Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2017, 12:29:30 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Would you pay taxes if you could live off bitcoins?
Yes, even w/o risks - 35 (38.5%)
Depends on the risks - 22 (24.2%)
No, even w/ risks - 34 (37.4%)
Total Voters: 91

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [All]
  Print  
Author Topic: Would you pay taxes if you could live off bitcoins?  (Read 11023 times)
nevafuse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 248


View Profile
July 06, 2012, 03:15:40 PM
 #1

I'm curious if you pay taxes because you are forced to or because you believe in the benefits it provides.  Also, I think this would be the first huge decision people would have to make if bitcoins became popular enough.  It would decide the fate of the government as we know it.

The only reason to limit the block size is to subsidize non-Bitcoin currencies
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1512995370
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1512995370

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1512995370
Reply with quote  #2

1512995370
Report to moderator
1512995370
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1512995370

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1512995370
Reply with quote  #2

1512995370
Report to moderator
1512995370
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1512995370

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1512995370
Reply with quote  #2

1512995370
Report to moderator
niko
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742


There is more to Bitcoin than bitcoins.


View Profile
July 06, 2012, 03:17:53 PM
 #2

Or if you could live off of cash

They're there, in their room.
Your mining rig is on fire, yet you're very calm.
bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
July 06, 2012, 03:20:45 PM
 #3

Option 3 for me.

Taxes are a fraud just like government !
bitdragon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 610


peace


View Profile WWW
July 06, 2012, 03:32:36 PM
 #4

no, I would not.
I consider Bitcoins to provide Capital gains and those is not taxed where I live.
Still need to finalise that though Smiley

nevafuse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 248


View Profile
July 06, 2012, 03:54:01 PM
 #5

Or if you could live off of cash

And if cash had the benefits of bitcoins, I don't think we'd be having this discussion right now.  Cash is risky & worth paying taxes to avoid.  Bitcoins aren't riskless, but IMO are less risky than cash.  I could see large businesses switching over to using bitcoins in the future to save on financial fees.  Then it's only a matter of time until they start understating their income.

The only reason to limit the block size is to subsidize non-Bitcoin currencies
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 06, 2012, 04:47:49 PM
 #6

Option 3 for me.

Taxes are a fraud just like government !

Not where I live.  If you happen to live in a place that can't run its public services efficiently, you have my sympathy.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
bitdragon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 610


peace


View Profile WWW
July 06, 2012, 04:52:41 PM
 #7

Option 3 for me.

Taxes are a fraud just like government !

Not where I live.  If you happen to live in a place that can't run its public services efficiently, you have my sympathy.

May I ask where that is you live? 

bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
July 06, 2012, 05:04:30 PM
 #8

Option 3 for me.

Taxes are a fraud just like government !

Not where I live.  If you happen to live in a place that can't run its public services efficiently, you have my sympathy.

May I ask where that is you live? 

UK just like me. I live in London.

Potholes everywhere, MP expenses scandal, huge useless incompetent army, crappy NHS healthcare ... it sucks.

EhVedadoOAnonimato
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616



View Profile
July 06, 2012, 05:17:01 PM
 #9

I would definitely not want to give my money to thieves, but it's not always as simple as an option.

Even with bitcoin only revenues, if you simply don't declare any income above the exemption threshold, that might look suspicious.
How would you buy anything significant, for example a house, if practically all your savings are undeclared? Perhaps via debt that would be possible but then you'd need to declare some income compatible with the debt you're paying.
Also, if you're just an employee and your employer declares everything he pays you, then being it in bitcoin, cash or whatever it doesn't matter, the taxman will get you.

Anyways, I answered with "depends on the risks".
sadpandatech
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
July 06, 2012, 05:19:27 PM
 #10

Depends on which taxes you are refering to. Taxes that support the infrastructure that I use to live the modern life I choose, then yes. All that federal crap can eat it...

If you're not excited by the idea of being an early adopter 'now', then you should come back in three or four years and either tell us "Told you it'd never work!" or join what should, by then, be a much more stable and easier-to-use system. - GA
It is being worked on by smart people. -DamienBlack
niko
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742


There is more to Bitcoin than bitcoins.


View Profile
July 06, 2012, 05:27:53 PM
 #11

I voted "yes" - but that assumes a reasonably functioning goverment that mostly represents the interest of the people, provides social care to those who need it, and keeps for-profit businesses out of air, water, and basic healthcare business. Don't laugh.

They're there, in their room.
Your mining rig is on fire, yet you're very calm.
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 06, 2012, 05:32:02 PM
 #12

Option 3 for me.

Taxes are a fraud just like government !

Not where I live.  If you happen to live in a place that can't run its public services efficiently, you have my sympathy.

I also chose option three. If it can run efficiently, it can run as a for-profit, and doesn't need to force people to pay.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
nevafuse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 248


View Profile
July 06, 2012, 05:37:51 PM
 #13

I would definitely not want to give my money to thieves, but it's not always as simple as an option.

Even with bitcoin only revenues, if you simply don't declare any income above the exemption threshold, that might look suspicious.
How would you buy anything significant, for example a house, if practically all your savings are undeclared? Perhaps via debt that would be possible but then you'd need to declare some income compatible with the debt you're paying.
Also, if you're just an employee an your employer declares everything he pays you, then being it in bitcoin, cash or whatever it doesn't matter, the taxman will get you.

