Robbery is theft with force
And if you refuse to pay the taxes to give to paul the nice policement will come and use force.
and theft is illegally taking someone elses property. Taxation is legal, and hence is not robbery.
Hey look, slavery was/is legal in certain places/times. I guess that makes it not slavery since we arbitrarily decide to add "illigally" to the definition.
are you really saying that a government policy that takes 10% on the first $20k, and 50% on any income above that isn't taxation but is slavery?!
No we explained that before, that is disproportinate taxation... you take MORE from bob then you do from joe, and then you give BOTH of them roads. disproportionate taxation.. if you take from joe to give to bob and not to joe, then you are going into the realm of slavery.
because such a tax is redistributive in nature
No it isn't. It CAN be redistributive, it CAN be disproportinate, and it CAN be equal.
More socialism/communism attacks? Rather amusing, since it means you're saying that the US, UK, Western Europe, and pretty well every developed country out there has a government practicing stuff WAYYY beyond socialism and is stealing+enslaving it's population
No, those countries have socialism, things like socialized healthcare and unimployment insurence... The only country that practices redistribution is zimbabwe... and if people like you get their way, the USA would as well.
Actually he often would provide a service - for example protection from bandits (since if bandits routinely came and stole all the villagers produce and/or killed them, the lord wouldn't get any more money)
No he didn't. A single lord cannot stop a group of bandits (unless he is level 20), what he would do is draft serfs and have them fight bandits... and other lords so that he could conquer more lands and more serfs.
you could have the government taking 99% of your income, for example, and it's taxation not slavery
That is a question of who gets it, the government can take 100% of your income and not be slavery, just communism as long as they take 100% of everyone else and provide for all equally as they do to everyone else, that would be disproportionate taxation. The moment the government takes from you, and gives to someone else, aka providing for his needs with your money but NOT providing for YOUR needs, then it is slavery.
It doesn't matter if he uses the money to line his crown and build a palace, or if he uses it to hire+equip soldiers for protection, and establish a network of roads to encourage trade. Either way, it's a tax.
Thats what he calls it.. but as long he is calling it a tax while taking money to line his own pockets then it is indirect slavery...