Taxation [discussion]

[WiW]

It's not about bluffing them, it's about cooperating instead of fighting.
Sure we could fight, but do we really want a war?

If USA and Russia shared your opinion, we would have a nuclear wasteland right now.

Again, cooperating means taxing by force. I understand you love this monopoly on money which supports the monopoly on violence. But when we're talking about a system that allows you to escape that (bitcoin), you're making a pretty weak argument (let others make decisions with your money). The government can and WILL try to choke bitcoin, but of the two I'm pretty sure math will win gunpowder.

All wars are funded by taxes. Every single one. So please don't go talking about nuclear wastelands.

[1714773500]

1714773500

[1714773500]

1714773500

[1714773500]

1714773500

[1714773500]

1714773500

[Birdy]

It's not about bluffing them, it's about cooperating instead of fighting.
Sure we could fight, but do we really want a war?

If USA and Russia shared your opinion, we would have a nuclear wasteland right now.

Again, cooperating means taxing by force. I understand you love this monopoly on money which supports the monopoly on violence. But when we're talking about a system that allows you to escape that (bitcoin), you're making a pretty weak argument (let others make decisions with your money). The government can and WILL try to choke bitcoin, but of the two I'm pretty sure math will win gunpowder.

All wars are funded by taxes. Every single one. So please don't go talking about nuclear wastelands.

It's so easy to just put all the fault on the evil states.

I'm not a supporter of states per se, but I cannot see anarchy doing a good job for humanity.

[WiW]

It's so easy to just put all the fault on the evil states.

I'm not a supporter of states per se, but I cannot see anarchy doing a good job for humanity.

So what are you gonna do about it? Force me to live under democracy? Sounds like a better job for humanity.

Ladies and gentlemen: Rationale no. 1 for coercion and use of force.
"You don't want my rules? You don't know what's good for you. I will force rules on you to make this world better for you!"

[WiW]

Ultimately it's a very simple concept. Either you:
1) Decide what's good for others, and forcefully apply such life on them (violence)
2) Don't (non violence)

I prefer to never pick 1. You're saying "Well, 2 will never work so let's pick 1", or in other words "Well, good will never work so let's pick evil."

If you're gonna pick evil, you better have a REALLY GOOD excuse for it, or else I'm gonna put you in the same basket along with warmongers and violent criminals. The onus of proof is on you. Prove to me that the violence you're applying is less than would otherwise occur and you'll be off the hook. Meanwhile, I'll be sitting here not applying violence on anyone.

[Birdy]

It's so easy to just put all the fault on the evil states.

I'm not a supporter of states per se, but I cannot see anarchy doing a good job for humanity.

So what are you gonna do about it? Force me to live under democracy? Sounds like a better job for humanity.

Ladies and gentlemen: Rationale no. 1 for coercion and use of force.
"You don't want my rules? You don't know what's good for you. I will force rules on you to make this world better for you!"

Present a concept that will not do this and will not end up in chaos.
Total freedom may seem like a good thing, but it's illusionary.
If you want to do something that's an adavantage for you, but an disadvantage for the other one, the stronger one will win.
That's not freedom at all, if you think about it.

[tuliplover]

Ultimately it's a very simple concept. Either you:
1) Decide what's good for others, and forcefully apply such life on them (violence)
2) Don't (non violence)

I prefer to never pick 1. You're saying "Well, 2 will never work so let's pick 1", or in other words "Well, good will never work so let's pick evil."

Except that statists think that forcing others to do something can be a good thing. And resisting that is bad.
They just want to make the world a better place, but you always get in the way. Maybe we should put you in a cage,
that would teach you how to behave.

[WiW]

It's so easy to just put all the fault on the evil states.

I'm not a supporter of states per se, but I cannot see anarchy doing a good job for humanity.

So what are you gonna do about it? Force me to live under democracy? Sounds like a better job for humanity.

Ladies and gentlemen: Rationale no. 1 for coercion and use of force.
"You don't want my rules? You don't know what's good for you. I will force rules on you to make this world better for you!"

Present a concept that will not do this and will not end up in chaos.
Total freedom may seem like a good thing, but it's illusionary.
If you want to do something that's an adavantage for you, but an disadvantage for the other one, the stronger one will win.
That's not freedom at all, if you think about it.

I don't believe in total freedom. I believe that a person can either be violent or non violent. If someone wants to make a decision to be violent in order to prevent more violence in the future, they are being violent. I simply wish to not be violent and I will resist any attempt of violence by others. You now fall under the category of violent people.