Anyways, I answered with "depends on the risks".

You definitely bring up a lot of good points.  There are already a ton of people that understate their income (think people in the service industry).  But I doubt the IRS cares much about them anyways because they don't really make that much to begin with.  It would definitely be more difficult for the middle class because they are the ones making larger purchases that could come up on the IRS radar.  It'll probably be very gradual - kinda like bittorrent.  A couple people get caught & fined in the beginning, but eventually there are so many people doing it, it is pointless to go after individuals.  Also that lack of revenue is going to start affecting the IRS budget, forcing them to downsize, making it even more difficult to catch people.  Once it gets to a certain level, larger transactions like houses will be a drop in the bucket compared to large corporations understating billions.  But I can only hope & dream.

Depends on which taxes you are refering to. Taxes that support the infrastructure that I use to live the modern life I choose, then yes. All that federal crap can eat it...

If I could allocate my tax dollars, bitcoin won't seem near as revolutionizing.

I voted "yes" - but that assumes a reasonably functioning goverment that mostly represents the interest of the people, provides social care to those who need it, and keeps for-profit businesses out of air, water, and basic healthcare business. Don't laugh.

I'd consider paying taxes too if it worked that way.  But it doesn't.  And continuing to support it by paying your taxes is only going to keep the status quo.

The only reason to limit the block size is to subsidize non-Bitcoin currencies
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 06, 2012, 07:07:28 PM
 #14

Option 3 for me.

Taxes are a fraud just like government !

Not where I live.  If you happen to live in a place that can't run its public services efficiently, you have my sympathy.

May I ask where that is you live?

UK just like me. I live in London.

Potholes everywhere, MP expenses scandal, huge useless incompetent army, crappy NHS healthcare ... it sucks.



Crappy NHS healthcare in a city with some of the best private hospitals in the world?  Go private and be happy!  Its far cheaper to go private in the UK that it is in the US.


.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
ribuck
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


View Profile
July 06, 2012, 07:54:57 PM
 #15

Crappy NHS healthcare in a city with some of the best private hospitals in the world?  Go private and be happy!
Most people are reluctant to pay twice for healthcare. When you're already paying for the NHS through tax, it's no so easy to pay for it privately too.

Although stories like this make me consider private healthcare:

"A desperate hospital patient who died of  thirst after he was denied vital medication rang police and begged them to bring  him a drink, an inquest heard today ... he became so delirious he was forced to  call 999 to ask for help ... Officers raced to St George’s Hospital in Tooting, south London, but were turned away by staff who insisted Mr Gorny was  fine, Westminster Coroner’s Court heard."
http://updatednews.ca/2012/07/02/hospital-patient-22-died-of-thirst/
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 06, 2012, 07:59:26 PM
 #16

Crappy NHS healthcare in a city with some of the best private hospitals in the world?  Go private and be happy!
Most people are reluctant to pay twice for healthcare. When you're already paying for the NHS through tax, it's no so easy to pay for it privately too.

Although stories like this make me consider private healthcare:

"A desperate hospital patient who died of  thirst after he was denied vital medication rang police and begged them to bring  him a drink, an inquest heard today ... he became so delirious he was forced to  call 999 to ask for help ... Officers raced to St George’s Hospital in Tooting, south London, but were turned away by staff who insisted Mr Gorny was  fine, Westminster Coroner’s Court heard."
http://updatednews.ca/2012/07/02/hospital-patient-22-died-of-thirst/

Even with the tax paid, its cheaper to go private in the UK than the US.  You can get a very good scheme for less than £100 per month.

The big issue is quality - for most operations the NHS is actually better.  When my first child was due, my wife had complications and the doctor advised us to use the Royal Berks hospital rather than BUPA Dunedin because they handle 150 births a week and are better for difficult births.  On the other hand, in BUPA Dunedin, you could get a private room so it wasn't a complete waste of money.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 06, 2012, 08:03:35 PM
 #17

F*** NO!

I barely do now!
ThiagoCMC
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190

฿itcoin: Currency of Resistance!


View Profile
July 06, 2012, 08:07:58 PM
 #18

NO!
RodeoX
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2464


The revolution will be monetized!


View Profile
July 06, 2012, 08:09:24 PM
 #19

I would pay capitol gains on appreciation, but only if I can claim losses.  I would not pay "income" tax on bitcoin however.

The gospel according to Satoshi - https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

Free bitcoin in ICELAND - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1610684
Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 02:12:05 PM
 #20

I too would pay taxes. I think taxation is necessary one way or another, I only question the amount needed to be taxed.
This.

The NHS is one of the examples where public provision of a service through forced taxation is a necessary evil. 

cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 02:55:05 PM
 #21

I too would pay taxes. I think taxation is necessary one way or another, I only question the amount needed to be taxed.
This.

The NHS is one of the examples where public provision of a service through forced taxation is a necessary evil. 

There is no such thing as a "necessary evil"..unless you're evil.
Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 03:10:25 PM
 #22

I too would pay taxes. I think taxation is necessary one way or another, I only question the amount needed to be taxed.
This.

