We already live in an AnCap world

[myrkul]

That percentage of what I would call "tax" is always being debated and changed.  I don't think or have an exact utopian figure but I would prefer something over 10% but under 20% to go towards infrastructure, education, basic health and a standing army.

But is taking, by force, not more than 20% of a person's productivity not slavery? If it is not, why is it not? What quality sets it apart from 21%, or 100%?

I am not saying more than a 21% tax is slavery.  I just don't want to give a blank check to people I don't know personally and have any oversight on where my money goes.

I do not believe a "tax" forced on me is slavery because I believe their are public services that are better handled by a more centralized administration that a private for-profit company.

OK. Would a 100% tax not be slavery, then?

[1714804087]

1714804087

[1714804087]

1714804087

[1714804087]

1714804087

[1714804087]

1714804087

[nevafuse]

This has been talked about before & I agree with it.  But doesn't mean the world can't evolve (or at least some of it).  It takes a while for the potential of new technologies to really shape our political landscape.  The internet has been available to the public for 15-20 years, but you are only recently seeing revolts in Egypt & Syria.  Just imagine 15-20 years from now when more & more people are discovering the benefits of crypto-currencies.  Right now they settle with the current systems because there aren't any good alternatives.  Once new technologies like crypto-currencies make those alternatives available, people will migrate.

[Dalkore]

Slavery is the appropriation of 100% of a person's productivity, is it not?

lrn2freedom

Can you tell me what this means.   Learn 2 Freedom sounds nonsensical. 

[Dalkore]

That percentage of what I would call "tax" is always being debated and changed.  I don't think or have an exact utopian figure but I would prefer something over 10% but under 20% to go towards infrastructure, education, basic health and a standing army.

But is taking, by force, not more than 20% of a person's productivity not slavery? If it is not, why is it not? What quality sets it apart from 21%, or 100%?

I am not saying more than a 21% tax is slavery.  I just don't want to give a blank check to people I don't know personally and have any oversight on where my money goes.

I do not believe a "tax" forced on me is slavery because I believe their are public services that are better handled by a more centralized administration that a private for-profit company.

OK. Would a 100% tax not be slavery, then?

100% tax would "in fact" be slavery being that I would not be in control of any of my productive output. 

[myrkul]

That percentage of what I would call "tax" is always being debated and changed.  I don't think or have an exact utopian figure but I would prefer something over 10% but under 20% to go towards infrastructure, education, basic health and a standing army.

But is taking, by force, not more than 20% of a person's productivity not slavery? If it is not, why is it not? What quality sets it apart from 21%, or 100%?

I am not saying more than a 21% tax is slavery.  I just don't want to give a blank check to people I don't know personally and have any oversight on where my money goes.

I do not believe a "tax" forced on me is slavery because I believe their are public services that are better handled by a more centralized administration that a private for-profit company.

OK. Would a 100% tax not be slavery, then?

100% tax would "in fact" be slavery being that I would not be in control of any of my productive output. 

So then you still have not answered my original question. At what percentage is it not slavery?

[davout]

Slavery is the appropriation of 100% of a person's productivity, is it not?

lrn2freedom

Can you tell me what this means.   Learn 2 Freedom sounds nonsensical. 

It means the only freedom that there is to find is in one's mind.
Real slavery is not appropriation of 100% of one's productivity.

The real slaves are the people who are guided by their ego, their fear, their greed, their addictions, their thoughts and their delusions. Those who expect something else than what is right in front of them, those who fail to realize that everything is already here and that nothing exterior can truly free or enslave them.

Look at the poor myrkul, he's enslaved to his idea of what ancap is, what it should be, what it should look like. He's so attached and married to this idea that he starts wasting his time responding in a thread that has the word "trollitics" in the first line. And now he might be raging a little, because I predicted that after ignoring me quite vocally, he'd go out of his way and click the infamous "show/hide" button, just because he's identified himself so hard to this idea and he wants to know what this stupid frenchman dares to say about it. Myrkul, also the game.

Bottom line : freedom is subjective, it's not a percentage of whatever.

[Dalkore]

Slavery is the appropriation of 100% of a person's productivity, is it not?

lrn2freedom

Can you tell me what this means.   Learn 2 Freedom sounds nonsensical. 

It means the only freedom that there is to find is in one's mind.
Real slavery is not appropriation of 100% of one's productivity.

The real slaves are the people who are guided by their ego, their fear, their greed, their addictions, their thoughts and their delusions. Those who expect something else than what is right in front of them, those who fail to realize that everything is already here and that nothing exterior can truly free or enslave them.

