Electile Dysfunction (Current students plz look!)

[Kaan]

I paid over $50k in taxes in 2018

If you are making so much why are you still driving a GTI?

dont live above your means... he's got a kid to think about yo! #dinkforlife

[Apoc]

I paid over $50k in taxes in 2018

If you are making so much why are you still driving a GTI?

If we were Facebook friends, you'd know the answer. 

Also, blatant consumerism for the sake of consumerism is dumb.

[rherold9]

Also, blatant consumerism for the sake of consumerism is dumb.

You're right, so why didn't you just donate the money to your local food bank vs buying the car? Stand behind your principles, you know?

[CaptainHenreh]

Also, blatant consumerism for the sake of consumerism is dumb.

You're right, so why didn't you just donate the money to your local food bank vs buying the car? Stand behind your principles, you know?

Because he had 50k+ stolen from him by the government, obv.

[G.Irish]

I too, would like to see the foundation of Libertaria.

In Libertaria, there would be no taxes. You only pay for the things you want to pay for.

How does property get decided? Well you can pay into a property collective that will draw your property boundaries and ensure that no one else annexes your property. If you let your property fee lapse for even one second, someone else can just declare your property there's and it's up to you to settle it with bullets or rochambeau.

What about infrastructure? Every road would be a toll road. Power lines, plumbing, telecom are all done by private companies who can charge the market rate. Hopefully those companies are up to date on their annual property bill, otherwise someone else could seize their assets.

Law enforcement? If you pay your annual law enforcement and justice fee, the police will come if you call them. If someone commits a crime against you, they go to jail, but only for as long as you pay your LE fee. The cost of the jail, courts, and police would have to be tallied and divided up amongst only those who want those services. Anyone who doesn't pay their LE fee is on their own. If you pay your LE fee after the crime is committed, you've got to pay for the apprehension, trial, and imprisonment of the criminal out of pocket.

Medical insurance would just be whatever companies want to charge, with whatever terms they want. Hopefully you have enough money to get what you need in that environment.

The toughest thing would be stuff that falls into externalities. Libertaria would be a great place for business because there'd be no regulations. Businesses could pollute as much as they want, have no employee safety, discriminate at will, and the market would be left to correct all that, or not.

Finally, you only get a vote, if you pay for your share of election expenses. No pay, no vote. But to the extent that any elected government creates laws, only people who pay for the enforcement of those laws gets to enjoy them.

Libertaria would have to get started by some rich guys who buy some land from some country willing to sell, then they'd have to set up the laws and all of the totally voluntary government entities. Would probably be a great place to be a rich person or have a mega corporation. Probably very inefficient and shitty for people of normal means.

No one is stopping the people who don't believe in the fundamental concept of taxes from starting their own country. Would be a great experiment, but I suspect few would really want to take the risk of living that way.

[Apoc]

Also, blatant consumerism for the sake of consumerism is dumb.

You're right, so why didn't you just donate the money to your local food bank vs buying the car? Stand behind your principles, you know?

1) That's socialism, not libertarianism. 
2) I already said I'd do more of I wasn't paying a shitton in taxes. 
3) I choose to help by volunteering at my local food bank. Here's a picture from the event I set up for my team at Amazon last month.

[CaptainHenreh]

I too, would like to see the foundation of Libertaria.

In Libertaria, there would be no taxes.  You only pay for the things you want to pay for.

How does property get decided?  Well you can pay into a property collective that will draw your property boundaries and ensure that no one else annexes your property.  If you let your property fee lapse for even one second, someone else can just declare your property there's and it's up to you to settle it with bullets or rochambeau.

What about infrastructure?  Every road would be a toll road.  Power lines, plumbing, telecom are all done by private companies who can charge the market rate.  Hopefully those companies are up to date on their annual property bill, otherwise someone else could seize their assets.  

Law enforcement?  If you pay your annual law enforcement and justice fee, the police will come if you call them.  If someone commits a crime against you, they go to jail, but only for as long as you pay your LE fee. The cost of the jail, courts, and police would have to be tallied and divided up amongst only those who want those services.  Anyone who doesn't pay their LE fee is on their own.  If you pay your LE fee after the crime is committed, you've got to pay for the apprehension, trial, and imprisonment of the criminal out of pocket.

Medical insurance would just be whatever companies want to charge, with whatever terms they want.  Hopefully you have enough money to get what you need in that environment.

