Without government, would there actually be more theft from the rich?

[Elwar]

Right now the government steals a lot from the rich, steals a lot from the middle class...they're just really good at stealing people's money.

But, without government, wouldn't mobs of people steal more? Sure people can come up with their own private security forces but there are a lot of people in this world. If the "majority" wants your money...they'll take it. Sure they might go after easier targets first but eventually they'll go after everyone.

Does the government play a useful role in appeasing folks by stealing for them at a predictable pace?

I'm not saying it's right, just talking about the reality of it.

[1715392514]

1715392514

[1715392514]

1715392514

[1Referee]

No mather how much we tend to dislike governments, they do indeed play a useful role in providing security. It's for all people. The world would be a huge chaos. With governments there is 1 authority. If there weren't any governments, plenty of groups or people would then try to force themself into the authority role. Mostly not in a good way.

[n2004al]

Right now the government steals a lot from the rich, steals a lot from the middle class...they're just really good at stealing people's money.

But, without government, wouldn't mobs of people steal more? Sure people can come up with their own private security forces but there are a lot of people in this world. If the "majority" wants your money...they'll take it. Sure they might go after easier targets first but eventually they'll go after everyone.

Does the government play a useful role in appeasing folks by stealing for them at a predictable pace?

I'm not saying it's right, just talking about the reality of it.

I cannot catch your aim with this post because go from one supposition to another. Normally can be made one supposition and discuss about that. There are to many the situations than can be created based at only such. If are two it is very hard to discuss. If are more it is impossible because needed year to give all that can be told.

Anyhow I am doing only a simple comment. Pretend to make in discussion the existence of the Government in one country it is more than a stupidity. Think that the people can be self organised to protect himself like this can be the only duty of an Government is a totally ignorance about the role of Government in a society and in a country. But even if so where it will be the difference between the Government which must not exist (because steal everyone and feed or use with the stolen money only the Members of Government) and the other elected part (after the disappearance of the thief Government) which will protect the other part of people (I am not going here to comment the supposition that the majority of the world population are thieves)? Both are elected from the people. Why the new ones must be better that the old ones? Why the new ones cannot enter at the thief Government and clean it? So create another Government not thief? It is much more easy to be realized this than the disappearance of the institution of Government and the creation of the new "thing" without name which must protect the people from the thieves.

All this above is written supposing that the Government is created only to steal the money from its people. Is only this the reason which is taken in consideration from OP in discussing the existence or not of an Government.

[Razick]

Absolutely. That's why anarchy doesn't work, because where there is an absence of power, someone will fill it. If there is no government, someone will create government.

The only way around this is probably very close, heavily armed communities that invest heavily in defense, but then again, that's basically a small government.

Government is a necessary evil.

[NorrisK]

Theft from the rich would probably not matter anymore as none of the structure we know right now would be into place.

Power shifts to people who are organized, have weapons and other high demand goods such as petrol, sigarettes and food.

Rich would completely be redifined and all money you have on your banks would be worthless in an instant.

[abs350]

Very stupid thread

There will always need to be a government. Otherwise someone like Putin can just come and rob everyone.

Also the government now steals from the poor and gives to the rich  more than it steals from the rich

[afbitcoins]

An interesting topic I think.

Without government, would there actually be more theft from the rich?

Just sort of letting my thoughts wander but I tend to think the rich would be unaffected by there being a government or not. At the moment the rich pretty much control governments and banking and use this power to consolidate and accumulate yet more and more wealth. We are living in a world where the rich are the only ones seeing their wealth increasing this is because they have it designed that way. If they don't use a government for this in the future it will probably because they have some even more sinister method planned to replace it.

The real question is how to stop this situation and make a more fair world? Perhaps bitcoin takes us in the right direction by taking power away from banks.

[diegz]

without a government, its like we are back in the old age where barbarians fight each other and steal the properties of those they conquer. people will live in factions and the stronger one will prevail and then samething happens over and over.

But with government, all those stealing is like an organized crime, systematically executed by government leaders. 

[The Sceptical Chymist]

No mather how much we tend to dislike governments, they do indeed play a useful role in providing security. It's for all people. The world would be a huge chaos. With governments there is 1 authority. If there weren't any governments, plenty of groups or people would then try to force themself into the authority role. Mostly not in a good way.

Yep you got that right.  With no rule of law, all would be anarchy and as much as I detest some of the foul things my gov't does, it's better than the alternative.  It'd be like the Walking Dead and eventually we'd end up with a government anyway.

[Beliathon]

Right now the government steals a lot from the rich, steals a lot from the middle class...they're just really good at stealing people's money.

But, without government, wouldn't mobs of people steal more? Sure people can come up with their own private security forces but there are a lot of people in this world. If the "majority" wants your money...they'll take it. Sure they might go after easier targets first but eventually they'll go after everyone.

Does the government play a useful role in appeasing folks by stealing for them at a predictable pace?