The NHS is one of the examples where public provision of a service through forced taxation is a necessary evil. 

There is no such thing as a "necessary evil"..unless you're evil.
Sadly, is this world, you often have to pick the lesser of two evils.

If forcing people to pay tax prevents a greater evil then so be it.

cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 03:46:45 PM
 #23

I too would pay taxes. I think taxation is necessary one way or another, I only question the amount needed to be taxed.
This.

The NHS is one of the examples where public provision of a service through forced taxation is a necessary evil. 

There is no such thing as a "necessary evil"..unless you're evil.
Sadly, is this world, you often have to pick the lesser of two evils.

If forcing people to pay tax prevents a greater evil then so be it.

No, you don't. In this world or any other. What you said is called a "cop-out"

Furthermore, people like you pose a problem for me that transcends me being able to tolerate you. You are attempting to oppress me through the state. I don't want the healthcare that you seem determined to rob people to fund, and I don't like you pointing a gun at my head telling me I have to "pay or else".

The alternative is to pay for your own goddam healthcare. If its too expensive, its your own fucking fault for allowing the government to subsidize healthcare at all in the first place. Government subsidies raise the price, free market competition lowers it - how hard is that to understand?!?

BlackBison
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 253



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 04:05:45 PM
 #24

Option 3 for me.

Taxes are a fraud just like government !

Not where I live.  If you happen to live in a place that can't run its public services efficiently, you have my sympathy.

May I ask where that is you live?

UK just like me. I live in London.

Potholes everywhere, MP expenses scandal, huge useless incompetent army, crappy NHS healthcare ... it sucks.



Crappy NHS healthcare in a city with some of the best private hospitals in the world?  Go private and be happy!  Its far cheaper to go private in the UK that it is in the US.



Well that guy is so desperate for money he wouldn't return $100 worth of btc to someone who overpaid him by accident, so I don't think his broke ass will be affording private medical care any time soon.

Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 04:29:40 PM
 #25

I too would pay taxes. I think taxation is necessary one way or another, I only question the amount needed to be taxed.
This.

The NHS is one of the examples where public provision of a service through forced taxation is a necessary evil. 

There is no such thing as a "necessary evil"..unless you're evil.
Sadly, is this world, you often have to pick the lesser of two evils.

If forcing people to pay tax prevents a greater evil then so be it.

No, you don't. In this world or any other. What you said is called a "cop-out"

Furthermore, people like you pose a problem for me that transcends me being able to tolerate you. You are attempting to oppress me through the state. I don't want the healthcare that you seem determined to rob people to fund, and I don't like you pointing a gun at my head telling me I have to "pay or else".

The alternative is to pay for your own goddam healthcare. If its too expensive, its your own fucking fault for allowing the government to subsidize healthcare at all in the first place. Government subsidies raise the price, free market competition lowers it - how hard is that to understand?!?
I do pay for my own healthcare - through taxes.

Free market competition in health care only works for those that can afford it.

In your ideal society, what happens to the people that can't afford to pay for their healthcare?

niko
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742


There is more to Bitcoin than bitcoins.


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 04:42:08 PM
 #26

Depends on the country. In a country full of selfish, ignorant, narcissistic morons - no.

They're there, in their room.
Your mining rig is on fire, yet you're very calm.
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 04:57:03 PM
 #27


I do pay for my own healthcare - through taxes.

Free market competition in health care only works for those that can afford it.

In your ideal society, what happens to the people that can't afford to pay for their healthcare?


1. No, you don't. You pay PART of your healthcare - the rest you are demanding taxpayers pay. You either want taxpayer money or you don't - if you don't, you don't need socialized medicine to help pay for it. If you do, then you're not paying it all yourself, are you?

2. Free market competition brings prices DOWN. The high healthcare costs you claim people can't pay are a DIRECT RESULT of people like you demanding that others are robbed to pay for crooks to run the system. What incentive does the government have to reduce prices? Answer: None

3. In a FREE society, people will cater to the poor because that is where the largest revenues are. Ask the ghost of Sam Walton. Its your government programs that screw the poor the most.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 05:02:23 PM
 #28

I too would pay taxes. I think taxation is necessary one way or another, I only question the amount needed to be taxed.
This.

The NHS is one of the examples where public provision of a service through forced taxation is a necessary evil. 

There is no such thing as a "necessary evil"..unless you're evil.
Sadly, is this world, you often have to pick the lesser of two evils.

If forcing people to pay tax prevents a greater evil then so be it.

No, you don't. In this world or any other. What you said is called a "cop-out"

Furthermore, people like you pose a problem for me that transcends me being able to tolerate you. You are attempting to oppress me through the state. I don't want the healthcare that you seem determined to rob people to fund, and I don't like you pointing a gun at my head telling me I have to "pay or else".

The alternative is to pay for your own goddam healthcare. If its too expensive, its your own fucking fault for allowing the government to subsidize healthcare at all in the first place. Government subsidies raise the price, free market competition lowers it - how hard is that to understand?!?



Funny thing is, its not true.  Before making such assertions, look up a few facts and figures.  UK health care, both public and private, is very cheap. 