Look at the poor myrkul, he's enslaved to his idea of what ancap is, what it should be, what it should look like. He's so attached and married to this idea that he starts wasting his time responding in a thread that has the word "trollitics" in the first line. And now he might be raging a little, because I predicted that after ignoring me quite vocally, he'd go out of his way and click the infamous "show/hide" button, just because he's identified himself so hard to this idea and he wants to know what this stupid frenchman dares to say about it. Myrkul, also the game.

Bottom line : freedom is subjective, it's not a percentage of whatever.

Yes, freedom of the mind is something only you control, you are responsible for and only you can give away to other ideas.

[Dalkore]

That percentage of what I would call "tax" is always being debated and changed.  I don't think or have an exact utopian figure but I would prefer something over 10% but under 20% to go towards infrastructure, education, basic health and a standing army.

But is taking, by force, not more than 20% of a person's productivity not slavery? If it is not, why is it not? What quality sets it apart from 21%, or 100%?

I am not saying more than a 21% tax is slavery.  I just don't want to give a blank check to people I don't know personally and have any oversight on where my money goes.

I do not believe a "tax" forced on me is slavery because I believe their are public services that are better handled by a more centralized administration that a private for-profit company.

OK. Would a 100% tax not be slavery, then?

100% tax would "in fact" be slavery being that I would not be in control of any of my productive output. 

So then you still have not answered my original question. At what percentage is it not slavery?

Like I said before, there is not an exact number.  You should just take away that I believe their are basic responsibilities that I do not believe some private entity will be a good custodian of, better than a central administration (ie: a government). 

[myrkul]

You should just take away that I believe their are basic responsibilities that I do not believe some private entity will be a good custodian of, better than a central administration (ie: a government). 

Is there any reason that central administration can not be run as a for-profit company, rather than pointing guns at people to get their money?

[FirstAscent]

You should just take away that I believe their are basic responsibilities that I do not believe some private entity will be a good custodian of, better than a central administration (ie: a government). 

Is there any reason that central administration can not be run as a for-profit company, rather than pointing guns at people to get their money?

Not this again. Stop using the state's infrastructure without paying if you don't want a gun pointed at you. Just like sooner or later, if you keep using your landlord's house without paying, you're going to get physically abused.

[Dalkore]

You should just take away that I believe their are basic responsibilities that I do not believe some private entity will be a good custodian of, better than a central administration (ie: a government). 

Is there any reason that central administration can not be run as a for-profit company, rather than pointing guns at people to get their money?

I am not sure where this "pointing guns at people" is referring too, please elaborate?

Now to the question about why not a for-profit company.   Because the incentive is not the same when you are in a job "for profit" than when you in a job "providing a public service not for profit".    To close, I fee their are "services" that I believe are better provided by a
"not for profit" administration than a "for profit" one.   I mention a list in an earlier reply in this thread.

[myrkul]

You should just take away that I believe their are basic responsibilities that I do not believe some private entity will be a good custodian of, better than a central administration (ie: a government). 

Is there any reason that central administration can not be run as a for-profit company, rather than pointing guns at people to get their money?

I am not sure where this "pointing guns at people" is referring too, please elaborate?

Taxation is backed up by force of arms. Do you dispute that?

Now to the question about why not a for-profit company.   Because the incentive is not the same when you are in a job "for profit" than when you in a job "providing a public service not for profit".    To close, I fee their are "services" that I believe are better provided by a
"not for profit" administration than a "for profit" one.   I mention a list in an earlier reply in this thread.

Then, a not-for-profit charity, perhaps?

[Dalkore]

You should just take away that I believe their are basic responsibilities that I do not believe some private entity will be a good custodian of, better than a central administration (ie: a government).  

Is there any reason that central administration can not be run as a for-profit company, rather than pointing guns at people to get their money?

I am not sure where this "pointing guns at people" is referring too, please elaborate?

Taxation is backed up by force of arms. Do you dispute that?

Now to the question about why not a for-profit company.   Because the incentive is not the same when you are in a job "for profit" than when you in a job "providing a public service not for profit".    To close, I fee their are "services" that I believe are better provided by a
"not for profit" administration than a "for profit" one.   I mention a list in an earlier reply in this thread.

Then, a not-for-profit charity, perhaps?

Taxation is backed up by force of arms. Do you dispute that? - No I do not.  Non-compliance will land you in jail and so armed force will come to your place of residence if you do not voluntarily surrender if judgement deemed your incarceration.  (I am not saying this could be the only punishment, just that is the current remedy)

Then, a not-for-profit charity, perhaps?  

Charity Definition - The voluntary giving of help, typically money, to those in need.

Keep the non-profit and change voluntary to mandatory giving of money and you will have what I am advocating for those basic services I feel is not an option for the vast majority of societies.  

