Government is force. Libertarians believe in a win-win voluntary society where people cooperate through trade and charity. The moral issue here is that Libertarians believe that it is not right to take forcefully from one person in order to provide for another's needs. Libertarians believe in minimizing taxation and funding government by other means if possible. Welfare for those in need should be provided through voluntary means. Forcing others to "give" is not just or generous. Government should not be deciding who needs welfare, because welfare is damaging to some people because it encourages dependency, lack of initiative, and poor planning. A free economy will produce more wealth for everyone. Taxation is robbing people of their wealth and the ability to invest that wealth in new business, which would benefit the poor.

Think of the possibilities for giving in a society with extremely low taxation. People are concerned about providing for their own families and living responsibly and they need to be free to make their own decisions with their money. Most people in our daily lives are good most of the time - otherwise society wouldn't function - we trust people enough as equals. However, the more power we give to others, the more skewed things become. As Lord Acton said, Power corrupts.

Some people think that inheritance taxes are the right way to redistribute wealth. But does it really do that? In effect, they just provide governments with more money to squander. If they really should redistribute wealth, they should be excluded from the normal government income and allocated in a special fund earmarked for the purpose. Some people think that inheritance taxes are downright wrong; taking away already taxed and hard earned money from people who earned it.

What happens when you tax an inheritance? Applying British standards, 50 percent of the inheritance gets lost to the government coffers. If this money is sitting in a savings account or in a safe, the fact might be annoying to the heir, but hardly life threatening to anyone. If the money on the other hand is sitting in a company providing work to people, losing half the money could mean the end of the company. This second case in fact doesn’t redistribute wealth, it kills it

Taxation is theft because it is the use of aggression to deny another person their property. It doesn’t matter what their property is to be used for or what complicated arguments are made to justify it. Taxation is involuntary and it results in a person’s property being permanently taken. This is all that is necessary for our thesis to be proven.

Yet others will claim that taxes are payment for those services government provides. What if one doesn’t want those services? What if they are substandard? There are no answers to these questions because these alleged services are provided involuntarily. You can hardly call that a voluntary arrangement.

Taxation is theft because it involves a first use of violence in order to permanently acquire someone else’s property. State apologists may make excuses or wild conjecture in a vain attempt to justify this theft. But the fact remains that is theft. The only valid way to acquire someone else’s property is through voluntary interaction. Taxation is involuntary.

Liberty is incompatible with taxation. This despite that famous saying by Oliver Wendell Holmes that "Taxation is the price we pay for civilization." In fact, taxation is a most uncivilized way of obtaining funds, given that it boils down to nothing less than extortion.

Not a lot of taxation, mind you, because it seemed pretty clear to the Founders that taxation is in fact extortion. But they didn't see some other, legitimate, morally acceptable way of collecting the funds needed to pay government for its service of securing our rights. Yet, they might have.

The first step is to acknowledge, unapologetically, that the institution of taxation is not a civilized but a barbaric method to fund anything, because it amounts to nothing less than outright extortion, a gross violation of human liberty.

Nowak, an Austrian human rights lawyer who has been U.N. special rapporteur on torture for six years, called for an investigation of all allegations of U.S. torture and collusion with states that use torture since the fight against militants began in earnest after the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001.

Nowak also reiterated calls by him and other U.N. officials for the Obama administration to investigate reports from reams of leaked military documents showing U.S. troops killed Iraqi civilians or ignored prisoner abuse by Iraqis.

"What we need is a full investigation into torture practices by U.S. officials -- whether it's military officials, CIA officials or private security companies," he said, adding it should include those "who willingly and knowingly handed over detainees to other states" that torture. An ideal probe, Nowak said, would be conducted by a special prosecutor or panel of international experts.