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 05:09:35 PM
 #29

1. No, you don't. You pay PART of your healthcare - the rest you are demanding taxpayers pay.

Insurance also pays out for the unlucky from those who pay in. Your insurance premium is not just for your healthcare costs.
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 05:32:12 PM
 #30

Go Cryptoanarchist go! You are someone I would like to share a society with.

Thank you.  Smiley

All I ask is that people like yourself do your best to not fund people like those I'm arguing against. Cut them off and don't fear their armed henchmen.
Gareth Nelson
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 722


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 05:53:40 PM
 #31

The government is generally quite expert at recovering taxes they have decided you owe, and at changing the rules to ensure you can't sidestep the system simply by using something such as bitcoin (bitcoin is either a currency or "payment in kind" when it comes to receiving it as compensation for selling to others - although it's more difficult for the law to be enforced here, it's still the law that you have to pay taxes).

Easiest way to get caught is by living a good lifestyle that obviously costs money to maintain while reporting an incredibly low income.

Whether or not you agree with the principles behind taxation, it's irrational to willingly expose yourself to the liability (including possible jail time) from not paying them.

On top of that, if you do happen to make use of any government-provided facilities then it seems only right to pay for them, even if the only way to pay currently is by giving a % of your total income.


These days it's even worse as now not only does the government look out for loopholes but we have a whole bunch of people who are actively lobbying the government to take more tax (think: UK uncut, occupy wallstreet etc - side note: why do some of these people talk about "overthrowing the state" when going to their protests when the protests are about giving the state more power and more funding?)
Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:05:51 PM
 #32


I do pay for my own healthcare - through taxes.

Free market competition in health care only works for those that can afford it.

In your ideal society, what happens to the people that can't afford to pay for their healthcare?


1. No, you don't. You pay PART of your healthcare - the rest you are demanding taxpayers pay. You either want taxpayer money or you don't - if you don't, you don't need socialized medicine to help pay for it. If you do, then you're not paying it all yourself, are you?

2. Free market competition brings prices DOWN. The high healthcare costs you claim people can't pay are a DIRECT RESULT of people like you demanding that others are robbed to pay for crooks to run the system. What incentive does the government have to reduce prices? Answer: None

3. In a FREE society, people will cater to the poor because that is where the largest revenues are. Ask the ghost of Sam Walton. Its your government programs that screw the poor the most.
1. Some people pay in more than they receive back through public services.

2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:10:02 PM
 #33

side note: why do some of these people talk about "overthrowing the state" when going to their protests when the protests are about giving the state more power and more funding?)

Exactly, I call those people the result of single mother parenting. To them, money is something that just is handed out from a magical authority, not something that requires actual labor to produce.

As far as paying taxes goes, its easy to not pay them - don't make any taxable income. Don't leave ANY evidence of your wealth for them to see. Pay your rent late so you look like a brokedick to those around you. Don't leave them anything to take.

Now if you go to clubs at night in your brand new mercedes..you're gonna draw attention.


1. Some people pay in more than they receive back through public services.

2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

1. Yes, most people do. Those are the people being robbed of the rewards of their productivity.

2/3. In a free market system, where anyone can provide healthcare to anyone, the market will aggressively trade with the poor. Again, look at Wal-Mart. They might not get as good of service, just like a poor person can't afford as nice of anything as a rich person, but they'll get poor people healthcare. Shopping at Wal-Mart isn't as nice as other stores, but poor people are content to shop there, and Wal-Mart is happy to cater to them.
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:22:22 PM
 #34

Free market competition brings prices DOWN.

Sometimes, and only temporarily. Depending on the nature of the product, it quite often only borrows from the future. Since you're such a strong advocate of the free market, then you should be educated on the free market. If you wish to make statements about the free market, then be specific about the particular dynamics of the free market you are discussing, otherwise you'll simply come off as a brainwashed fool.

You see, I don't have a problem with defenders of the free market - just individuals who vehemently defend it without understanding it. And that's a big problem with most on this forum - they just spout what they read in their heavily biased books on economic theory.

Consider a market in X. The quantity of X left in the world is small, and its price, accordingly, is high. X is consumed, because, allegedly, it helps cure Y.

Now, according to your theory, competition will bring the price of X down. So, enter competition. In fact, let's establish that new competition is inevitable, because the price of X is currently so high. New entrepreneurs enter the market, and begin their harvesting of X. More of X hits the market, and the price comes down, as supply has risen. Basic economics, right?

Except the supply of X has not risen. In its consumption, the ultimate worldwide potential supply of X has actually dropped. The future price of X must now rise significantly to account for that. And so the price rises significantly, and as a result, the harvesting of X becomes more desirable, as more effort, technology and participants enter the market until X no longer exists.

The problems:

Free market advocates fail to distinguish between markets as the one I described, and markets in which a mostly theoretically infinite production exists, as in services. That's the first problem. The second problem is that ultimately, all markets depend on the first type of market. Those two problems can be summarized as genuine ignorance of market dynamics.