The toughest thing would be stuff that falls into externalities.  Libertaria would be a great place for business because there'd be no regulations.  Businesses could pollute as much as they want, have no employee safety, discriminate at will, and the market would be left to correct all that, or not.

Finally, you only get a vote, if you pay for your share of election expenses.  No pay, no vote.  But to the extent that any elected government creates laws, only people who pay for the enforcement of those laws gets to enjoy them.

Libertaria would have to get started by some rich guys who buy some land from some country willing to sell, then they'd have to set up the laws and all of the totally voluntary government entities.  Would probably be a great place to be a rich person or have a mega corporation.  Probably very inefficient and shitty for people of normal means.  

No one is stopping the people who don't believe in the fundamental concept of taxes from starting their own country.  Would be a great experiment, but I suspect few would really want to take the risk of living that way.

Reducto ad absurdum, yes, that's fine. Now show me who is advocating for that? In this thread? Anywhere? 

What I want is more voluntary participation, less coercion. More freedom, less bureaucracy. A recognition that "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness," maybe.

[Ken]

I too, would like to see the foundation of Libertaria.

In Libertaria, there would be no taxes.  You only pay for the things you want to pay for.

How does property get decided?  Well you can pay into a property collective that will draw your property boundaries and ensure that no one else annexes your property.  If you let your property fee lapse for even one second, someone else can just declare your property there's and it's up to you to settle it with bullets or rochambeau.

What about infrastructure?  Every road would be a toll road.  Power lines, plumbing, telecom are all done by private companies who can charge the market rate.  Hopefully those companies are up to date on their annual property bill, otherwise someone else could seize their assets.  

Law enforcement?  If you pay your annual law enforcement and justice fee, the police will come if you call them.  If someone commits a crime against you, they go to jail, but only for as long as you pay your LE fee. The cost of the jail, courts, and police would have to be tallied and divided up amongst only those who want those services.  Anyone who doesn't pay their LE fee is on their own.  If you pay your LE fee after the crime is committed, you've got to pay for the apprehension, trial, and imprisonment of the criminal out of pocket.

Medical insurance would just be whatever companies want to charge, with whatever terms they want.  Hopefully you have enough money to get what you need in that environment.

The toughest thing would be stuff that falls into externalities.  Libertaria would be a great place for business because there'd be no regulations.  Businesses could pollute as much as they want, have no employee safety, discriminate at will, and the market would be left to correct all that, or not.

Finally, you only get a vote, if you pay for your share of election expenses.  No pay, no vote.  But to the extent that any elected government creates laws, only people who pay for the enforcement of those laws gets to enjoy them.

Libertaria would have to get started by some rich guys who buy some land from some country willing to sell, then they'd have to set up the laws and all of the totally voluntary government entities.  Would probably be a great place to be a rich person or have a mega corporation.  Probably very inefficient and shitty for people of normal means.  

No one is stopping the people who don't believe in the fundamental concept of taxes from starting their own country.  Would be a great experiment, but I suspect few would really want to take the risk of living that way.

Reducto ad absurdum, yes, that's fine. Now show me who is advocating for that? In this thread? Anywhere? 

What I want is more voluntary participation, less coercion. More freedom, less bureaucracy. A recognition that "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness," maybe.

Or voting Libertarian and building a local government that enacts policies that push us in this direction.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_State_Project

[*insertusernamehere*]

Thank you for taking the time today, Gerald

Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk

[CaptainHenreh]

Limited Government is not the same as "This Freedom Brought To You By Outback Steakhouse, no Rules, just Right."

[G.Irish]

I mean, if you're gonna stake out an absurd position, you get an absurd solution.

If the premise is that taxes are fundamentally illegitimate, then you're advocating for a country where there are no taxes. If that's not what you're advocating for, then you're just saying that taxes should be lower, and/or that taxes should be done differently. That's a very different argument.

People who sincerely believe that they shouldn't be coerced into paying a portion of the fruits of their labor to taxes have the option of not doing that. There is currently no country on earth that doesn't have taxes but they could either band together and create that country, or go live on boats.

Personally I think it would make for the greatest reality show of all time. And we haven't had any truly grand experiments in government in a long time.

[SlimKlim]

This thread

[Apoc]

Hyperbole, sarcasm, and outright dismissal weakens your position significantly, Gerald.

You're better than that.

[*insertusernamehere*]

Hyperbole, sarcasm, and outright dismissal weakens your position significantly,  Gerald.

