bitcoin changing my ideology from socialism to libertarianism! What about you?

[jonald_fyookball]

    Either way, land is the source of all wealth, and you and I have next to zero of it.

True.  Because of this, I actually agree with the idea of property taxes.  You will have staunch libertarians
that say property taxes are wrong, but they do solve the problem of people hoarding all the land resources...
which could be a problem in a "pure capitalism" system.  

[practicaldreamer]

No coercion here - or here. Just people taking control of the wealth that was rightfully theirs all along. Call it communism, socialism, anarcho syndicalism etc etc - it doesn't really matter - its the future.

The links you provide don't clarify how decisions are made when their is a disagreement among members in the society. Please provide the consensus method so I can verify no coercion is used.

How is a consensus reached by a jury ? Or would you prefer a panel of "experts", or maybe a judge to sit in judgement ? As has already been stated, sometimes its a case of the lesser of two evils. Democracy isn't perfect - but its got to be worth a try  

[inBitweTrust]

How is a consensus reached by a jury ? Or would you prefer a panel of "experts", or maybe a judge to sit in judgement ? As has already been stated,

Why are you making the assumption I am in support of democratic republics and a trial by Jury? I have clearly indicated I am a Anarcho-Capitalist.

I'll grant you that I would prefer to live in an Anarcho-Communist society above certain countries like North Korea, but I would rather live in a corrupt crony-capatalist society than many anarcho-communist ones as well, if I had to choose ... and apparently you do too... as you likely still are.

sometimes its a case of the lesser of two evils.  Democracy isn't perfect - but its got to be worth a try  

This is a false dichotomy. There are other options that don't involve two wolves and a sheep deciding whats for dinner.

Why didn't you admit that it was the "lesser of two evils" right from the start instead of making the false claim that no coercion was involved?

[inBitweTrust]

    Either way, land is the source of all wealth, and you and I have next to zero of it.

True.  Because of this, I actually agree with the idea of property taxes.  You will have staunch libertarians
that say property taxes are wrong, but they do solve the problem of people hoarding all the land resources...
which could be a problem in a "pure capitalism" system.  

Another solution that many Anarcho-caps suggest without the need of taxes is just not acknowledging permanent ownership of land.
Homesteading is allowed for land which is not developed and land is redistributed after death.(With certain exceptions if the
children can show to take on the responsibility of homesteading)

The NAP is not violated as "you" only temporarily possess rights to land as an extension of your effort(which you own and create).

[jonald_fyookball]

    Either way, land is the source of all wealth, and you and I have next to zero of it.

True.  Because of this, I actually agree with the idea of property taxes.  You will have staunch libertarians
that say property taxes are wrong, but they do solve the problem of people hoarding all the land resources...
which could be a problem in a "pure capitalism" system.  

Another solution that many Anarcho-caps suggest without the need of taxes is just not acknowledging permanent ownership of land.
Homesteading is allowed for land which is not developed and land is redistributed after death.(With certain exceptions if the
children can show to take on the responsibility of homesteading)

The NAP is not violated as "you" only temporarily possess rights to land as an extension of your effort(which you own and create).

interesting.  I think the downside of that would be squatters and a lot of fighting over who can get into old man Johnson's farmhouse
first when he kicks the bucket.

[EFS]

Wow, a lot of trolls in this thread. Time to stop watching it.

[inBitweTrust]

interesting.  I think the downside of that would be squatters and a lot of fighting over who can get into old man Johnson's farmhouse
first when he kicks the bucket.

True, but that dilemma already exists currently.

Additionally, Anarcho-cap societies can have rules and regulations(just no rulers). If everyone agrees to a standard there is no violation of a the NAP.
Each community could have different standards that would be agreed upon 100% before joining with an easy exit clause. Land rights
would be clearly agreed upon before joining a community and if you don't agree there would be hundreds of other choices to select from which matched your values.

[cynicSOB]

heavy taxation and redistribution is not theft

It is theft to me.

Call it what you want -- it involves threats backed by guns and jails and
taking away what someone earned on their own to give it to someone else.

This is socialism... this is what the OP said he changed from.

And why should there be an arbitrary limit if you truly earned your wealth
by providing value to others?

no, that is not socialism, but yes, I think that the OP's change was not for the better.

the problem is how to measure value provided. Thanks to current freedom in markets and economy some soccer players earn millions while some firefighters putting their lifes at risk live from donations. Does this represent our values as a society?
free market capitalism founders say that when we spend money we are voting on what we want, so the most voted things are the best, so the best thrive and everything is optimized. But this is flawed: people are manipulated, and once there's a monopoly you can't really vote, you have to buy from your only provider which will only get shittier and shittier...

John Locke would have said: if a limit is decided by a majority, and the law is imposed on all members regardless of race, sex, whatever instead of imposed on arbitrary members of the society (ie have a rule where the more you have the higher your tax % instead of something like "let's take from Bill Gates and give to ...."), then it's not an arbitrary coercion, it's just part of the social contract.

[inBitweTrust]

Does this represent our values as a society?  

We all agree that society is currently far from optimal. The question is what is a viable alternative?
Have you visited an anarcho-communist or anarcho-socialist commune before?

it's just part of the social contract.

That is imposed upon the unborn with no exit clause. You are right that isn't "arbitrary" at all but systematic and widespread
immorality.

"let's take from Bill Gates and give to ...."

You do realize the primary reason individuals like Bill Gates have amassed such gross sums of wealth is because the state(Which you support either on a local or larger scale) granted these individuals special rights(copyright/patent/trademark) enforced at gunpoint. Such profits would be much more difficult to require without state granted monopolies.