The third problem is the market's inability to properly attach a value to X. As it turns out, X, in its consumption, was not being used efficiently or appropriately at all, given the general ignorance of what X could be used for. But, since the participants in the market for X were in general, ignoramuses, X no longer exists. This is ignorance as well.
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:26:27 PM
 #35

@FirstAscent

Your scenario doesn't prove anything.

So are you saying that goods are provided better at the point of a gun?
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:28:26 PM
 #36

@FirstAscent

You have too many inaccurate statements here to point each out.

So are you saying that goods are provided better at the point of a gun?

Point out the inaccurate statements. Start a new thread if you wish. Or engage me via PM.
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:30:30 PM
 #37

@FirstAscent

You have too many inaccurate statements here to point each out.

So are you saying that goods are provided better at the point of a gun?

Point out the inaccurate statements. Start a new thread if you wish. Or engage me via PM.

Let's start with "Sometimes, and only temporarily."

No, competition always drives down price. That's basic logic. Monopoly prices are higher to maximize revenue if there is no one to offer an alternative.
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:36:16 PM
 #38

Let's start with "Sometimes, and only temporarily."

No, competition always drives down price. That's basic logic. Monopoly prices are higher to maximize revenue if there is no one to offer an alternative.

Incorrect. You need to understand the dynamics of X. Increased competition does not really increase supply. It only moves it from its source to the consumer. And once consumed, the actual supply is decreased further and permanently depleted. At best, you will see a temporary price decrease which will be more than offset by the future rise in prices due to the permanent total supply depletion available at the source. Again, your understanding of the full process is deficient.
Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:37:42 PM
 #39

@FirstAscent

You have too many inaccurate statements here to point each out.

So are you saying that goods are provided better at the point of a gun?

Point out the inaccurate statements. Start a new thread if you wish. Or engage me via PM.

Let's start with "Sometimes, and only temporarily."

No, competition always drives down price. That's basic logic. Monopoly prices are higher to maximize revenue if there is no one to offer an alternative.
In a completely free market with no regulation, what is to stop several large corporations with economies of scale colluding on price?

Any smaller companies couldn't compete fairly and therefore the price wouldn't be driven down.

FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:39:29 PM
 #40

@FirstAscent

You have too many inaccurate statements here to point each out.

So are you saying that goods are provided better at the point of a gun?

Point out the inaccurate statements. Start a new thread if you wish. Or engage me via PM.

Let's start with "Sometimes, and only temporarily."

No, competition always drives down price. That's basic logic. Monopoly prices are higher to maximize revenue if there is no one to offer an alternative.
In a completely free market with no regulation, what is to stop several large corporations with economies of scale colluding on price?

Any smaller companies couldn't compete fairly and therefore the price wouldn't be driven down.

That too. Cryptoanarchist doesn't fully understand free market dynamics at both ends of the spectrum.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 06:49:55 PM
 #41



1. Some people pay in more than they receive back through public services.

2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

1. Yes, most people do. Those are the people being robbed of the rewards of their productivity.

2/3. In a free market system, where anyone can provide healthcare to anyone, the market will aggressively trade with the poor. Again, look at Wal-Mart. They might not get as good of service, just like a poor person can't afford as nice of anything as a rich person, but they'll get poor people healthcare. Shopping at Wal-Mart isn't as nice as other stores, but poor people are content to shop there, and Wal-Mart is happy to cater to them.

What you leave out is that no matter what system you have, health has to be paid for and it can't be paid for when you are sick as you likely can't work. 

So, using the tax system to pay for your own health care makes sense.  Everyone pays taxes; everyone gets sick; when you get sick, you get back the money you have paid in.

And its pretty certain you will get sick...modern societies have such long lifespans that almost everyone needs hospital care at some point.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:52:46 PM
 #42

Let's start with "Sometimes, and only temporarily."

No, competition always drives down price. That's basic logic. Monopoly prices are higher to maximize revenue if there is no one to offer an alternative.

Incorrect. You need to understand the dynamics of X. Increased competition does not really increase supply. It only moves it from its source to the consumer. And once consumed, the actual supply is decreased further and permanently depleted. At best, you will see a temporary price decrease which will be more than offset by the future rise in prices due to the permanent total supply depletion available at the source. Again, your understanding of the full process is deficient.

I never said that increased competition increases supply, it doesn't have to. It can lower demand for the competitors product, which decreases their price. You are making the econ 101 mistake of applying the supply/demand curve to the entire market for a product, even though competitors may have different methods of production. Like most statists, you think there is some magical formula to find the best price, and throw out the day-to-day decisions of individuals that constantly change the numbers.

Can you give any real life examples of your absurd scenario? How would healthcare be "permanently depleted" by competition?
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 06:53:48 PM
 #43



1. Some people pay in more than they receive back through public services.

2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

1. Yes, most people do. Those are the people being robbed of the rewards of their productivity.

2/3. In a free market system, where anyone can provide healthcare to anyone, the market will aggressively trade with the poor. Again, look at Wal-Mart. They might not get as good of service, just like a poor person can't afford as nice of anything as a rich person, but they'll get poor people healthcare. Shopping at Wal-Mart isn't as nice as other stores, but poor people are content to shop there, and Wal-Mart is happy to cater to them.

What you leave out is that no matter what system you have, health has to be paid for and it can't be paid for when you are sick as you likely can't work. 