You're better than that.

Isn't that all Rex does or am i interpreting wrong?

[Apoc]

Hyperbole, sarcasm, and outright dismissal weakens your position significantly,  Gerald.

You're better than that.

Isn't that all Rex does or am i interpreting wrong?

There is a big difference between advocating your beliefs... and I think Rex honestly believes what he's saying... and purposefully misconstruing someone else's beliefs into a theoretical dystopia to make it easier to attack.

Terms like "absurd position" and "la la land" are dismissive, at best. It shows you aren't actually open to considering the position and is a common tactic used (mostly by extremes on left AND right) to shout down ideas different than theirs.

[rherold9]

[Ken]

Hyperbole, sarcasm, and outright dismissal weakens your position significantly,  Gerald.

You're better than that.

Isn't that all Rex does or am i interpreting wrong?

There is a big difference between advocating your beliefs... and I think Rex honestly believes what he's saying... and purposefully misconstruing someone else's beliefs into a theoretical dystopia to make it easier to attack.

Terms like "absurd position" and "la la land" are dismissive, at best. It shows you aren't actually open to considering the position and is a common tactic used (mostly by extremes on left AND right) to shout down ideas different than theirs.

Then provide us your solution? So far all it has circled back to is we don't like how taxes are spent so we shouldn't pay them, also, taxes are theft anyway.

You provided a link to the Libertarian party's beliefs which, itself, indicated that taxes would most likely still be necessary when they stated, "to the extent possible." Not sure how else you can interpret that but i'm open to hearing that.

Ultimately, it still appears to boil down to this:

If the premise is that taxes are fundamentally illegitimate, then you're advocating for a country where there are no taxes.  If that's not what you're advocating for, then you're just saying that taxes should be lower, and/or that taxes should be done differently.  That's a very different argument.

In which case i guess that's the closest you've come by suggesting a use-tax.

[SlimKlim]

Hyperbole, sarcasm, and outright dismissal weakens your position significantly,  Gerald.

You're better than that.

Isn't that all Rex does or am i interpreting wrong?

There is a big difference between advocating your beliefs... and I think Rex honestly believes what he's saying... and purposefully misconstruing someone else's beliefs into a theoretical dystopia to make it easier to attack.

Terms like "absurd position" and "la la land" are dismissive, at best. It shows you aren't actually open to considering the position and is a common tactic used (mostly by extremes on left AND right) to shout down ideas different than theirs.

You can't accuse G of using hyperbole and defend Rex's use of it on the other side of the same argument. Either he's actually arguing that taxes are fundamentally immoral and shouldn't exist, or he's making a hyperbolic statement and going for shock factor when he says "taxation is theft." 

It doesn't matter if he believes his argument, i can believe the sky is red as much as I want and it won't do dickshit to change the definition of the color blue.

[CaptainHenreh]

Hyperbole, sarcasm, and outright dismissal weakens your position significantly,  Gerald.

You're better than that.

Isn't that all Rex does or am i interpreting wrong?

There is a big difference between advocating your beliefs... and I think Rex honestly believes what he's saying... and purposefully misconstruing someone else's beliefs into a theoretical dystopia to make it easier to attack.

Terms like "absurd position" and "la la land" are dismissive, at best. It shows you aren't actually open to considering the position and is a common tactic used (mostly by extremes on left AND right) to shout down ideas different than theirs.

It's why I tried to make it about morality, but nobody really wants to listen. WHICH IS FINE.

Like for example, I'm totally against killing people. I think it's completely immoral to end someone's life. And yet, if that happens in the course of defending one's self from harm, I can accept that the alternative to this immoral act was an even larger one. That is NOT the same as saying "If someone wants to kill you, you should let them because killing is immoral". Taxes are the same. I can accept that I am stolen from, and that stolen property could have a net benefit...BUT THAT THEFT IS STILL IMMORAL, and we should work through our government with that in mind. If I am stolen from and that money is used to hurt innocent people, that isn't a fucking policy issue, it's an additional affront to my sovereignty. I'm not saying "no taxes ever for any reason" but rather "Taxes should be absolutely as small as possible, as voluntary as possible, and we should make sure that the damage done is outweighed by the good." 

But you're right, I must secretly want to play fuckin' Lord of The Wasteland, Brought To You by Coca Cola.

[Kaan]

leave sky color out of this... i'm color blind and it hurts my feelings when you talk about colors i cant see.