[Birdy]

I don't believe in total freedom. I believe that a person can either be violent or non violent. If someone wants to make a decision to be violent in order to prevent more violence in the future, they are being violent. I simply wish to not be violent and I will resist any attempt of violence by others. You now fall under the category of violent people.

The world is not black and white.

If someone wants to make a decision to be violent in order to prevent more violence in the future

If I knew for certain it would do this, yes I would. But it's really easy to just think that you would know this, so I really do dislike the option.

But I appreciate that you want to be non-violent at all costs.

[Wilikon]

And those who don't agree with your idea of public education, should be put in a cage, right?

You have to pay for public education right now.

So you want Bitcoin to be a model to flee from this?
Public education was an important step for mankind, if you want to go back to the days where 90% of the people didn't had any school.
Then yeah... then I think you are stupid.

I came here to find smart people and here we go again. Calling names etc is not too smart, but you would not know any better...

[WiW]

The world is not black and white.

Exactly. Considering how unclear the situation is, the decision to be violent to prevent more violence sounds like a bad idea to me. It's like saying "I don't know if I will cause more or less violence but I'm gonna be violent any way, fuck it..."

[Hawker]

It's so easy to just put all the fault on the evil states.

I'm not a supporter of states per se, but I cannot see anarchy doing a good job for humanity.

So what are you gonna do about it? Force me to live under democracy? Sounds like a better job for humanity.

Ladies and gentlemen: Rationale no. 1 for coercion and use of force.
"You don't want my rules? You don't know what's good for you. I will force rules on you to make this world better for you!"

States existed before your grandparents were born and will continue to exist long after your grandchildren have passed away.  Surely you are better off debating how you want to have the state run?

[Come-from-Beyond]

States existed before your grandparents were born and will continue to exist long after your grandchildren have passed away.

Are. You. Sure?

[Birdy]

I came here to find smart people and here we go again. Calling names etc is not too smart, but you would not know any better...

Yes, tell me more about this, please.
I think I got the bigger share of insults heading towards me.

Hey Birdy buddy, you sound dumb.[...]  But you're dumb, about as dumb as a monkey.

and it produces unthinking robots (like you) who are easily manipulated.

[Hawker]

States existed before your grandparents were born and will continue to exist long after your grandchildren have passed away.

Are. You. Sure?

OK - you got me - I assumed he would have grandchildren.  

States have existed for 100s of years and will exist in 100s of years time if humanity is still around.

[franky1]

when most governments are selling public services such as healthcare, emergency services (police/fire/etc) to private companies, there becomes less and less need for taxes.. NOT MORE.

[hiltonizer]

States have destroyed free and stateless societies for 100s of years and will continue to do so fpr 100s of years time if we allow it.

ftfy.

[Hawker]

when most governments are selling public services such as healthcare, emergency services (police/fire/etc) to private companies, there becomes less and less need for taxes.. NOT MORE.

Taxation for public services is the cheapest way of financing them.  Look at the US health system for an example of what happens when you have to create huge bureaucratic billing systems and compare it to the NHS.

[Hawker]

States have destroyed free and stateless societies for 100s of years and will continue to do so fpr 100s of years time if we allow it.

ftfy.

Um - http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf

Read it.  Stateless societies have existed and were indeed destroyed by states.  My country, Ireland, was one of them. The important thing is to understand why it was inevitable and why they won't be coming back.

[hiltonizer]

States have destroyed free and stateless societies for 100s of years and will continue to do so fpr 100s of years time if we allow it.

ftfy.

Um - http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf

Read it.  Stateless societies have existed and were indeed destroyed by states.  My country, Ireland, was one of them. The important thing is to understand why it was inevitable and why they won't be coming back.

Care to make a concise point rather than simply link to the work of another?

I personally believe in a minarchist state rather than anarchy/anaracho capitalism, but even while being a state I don't believe a night watchman state has to violate the NAP.

[Hawker]

States have destroyed free and stateless societies for 100s of years and will continue to do so fpr 100s of years time if we allow it.

ftfy.

Um - http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf

Read it.  Stateless societies have existed and were indeed destroyed by states.  My country, Ireland, was one of them. The important thing is to understand why it was inevitable and why they won't be coming back.

Care to make a concise point rather than simply link to the work of another?

I personally believe in a minarchist state rather than anarchy/anaracho capitalism, but even while being a state I don't believe a night watchman state has to violate the NAP.

If you believe that collecting taxes can be done without violating the NAP, then thats fine.