So, using the tax system to pay for your own health care makes sense.  Everyone pays taxes; everyone gets sick; when you get sick, you get back the money you have paid in.

And its pretty certain you will get sick...modern societies have such long lifespans that almost everyone needs hospital care at some point.

So do you think it is ok for you to point a gun at my head and tell me I HAVE to pay for your healthcare, OR ELSE?? Is that the kind of thug you are? If so, our conversation is over.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 06:55:59 PM
 #44

...snip...

So do you think it is ok for you to point a gun at my head and tell me I HAVE to pay for your healthcare, OR ELSE?? Is that the kind of thug you are? If so, our conversation is over.

No - you have to pay for your health care.  You may be healthy now but you almost certainly will get sick and you do have to pay for your care.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 07:05:44 PM
 #45

...snip...
Finally: If  do not wish to pay for healt care I should not have to. Of course this would man I would not receive any either. I ant to make my own decisions. Adults should.

That's a perfectly valid position.  The problem is that people never stick to it.  When healthy they skip insurance and talk about freedom of choice. Then they show at emergency clinics desperate not to have their baby die and society has to pick up the cost.


.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:06:41 PM
 #46

Let's start with "Sometimes, and only temporarily."

No, competition always drives down price. That's basic logic. Monopoly prices are higher to maximize revenue if there is no one to offer an alternative.

Incorrect. You need to understand the dynamics of X. Increased competition does not really increase supply. It only moves it from its source to the consumer. And once consumed, the actual supply is decreased further and permanently depleted. At best, you will see a temporary price decrease which will be more than offset by the future rise in prices due to the permanent total supply depletion available at the source. Again, your understanding of the full process is deficient.

I never said that increased competition increases supply, it doesn't have to. It can lower demand for the competitors product, which decreases their price. You are making the econ 101 mistake of applying the supply/demand curve to the entire market for a product, even though competitors may have different methods of production.

We're not in econ 101. We're in the real world. I am making no mistake here. You are making the mistake in thinking that your example is how the free market works by applying your example to the entire free market. You need to pull your head out of your econ 101 book on economic theory and expose yourself to more modern economic theories.

I could not be more clear when I said your understanding of the free market is deficient precisely because you think one part of the free market and its dynamics apply to the entire free market.

Quote
Like most statists, you think there is some magical formula to find the best price, and throw out the day-to-day decisions of individuals that constantly change the numbers.

Nothing could be further from the truth. It's you who thinks the free market finds the magic price.

Quote
Can you give any real life examples of your absurd scenario?

Absolutely. And it's not absurd, but rather the scenarios are ubiquitous and are the fundamental building blocks of humanity. The examples include all natural capital which undergoes a non-reversible transformation between initial extraction and consumption at a rate greater than it is renewed.

Quote
How would healthcare be "permanently depleted" by competition?

I specifically mentioned that I would be game to have this conversation in another thread or via PM. This conversation is a direct result of your comments about the free market.
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 07:10:05 PM
 #47

Taxes support countless facial and as-applied civil rights violations by pro-criminal tyrannies that result in countless murders, rapes, maimings, and lesser crimes perpetrated with practical impunity against disarmed and defenseless innocents.

FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:15:05 PM
 #48

FA by referring to a commodity X and showing that deplting that commidty will increase price (if demand is stable) even ina free mrket shows you are the one missing some things. Firstly aleterntives may exist for the utility that X posseses and second with he right level of technology no commodity can ever be depleted because it can always be replenished.

You're the one missing some things. The free market is not omnipotent, and the participants have their own self interests. Price is determined by the knowledge or lack of knowledge on the part of the consumer and the seller. These participants will act in the way I described, and the scenario will play out in the fashion I described. The ultimate cost is determined in the future, after it is too late for the free market to rectify.

Quote
Long term a free market is the most efficient system and therefore prices will be lowest.

But as I said, the price determined by the free market is not actually what it should be due to the ignorance of the players.

Seriously, you need to start investigating the deeper and broader consequences in addition to the affect on price.
pekv2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:19:00 PM
 #49

Yup, don't wanna to go to prison. Get all the appropriate people, a well known reputable tax man and a lawyer. But that's thinking in the clouds. Unless you have 100Ghash/s machines to pay for all of it.
westkybitcoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980

Firstbits: Compromised. Thanks, Android!


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:24:48 PM
 #50

...snip...
Finally: If  do not wish to pay for healt care I should not have to. Of course this would man I would not receive any either. I ant to make my own decisions. Adults should.

That's a perfectly valid position.  The problem is that people never stick to it.

This view has a number of problems. First, the universal declaration that people never stick to it. The Amish don't believe in stealing to get what you need. And they've setup a community to help each other so they don't need to rely on national healthcare. And yes, there are non-Amish who also take the position that they shouldn't get what they haven't paid for... and actually stick to it.

Second though, is the curious thought... are these people, after suddenly renouncing their stance due to a personal crisis, showing up at hospitals with guns and forcing healthcare from others? No? Then how are they obtaining it? Because others are choosing to give it to them. How that gets resolved afterwards is the issue. The obvious solution would be debt, or some other payment plan, or simply not giving them the care they can't afford, or giving the healthcare away as charity (from what I understand, many doctors in the past used to do this, before our modern system.)

