Am I a hypocrite for taking unemployment benefits?

[nanaimogold]

Whenever a man accepts the carrots, he sets himself up for the stick.

If you were truly dedicated to being free you would not be seeking "employment" but you would be making your living without tax and social contracts with the state.

It's not easy to get free and stay free. Take heart that you are young and already understanding this when so many men never figure it out in their whole lifetime.

[1713927266]

1713927266

[1713927266]

1713927266

[FreeMoney]

Whenever a man accepts the carrots, he sets himself up for the stick.

If you were truly dedicated to being free you would not be seeking "employment" but you would be making your living without tax and social contracts with the sate.

It's not easy to get free and stay free. Take heart that you are young and already understanding this when so many men never figure it out in their whole lifetime.

So don't take it because you might get hit? What if you've already been hit?

You don't take take a tiny bite? Would you take the whole thing and let it burn without funds?

There is no way this thing is going down all at once. Kill it with millions of small cuts, take from it when you can and resist when you can.

[Anonymous]

Use the funds to buy bitcoins?

 

[chickenado]

How would you say things are setup in your country?

Similar to Canada, unemployment insurance is provided by a quasi-non-governmental insurance company except it's compulsory and heavily regulated.

[chickenado]

If you were truly dedicated to being free you would not be seeking "employment" but you would be making your living without tax and social contracts with the state.

I agree, but to be a successful entrepreneur you need capital, industry experience, and connections.

Most prospective entrepreneurs gain these by being an employee for a few years, in the industry where they want to set up their business.

I personally don't have much of either at the moment, and believe that bootstrapping is too risky.  Employment is the only realistic option in the short term, unfortunately.

[MoonShadow]

How would you say things are setup in your country?

Similar to Canada, unemployment insurance is provided by a quasi-non-governmental insurance company except it's compulsory and heavily regulated.

Then benefits are still benefits of your former employment, only delayed.  It's unfortunate that your former employer was shackled by government regulations, but that was not your doing and they did bend to that will.  It's still your money.

[Cryptoman]

The state will never, ever be reformed through the political process.  The only way to crush the state is to bankrupt it.  Therefore, the more people receiving payments and the fewer paying taxes the better!  You should take the unemployment payments and also have some black-market income on the side.

[FreeMoney]

I realize the question in OP was about unemployment specifically, but please consider my comments to apply to all government handouts.

[MoonShadow]

The state will never, ever be reformed through the political process.  The only way to crush the state is to bankrupt it.  Therefore, the more people receiving payments and the fewer paying taxes the better!  You should take the unemployment payments and also have some black-market income on the side.

I don't know that the only way is to bankrupt it, but historicly speaking, I am aware of no case that a successful substantial reform has occurred without some greater threat beyond the ballot box.  Bloodless revolutions have occurred, but even those carried the implied threat of real actions on the part of the population.  The agorist plan of peaceful reform by undermining the government's source of funding (taxation) by advocating the rise of safe & effective "grey" markets that are difficult to monitor (and therefore tax) is a valid one.  However, I disagree that the end result would likely be the absence of a government structure.  More likely it would result in the replacement of the government structure with a more local, and perhaps less formal, form of government structure.  I agree that the vast majority of people do not need government for any honest purpose, but it is a sad fact that there is a very small minority of the population whose criminal tendancies will always require the response of a collective force.  Whatever form that collective force may take, it will always need to be subject to the collective in some fashion (i.e. regulated by representatives of the people, otherwise called a government) or it will become the government in very short order.  Human nature hates a power vacuum.

To all flavors of anarchists on this forum; be careful what you wish for, lest you get your wish.

[caveden]

The state will never, ever be reformed through the political process.  The only way to crush the state is to bankrupt it.  Therefore, the more people receiving payments and the fewer paying taxes the better!  You should take the unemployment payments and also have some black-market income on the side.

I agree on the premise that we can't expect anything from the political process.

But in your conclusion is complicated. If people just start running away from the state, that'll make it more intrusive and aggressive. Living in the "black market" is always difficult. By black market I mean anything not official, like undeclared labor, ambulant sellers who don't pay taxes etc.
Don't fool yourself to think that a black market is just like a free market. It is not. The simple fact that people have to hide from the state limit them a lot, there are lots of things capitalism can provide that they cannot use because of their hidden condition. Trust becomes much more complicated as you have no means of pursuing some one, at least not in a "civilized" manner. When you can't trust anyone like this, your circle of relations gets much smaller, what limits the benefits of capitalism.
If you ever had the chance of reading the book The Mistery of Capital, you get an idea of what I'm talking. Or, if you grew up in a third world country like me, you probably already know it. My country has something like 40% of the economy in the "dark side", and that doesn't seem to help people, on the contrary... those working on the black market are mostly the poorest.

I hope the internet (and bitcoins ) provide the means to people to escape government and also avoid all the problems unofficial markets have today... let's see.
(also, I hope the seasteading project becomes a reality soon )

[MoonShadow]

But in your conclusion is complicated. If people just start running away from the state, that'll make it more intrusive and aggressive. Living in the "black market" is always difficult. By black market I mean anything not official, like undeclared labor, ambulant sellers who don't pay taxes etc.

Greece has had a large portion of it's economy in the 'dark' for a long time.  It's entirely possible to live entirely off the books if such a lifestyle is relatively common.  It would be hard in the US, however, because there is no functioning and unified dark market that doesn't also increase end user costs due to political/legal risks.  The agorist idea is to develop such a market that can compete with the light markets on an even keel; which has proven difficult even in the age of the Internet, and I'm sure that is part of the attraction of Bitcoin for the agorists among us.  Previously, any such markets were limited to in person transaction involving precious metals; which is an incrediblely ineffecient way to buy groceries.  If the day ever comes that Wal-Mart (or a national competitor) ever starts accepting bitcoins for common neccessities without the need for additional identification (I.E. shoppers discount cards, what did you think they were for, if not to track your cash purchases?) then the agorists will already have won, even though it may take another decade for the system to actually change.

[caveden]

Greece has had a large portion of it's economy in the 'dark' for a long time. 

And for a long time they have been poorer than the western European countries. By the way, most poor countries, if not all, do have a large portion of their economy in the "dark side".

Black markets are not equivalent to free markets. The results aren't the same.
I hope these so called agorists find a way to make them be, but I'm a bit skeptical, at least for the short run. I think most governments will keep growing until their size make their ruled society so miserable that the state's own legitimacy gets threatened. At this moment, they might back off and allow more freedom, because they wouldn't have much other choices.