I'm not saying it's right, just talking about the reality of it.

8 million people in NYC, most of them working poor. Without the police, the rich manhattan dbags would be torn limb from limb pretty quickly I imagine.

Except that they'd just hire some of the poor to kill the others. So it'd be yet another bloodbath with a bunch of dead poor.

Capitalism has to go, it's the only way to move forward beyond poor killing poor for benefit of rich.

[Elwar]

Right now the government steals a lot from the rich, steals a lot from the middle class...they're just really good at stealing people's money.

But, without government, wouldn't mobs of people steal more? Sure people can come up with their own private security forces but there are a lot of people in this world. If the "majority" wants your money...they'll take it. Sure they might go after easier targets first but eventually they'll go after everyone.

Does the government play a useful role in appeasing folks by stealing for them at a predictable pace?

I'm not saying it's right, just talking about the reality of it.

8 million people in NYC, most of them working poor. Without the police, the rich manhattan dbags would be torn limb from limb pretty quickly I imagine.

Except that they'd just hire some of the poor to kill the others. So it'd be yet another bloodbath with a bunch of dead poor.

Capitalism has to go, it's the only way to move forward beyond poor killing poor for benefit of rich.

Governments already hire the poor to kill other poor people. It's called the military. It would be no different without government.

[BADecker]

As long as one person is alive, there will be government and religion... even if it is self-government.

The point that we need to be aiming for is for each of us, individually, to be self-governing, even though we have a shell of a formal government around us. Make the formal government obey you regarding your personal life and rights.

The lands of America, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and India have this built right into their formal governments. But, most of the people don't know it or how to use and do it.

[Snail2]

Governments used to bring some order into theft, so they are absolutely necessary. Otherwise everyone would erratically steal from everyone else instead of doing that in a nice coherent and orderly way what is good for the society and the economy as well. That's why governments used to punish their randomly occurring amateur competitors, but never or rarely punish professional players like themselves, institutions or corporations.

[afbitcoins]

I take it you are joking about governments being good for the economy!  

--

Capitalism has to go?! But but... what? We don't have capitalism, we have too big to fails who are draining the life from the economy via bailouts when they should have f***ng failed  

That is not capitalism. We have central banks controlling rates and markets. That is not capitalism. Capitalism was got rid of ages ago.

We'd have money that is not based on debt so you could save your capital and have some stability in its value.

Capitalism is dead.

[iCeSaiah]

Yap. but in my country, the supplier like the oil companies are the ones dictating the price and the government just agree with it even the goods. The government doesn't provide enough resource and they spend lots on the roads.

 Its near election now and the most politicians in our country spend millions on campaign than the actual humanitarian work they are advertising.

I guess this means that you can spend millions on ads and your money would be reimbursed after win.

[bitsmichel]

Right now the government steals a lot from the rich, steals a lot from the middle class...they're just really good at stealing people's money.

But, without government, wouldn't mobs of people steal more? Sure people can come up with their own private security forces but there are a lot of people in this world. If the "majority" wants your money...they'll take it. Sure they might go after easier targets first but eventually they'll go after everyone.

Does the government play a useful role in appeasing folks by stealing for them at a predictable pace?

I'm not saying it's right, just talking about the reality of it.

If you are rich, people are coming for your money. Government, activists, thieves, friends, colleagues

[saddampbuh]

"more" theft from the rich implying there is already some theft from them now. poor worker creates wealth, rich shareholder takes most of it from him, government takes a sliver of that wealth back from rich shareholder to give poor worker housing and food stamps so he wont die and you call that theft?

without government there would be genuine survival of the fittest and no police and army to protect those fat jew pussies in their skyscrapers and gated communities. 

[Eric Mu]

Modern government's last defence for itself is that it is necessary evil.
It maintains order and keep the poor from starving, it says.
But if you have faith in humanity and that one day that people would evolve to be so socially aware that they can contain their tendency to hurt others, then you know it is a certainty that government will go.
The mob is just manifestation of our greediness.
Greediness is a symptom of lack of social awareness.

[Elwar]

"more" theft from the rich implying there is already some theft from them now. poor worker creates wealth, rich shareholder takes most of it from him, government takes a sliver of that wealth back from rich shareholder to give poor worker housing and food stamps so he wont die and you call that theft?

without government there would be genuine survival of the fittest and no police and army to protect those fat jew pussies in their skyscrapers and gated communities. 

Does this happen voluntarily or does the rich shareholder threaten to kidnap the poor worker if they do not hand over their wealth?

[saddampbuh]

Does this happen voluntarily or does the rich shareholder threaten to kidnap the poor worker if they do not hand over their wealth?

poverty wage supplemented with food stamps vs destitution, some choice

to the capitalist exploiter taxes for stuff like police and prison service that protects him is not theft but laws that protect workers by making sure they earn the bare minimum they need to pay their rent and eat is theft