The impression I get is that you view debt/payments/no-care/charity as a bad, unacceptable array of responses to the problem of some people not taking responsibility for their health care... as so bad, that you consider a inefficient, corrupt, national-scale government wealth redistribution program to be a better option.

Seen in that light, can you understand why so many disagree with you?

Bitcoin is the ultimate freedom test. It tells you who is giving lip service and who genuinely believes in it.
...
...
In the future, books that summarize the history of money will have a line that says, “and then came bitcoin.” It is the economic singularity. And we are living in it now. - Ryan Dickherber
...
...
ATTENTION BFL MINING NEWBS: Just got your Jalapenos in? Wondering how to get the most value for the least hassle? Give BitMinter a try! It's a smaller pool with a fair & low-fee payment method, lots of statistical feedback, and it's easier than EasyMiner! (Yes, we want your hashing power, but seriously, it IS the easiest pool to use! Sign up in seconds to try it!)
...
...
The idea that deflation causes hoarding (to any problematic degree) is a lie used to justify theft of value from your savings.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 07:26:22 PM
 #51

...snip...
Finally: If  do not wish to pay for healt care I should not have to. Of course this would man I would not receive any either. I ant to make my own decisions. Adults should.

That's a perfectly valid position.  The problem is that people never stick to it.  When healthy they skip insurance and talk about freedom of choice. Then they show at emergency clinics desperate not to have their baby die and society has to pick up the cost.



Of course they do that is perfectly rational behaviour. I would too if I had elected not to take out health insurence and got sick. The solution? Easy don't provide the service to people that did not pay. Decisions have concequences you have to live by or die for.

Btw I have health insurance both ecause it is mandatory in my socialistic country but also becausein such countries the top few percentent incomes pay for mot of everyone's public services so I get it for far cheaper than it really cost. Yes I am till at the levelof income that I am basically a parasite of the society like most people are. And l even earn way above average income.

You make it sound simple.  If a man leaves his wife and baby and cancels their insurance, you are 100% happy to let that baby die?

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 07:32:29 PM
 #52

If you like to you are perfectly free o pay for them. Just don' force me to.

So your view is that the baby dies?

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 07:36:41 PM
 #53

If you like to you are perfectly free o pay for them. Just don' force me to.

So your view is that the baby dies?

I take that to mean you're not willing to pay for them, but you are perfectly willing to force others to?

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
westkybitcoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980

Firstbits: Compromised. Thanks, Android!


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:36:58 PM
 #54

If you like to you are perfectly free o pay for them. Just don' force me to.

So your view is that the baby dies?

Surely you realize that's a false dichotomy.

Bitcoin is the ultimate freedom test. It tells you who is giving lip service and who genuinely believes in it.
...
...
In the future, books that summarize the history of money will have a line that says, “and then came bitcoin.” It is the economic singularity. And we are living in it now. - Ryan Dickherber
...
...
ATTENTION BFL MINING NEWBS: Just got your Jalapenos in? Wondering how to get the most value for the least hassle? Give BitMinter a try! It's a smaller pool with a fair & low-fee payment method, lots of statistical feedback, and it's easier than EasyMiner! (Yes, we want your hashing power, but seriously, it IS the easiest pool to use! Sign up in seconds to try it!)
...
...
The idea that deflation causes hoarding (to any problematic degree) is a lie used to justify theft of value from your savings.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 07:38:41 PM
 #55

If you like to you are perfectly free o pay for them. Just don' force me to.

So your view is that the baby dies?

Surely you realize that's a false dichotomy.


wachtwoord says he wants people to take responsibility for their decisions.  So the question I ask is simple; if its wachtwoord's decision, is he happy to let the baby die?

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:46:35 PM
 #56

If you like to you are perfectly free o pay for them. Just don' force me to.

So your view is that the baby dies?

Surely you realize that's a false dichotomy.


wachtwoord says he wants people to take responsibility for their decisions.  So the question I ask is simple; if its wachtwoord's decision, is he happy to let the baby die?

Hawker, are you happy when someone dies because of poor government service?
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:48:55 PM
 #57

...snip...

So do you think it is ok for you to point a gun at my head and tell me I HAVE to pay for your healthcare, OR ELSE?? Is that the kind of thug you are? If so, our conversation is over.

No - you have to pay for your health care.  You may be healthy now but you almost certainly will get sick and you do have to pay for your care.

So now you are saying I should take responsibility for myself? Isn't that my position?
westkybitcoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980

Firstbits: Compromised. Thanks, Android!


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:50:42 PM
 #58

If you like to you are perfectly free o pay for them. Just don' force me to.

So your view is that the baby dies?

Surely you realize that's a false dichotomy.


wachtwoord says he wants people to take responsibility for their decisions.  So the question I ask is simple; if its wachtwoord's decision, is he happy to let the baby die?

But your question presumes that the only two options are: (1) wachtwoord pays via national healthcare, or (2) the poor baby dies. That is a false dichotomy.

(And as an aside, there are also issues with option (1) of the false dichotomy itself, the most notable being the presumption that it ensures that the baby won't die.)

