Tom:
"You tend to fling the word "strawman" about quite liberally. Doesn't it sort of imply that what I say isn't a fact?"

Not entirely, a Strawman argument is typically (in practice) an absurd amplification or reduction of aspects of a particular position. Then you exhibit the absurdity of the position you have manufactured. So its false in the sense that you are abstracting out facets of a position from the whole, magnifying them or 'spinning' them into something absurd and attacking that.

Tom:
"That you think I'm wrong that the forced redistribution of wealth is currently the main function of the Federal Government?"

I think this is a falsehood, yes, but not a malicious one. The Govenrnment has several main functions, and ours does them better than most. Some are: (order arbitrary)
1) Provide essential infrastructure to facilitate economic wealth
2) To manage and defend property rights and life of electorate
3) To provide a national defense
4) To preserve the rights of the electorate (which is not being done in this administration, I might add!)
<insert others, order by how important you think they are>

To do 1-4 requires money money money. To get money, we gotta Tax. I hate the current federal tax system, but I don't think its gonna change. I think its unfair, biased, wretchedly wasteful and patently absurd given our bill of rights.

So, basically, I argue the taxation is in service of and necessary for the primary functions of the Gov't and NOT the primary function.

Now, you are correct in your Robin Hood assertion IN AS MUCH AS it is true that money is taxed and spent on goods and services that are available, not exactly equally, to ALL PARTIES. But, as I said and as you do not address in your post, EVERYONE who works pays taxes... EVERYONE who buys something pays taxes, so in that fact, your analogy is false (steal exclusively from the rich and give exclusively to the poor), and yes: its a Strawman in the sense that you extrapolate social services and taxation into a 'Robin Hood' scenario. The very use of the term makes it a strawman argument by its very nature.

The federal tax policy is the federal tax policy, not a ponzi or Robin Hood or whatever. Pi is Pi, and not some sequence of integers that, when analyzed with the correct numerology, reveal the mind of god. A cigar is A Cigar. An Electron is an Electron, not a wave or a billiard ball. The leftie-nutzies often employ misleading metaphor to try to cloud the truth of the matter. This is a seductive strategy because everything in the universe is LIKE something else to our connection-machine brains. An appealing metaphor or analogy often clouds the truth of the matter, is subjective, and leads to arguments over interpretations and NOT FACTS.

In general, Tom, (correct me if I am wrong) you seem to think I am saying that I agree with the federal tax scheme and that our budget is all good. I don't think I have ever claimed that, What I am arguing against is that it is a Robin Hood scheme and that there should be no taxes and that the budget is 100% waste.

Davin L.