[myrkul]

Taxation is backed up by force of arms. Do you dispute that? - No I do not.  Non-compliance will land you in jail and so armed force will come to your place of residence if you do not voluntarily surrender if judgement deemed your incarceration.  (I am not saying this could be the only punishment, just that is the current remedy)

And if the slave didn't work for Master, what happened? The whip. So they get money from people by threatening them with guns, just like the plantation owners got work from the slaves by threatening the whip.

Then, a not-for-profit charity, perhaps?  

Charity Definition - The voluntary giving of help, typically money, to those in need.

Keep the non-profit and change voluntary to mandatory giving of money and you will have what I am advocating for those basic services I feel is not an option for the vast majority of societies.  

You would, then, point a gun at me, to provide yourself with healthcare?

[Dalkore]

Taxation is backed up by force of arms. Do you dispute that? - No I do not.  Non-compliance will land you in jail and so armed force will come to your place of residence if you do not voluntarily surrender if judgement deemed your incarceration.  (I am not saying this could be the only punishment, just that is the current remedy)

And if the slave didn't work for Master, what happened? The whip. So they get money from people by threatening them with guns, just like the plantation owners got work from the slaves by threatening the whip.

Then, a not-for-profit charity, perhaps?  

Charity Definition - The voluntary giving of help, typically money, to those in need.

Keep the non-profit and change voluntary to mandatory giving of money and you will have what I am advocating for those basic services I feel is not an option for the vast majority of societies.  

You would, then, point a gun at me, to provide yourself with healthcare?

Response to 1st line of discussion:  I reject your premise that a government is a Master/Slave relationship & than having things your are required to do in a society is a form of slavery.  Actually, the government has done many positive things for me.  I am not satisfied in many areas but I won't write it off completely either.


Response to 2nd line of discussion:  No I would not point a gun at you for healthcare, but I would also not defend you not paying taxes that were put in place in American through our republic if you lived in America.  If a court found you guilty of tax-evasion and decided that jail-time was the prescription under the law, then if they needed to grab you by force because you would not surrender yourself,  so be it.  Go live somewhere else or start a revolution and see if you get broad support.  If you did the later and was proven correct, I would support the will of the people, and still think they were wrong.

[myrkul]

Response to 1st line of discussion:  I reject your premise that a government is a Master/Slave relationship & than having things your are required to do in a society is a form of slavery. 

Translation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8qcccZy03s

Response to 2nd line of discussion:  No I would not point a gun at you for healthcare...

But that is exactly what you are doing. Worse... you aren't even ballsy enough to do it yourself. You're asking someone else to point a gun at me so you can have healthcare.

[Dalkore]

Response to 1st line of discussion:  I reject your premise that a government is a Master/Slave relationship & than having things your are required to do in a society is a form of slavery.

Translation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8qcccZy03s

Response to 2nd line of discussion:  No I would not point a gun at you for healthcare...

But that is exactly what you are doing. Worse... you aren't even ballsy enough to do it yourself. You're asking someone else to point a gun at me so you can have healthcare.

Ok, there is a difference between our perspective.  Good luck selling AnCap on the people.

Why are you focusing on healthcare so much, that was only one item on the list?   You show your partisan politics pretty heavily.  Its taxation, get over it or don't.   AnCap is a libratarians wet dream, but that is all it is.  Some pieces have promise but as a whole, inadequate.

[myrkul]

Why are you focusing on healthcare so much, that was only one item on the list?

Because it is such a clear benefit. I am not showing "partisan" politics. I'm showing you reality. The reality is that you are asking someone to point a fucking gun in my face and demand my money. If you wouldn't do that yourself, why do you ask someone else to do it?

[Dalkore]

Why are you focusing on healthcare so much, that was only one item on the list?

Because it is such a clear benefit. I am not showing "partisan" politics. I'm showing you reality. The reality is that you are asking someone to point a fucking gun in my face and demand my money. If you wouldn't do that yourself, why do you ask someone else to do it?

Taxation is what you keep referring to.  It is mandatory not voluntary.  I am showing you reality. 


AnCap is a pipe dream with good points but that is all.  Not enough substance to keep a functioning society together.  By functions I mean Law & Order that is fair and just.

[myrkul]

Why are you focusing on healthcare so much, that was only one item on the list?

Because it is such a clear benefit. I am not showing "partisan" politics. I'm showing you reality. The reality is that you are asking someone to point a fucking gun in my face and demand my money. If you wouldn't do that yourself, why do you ask someone else to do it?

Taxation is what you keep referring to.  It is mandatory not voluntary.  I am showing you reality. 

Yes, I have already seen that taxation is not voluntary. That's my problem with it. I see reality. All of it.

AnCap is a pipe dream with good points but that is all.  Not enough substance to keep a functioning society together.  By functions I mean Law & Order that is fair and just.

If the ref is a member of one of the soccer teams, is he going to make fair calls? No? Then why do you give the duty of judging and enforcing law to a monopoly? Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?