In a free market, there wouldn't need to be a middle man to redistribute this unfairly obtained wealth. In your society you are subsidizing corruption by having a government that can be manipulated and than taxing the public to "fix" this corruption.

[forevernoob]

"We feel free because we lack the very language to articulate our unfreedom"
-Slavoj Zizek, Welcome to the Desert of the Real, 5 essays on 9/11

Sorry my post was kinda ironic. I took a page from your book and made a post based on a funny image and a YouTube video.

It all comes down to this I guess:

Socialism and anarcho-communism: "Property is theft"
Libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism: "Taxation is theft"

I think we all know where you stand. But if you stop and think for awhile, would it be morally right you to take property from someone that doesn't share your views?
And I'm not talking about IP. I am with you on that. But that's not really stealing that's more like copying.

[MadAlpha]

John Locke would have said: if a limit is decided by a majority, and the law is imposed on all members regardless of race, sex, whatever instead of imposed on arbitrary members of the society (ie have a rule where the more you have the higher your tax % instead of something like "let's take from Bill Gates and give to ...."), then it's not an arbitrary coercion, it's just part of the social contract.

How about, instead, we try something simple: I get to keep what I earn, and you get to keep what you earn.

I don't want to be part of this "social contract". How can I opt-out? I don't want to be part of this "redistribution".

[Beliathon]

I think we all know where you stand. But if you stop and think for awhile, would it be morally right you to take property from someone that doesn't share your views?

"taking" implies ownership. One who doesn't believe in property rights doesn't concern himself with "taking" or "owning". Only "using" and "surviving".

[inBitweTrust]

I think we all know where you stand. But if you stop and think for awhile, would it be morally right you to take property from someone that doesn't share your views?

"taking" implies ownership. One who doesn't believe in property rights doesn't concern himself with "taking" or "owning". Only "using" and "surviving".

What is your address? I would love to invite all your neighbors to come over and "borrow" your possessions. Sorry, for the cheap shot... I understand you would only be kosher with
this if it was reciprocal..... so why not join an anarcho-communist society where you can all share everything?

The "Ship" has been throwing you a rope to climb on board and for some strange reason you are ignoring it. 

[Beliathon]

so why not join an anarcho-communist society where you can all share everything?

"Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."
-Eugene Debs

You can't change the system from outside the system. I'm doing good work here, in the belly of the beast. What, did you think posting on this forum is all I do for humanity? You make too many assumptions.

[practicaldreamer]

and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."

You are a probation worker  ?

[inBitweTrust]

You can't change the system from outside the system. I'm doing good work here, in the belly of the beast. What, did you think posting on this forum is all I do for humanity? You make too many assumptions.

Aha.... so it has been about tactics all along? Very noble of you to wallow in this "capitalist stench" with the rest of us in order to save a few of the mislead kindred, sir.
I may suggest that I believe many of us misguided folks would be better convinced if we actually witnessed an anarcho-communist community flourishing with a better quality of life.

I have an unusual proclivity to rely on evidence in guiding my decisions. So far, I see examples of anarcho-collectivist communities unmolested by state taxes and even subsidized by surrounding capitalist communities with lower standards of living. See you have to understand our lot, us capitalists are selfishly motivated, and have no shame in being converted by any communist utopia if the result was a happier and more prosperous condition.

Perhaps you have some special knowledge to correct their community?

Just a suggestion to understand what would motivate us . Take it or leave it.

[Westin Landon Cox]

I think I'm done here gentlemen. I'm fairly confident that any intelligent reader can draw their own conclusions by now, based on the arguments presented by both sides.

Good day, enjoy your thread. You are now liberated from the tyranny of evidence-based reasoned debate. Have fun circlejerking each other to Ayn Rand porn.

I wish Beliathon would come back and repeat "economic fundamentalist" a few more times.

[cynicSOB]

John Locke would have said: if a limit is decided by a majority, and the law is imposed on all members regardless of race, sex, whatever instead of imposed on arbitrary members of the society (ie have a rule where the more you have the higher your tax % instead of something like "let's take from Bill Gates and give to ...."), then it's not an arbitrary coercion, it's just part of the social contract.

How about, instead, we try something simple: I get to keep what I earn, and you get to keep what you earn.

I don't want to be part of this "social contract". How can I opt-out? I don't want to be part of this "redistribution".

ok, you can leave, don't pay taxes, but don't use anything provided by the government: public education, health, etc. Otherwise you'd be taking from others, stealing.

[inBitweTrust]

ok, you can leave, don't pay taxes, but don't use anything provided by the government: public education, health, etc. Otherwise you'd be taking from others, stealing.

Plenty of examples of people doing this. Anarcho-caps are routinely kidnapped, tortured, and killed by either the state they left or the new state they moved to.
Your "social contract" doesn't have an opt out clause, unless it means you have to opt into and bribe another state with a similar "social contract".

An interesting question I pose to you :

Why do certain states(like the USA) allow anarcho-communist communities the ability to opt out of the financial responsibility side of this social contract?

[cynicSOB]

You do realize the primary reason individuals like Bill Gates have amassed such gross sums of wealth is because the state(Which you support either on a local or larger scale) granted these individuals special rights(copyright/patent/trademark) enforced at gunpoint. Such profits would be much more difficult to require without state granted monopolies.

In a free market, there wouldn't need to be a middle man to redistribute this unfairly obtained wealth. In your society you are subsidizing corruption by having a government that can be manipulated and than taxing the public to "fix" this corruption.

what was first, the egg or the chicken? the state enforces at gunpoint what the rich bankers tell them to.

Free markets eventually lead to concentration of wealth and monopolies.