make them earn time and money.
I never had a single day looking for customers, they all come from word of mouth. (not a single time until now, from 8 years ago, where I started working as independent and trainer during school instead of being intern)
Given my limited time, choosing a customer is a function of belief + $$$$ + flexibility. And when there is subsidies (training), $$$$ goes higher. I profit from these subsidies more than I am paying them.
And I will profit of all I can given my knowledge.

I also created the biggest open source .NET library for Bitcoin, NBitcoin which work on Windows, Android, and IOS plateform, that lots of entrepreneurs are using.

If you are interested on the technical side of Bitcoin, you can take a look at the numerous article I wrote.
https://github.com/NicolasDorier/NBitcoin (tip accepted, almost 1BTC of donation since the beginning)
This is the value I am adding to Bitcoin, and I will continue to do so for forseeable future. You can also hire me for technical training, feedback has always been great.

I prefer fighting with reason than parade, to which Libertarian gave me more coherent responses than statists. (If I respond with parades sometimes, it is just laziness to argument my points. When I do that I admit that I should keep my mouth shut. )
I'd like some coherent reasoning or historical example that explain me some limits of libertarians, but I have not seen Rothbard trapped yet, discussing on this forum is very instructive though.

If you want to prevent me profiting from the system, considering it "unjust and childish", you'll soon arrive at the conclusion that libertarianism is the only answer.

[Silverspoon]

Aha, you "discovered" libertarianism late in life, and, like a born-again Christian still flushed with rapture, you can't wait to share The Good News.
The reason you have trouble finding people willing to debate your "libertarian" thinkings is not unlike the reason born-agains have trouble finding willing victims to discuss Christianity: It would be an exercise in frustration and futility, much like debating theology with a rusty bucket.



Libertarianism is a vague, umbrella term for a slew of ideas, most of them focusing on things Libertarians are against, rather than for.  Only one thing could be said about Libertarianism objectively:  No libertarian societies exist today or have ever existed...

...thus limiting libertarianism debates to teh purely theoretical, hypothetical realm.
Both Christianity and Communism are great in theory.

Libertarians appropriate many important thinkers like Proudhon, who believed that property was theft,
"The proprietor, the robber, the hero, the sovereign — for all these titles are synonymous — imposes his will as law, and suffers neither contradiction nor control; that is, he pretends to be the legislative and the executive power at once . . . [and so] property engenders despotism . . . "
without actually subscribing to the basic tenets that make the philosophies of said thinkers intrinsically consistent.

TL;DR:  I'm glad you've found validation for your antisocial, reactionary ideals in what you consider to be Libertarianism, but I'm not sure what it is you're asking folks to do.  Mebby trot them out one at a time, I'll see what I can do.

[picolo]

People agree to pay taxes because they think it is needed or because they are afraid to be thrown in jail.

[Beyonce]

why is it ok for a group of people calling themselves the government to force everyone to buy their services?

I actually think taxes are ok and good for society, but not the way they're currently dished out.

if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.

True, but sadly this will never happen because most people don't care.

[Gyfts]

You are using an established system. Everyone uses the government's system in one way or another. So you have to pay for that in a way.

[picolo]

You are using an established system. Everyone uses the government's system in one way or another. So you have to pay for that in a way.

If you don't agree to pay taxes, the money is taken away from you against your will by threat. A lot of us don't agree to how the taxes are used because they are wasted and a public service end up being more expensive for a lower quality than if it was provided by the private sector.

[sdmathis]

if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.

True, but sadly this will never happen because most people don't care.

That's called a revolution. It's happened before, and it will happen again. Unfortunately, the new government usually ends up collecting taxes too.

It's been said that the only sure things are death and taxes. If you can figure out how to get rid of death, you just might be smart enough to find a way to get rid of taxes too. I have a feeling that we are stuck with both however.

[Son0fLamb]

if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.

True, but sadly this will never happen because most people don't care.

That's called a revolution. It's happened before, and it will happen again. Unfortunately, the new government usually ends up collecting taxes too.
...

Then I'll get on my knees and praaaaay
http://webspace.webring.com/people/ov/viciousinterlude/SGandPete.jpg
*catches some air*
we WON'T get GET fooled agAiN!!1!
*turns perfectly good SG into firewood*
YAAAAH!!!!11!

[screwUdriver]

You are using an established system. Everyone uses the government's system in one way or another. So you have to pay for that in a way.

Right. It would not be fair for the government to provide you with something and for you to not have to pay for it

[dmugetsu]

You are using an established system. Everyone uses the government's system in one way or another. So you have to pay for that in a way.

Right. It would not be fair for the government to provide you with something and for you to not have to pay for it

Well,government build many infrastructure,so the people can use it
I think it's pretty normal for us to pay taxes