Bitcoin is the ultimate freedom test. It tells you who is giving lip service and who genuinely believes in it.
...
...
In the future, books that summarize the history of money will have a line that says, “and then came bitcoin.” It is the economic singularity. And we are living in it now. - Ryan Dickherber
...
...
ATTENTION BFL MINING NEWBS: Just got your Jalapenos in? Wondering how to get the most value for the least hassle? Give BitMinter a try! It's a smaller pool with a fair & low-fee payment method, lots of statistical feedback, and it's easier than EasyMiner! (Yes, we want your hashing power, but seriously, it IS the easiest pool to use! Sign up in seconds to try it!)
...
...
The idea that deflation causes hoarding (to any problematic degree) is a lie used to justify theft of value from your savings.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 07:50:47 PM
 #59

...snip...
Hawker, are you happy when someone dies because of poor government service?

Poor service is poor service.  I don't care if its a private company, the government or a charity.  

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:52:25 PM
 #60

...snip...
Hawker, are you happy when someone dies because of poor government service?

Poor service is poor service.  I don't care if its a private company, the government or a charity.  

so you don't care if the baby dies, you just want to use the guns of the state to force other people to pay for it. Sure you're not British?
westkybitcoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980

Firstbits: Compromised. Thanks, Android!


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:54:21 PM
 #61

Hmm. Seems as if several of us are suddenly jumping on Hawker at once. For the record, that wasn't my intent (despite having strong views on Hawker's perspective being flawed,) and as I have someplace to be, I'll leave the thread for now.

Bitcoin is the ultimate freedom test. It tells you who is giving lip service and who genuinely believes in it.
...
...
In the future, books that summarize the history of money will have a line that says, “and then came bitcoin.” It is the economic singularity. And we are living in it now. - Ryan Dickherber
...
...
ATTENTION BFL MINING NEWBS: Just got your Jalapenos in? Wondering how to get the most value for the least hassle? Give BitMinter a try! It's a smaller pool with a fair & low-fee payment method, lots of statistical feedback, and it's easier than EasyMiner! (Yes, we want your hashing power, but seriously, it IS the easiest pool to use! Sign up in seconds to try it!)
...
...
The idea that deflation causes hoarding (to any problematic degree) is a lie used to justify theft of value from your savings.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 07:55:26 PM
 #62

...snip...

So do you think it is ok for you to point a gun at my head and tell me I HAVE to pay for your healthcare, OR ELSE?? Is that the kind of thug you are? If so, our conversation is over.

No - you have to pay for your health care.  You may be healthy now but you almost certainly will get sick and you do have to pay for your care.

So now you are saying I should take responsibility for myself? Isn't that my position?

You tell me.  If you live in the UK, you get healthcare free at the point of delivery but you pay for it though the tax system.  So if you are hit by a car, you never pay a penny until you have income again.

Do you feel that is oppressive?

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
ribuck
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:57:55 PM
 #63

If you live in the UK, you get healthcare free at the point of delivery ...
Frequently what you get is access to a six month waiting list, free at the point of delivery. That's not the same as access to healthcare.
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 07:58:59 PM
 #64

...snip...

So do you think it is ok for you to point a gun at my head and tell me I HAVE to pay for your healthcare, OR ELSE?? Is that the kind of thug you are? If so, our conversation is over.

No - you have to pay for your health care.  You may be healthy now but you almost certainly will get sick and you do have to pay for your care.

So now you are saying I should take responsibility for myself? Isn't that my position?

You tell me.  If you live in the UK, you get healthcare free at the point of delivery but you pay for it though the tax system.  So if you are hit by a car, you never pay a penny until you have income again.

Do you feel that is oppressive?

So if I don't want to pay the taxes and instead pay the doctors directly, you want me violently forced into a cage where I'll get raped? How nice of you.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:04:26 PM
 #65

...snip...

So do you think it is ok for you to point a gun at my head and tell me I HAVE to pay for your healthcare, OR ELSE?? Is that the kind of thug you are? If so, our conversation is over.

No - you have to pay for your health care.  You may be healthy now but you almost certainly will get sick and you do have to pay for your care.

So now you are saying I should take responsibility for myself? Isn't that my position?

You tell me.  If you live in the UK, you get healthcare free at the point of delivery but you pay for it though the tax system.  So if you are hit by a car, you never pay a penny until you have income again.

Do you feel that is oppressive?

So if I don't want to pay the taxes and instead pay the doctors directly, you want me violently forced into a cage where I'll get raped? How nice of you.

Woah are we an emotional little thing tonight?  

Paying doctors directly would require doctors to charge a fee.  In the UK, doctors don't do that.  Its always a salary and bonus.  You can't expect people to set up a special system just for you.  

Out of curiosity, since what you propose is more expensive, why would you want to do that that?

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:09:55 PM
 #66

note: This is a answer to the question at the top. Typing on a Kindle is slow.


Nah I am fine if you pay for it Wink (But thanks for the ad hominem)

...snip...
I am not responsible for other people unless I choose to.

Thing is, I don't believe you.  Its people like you who say they want freedom that actually do show up needing treatment and the community has to provide it.  You may say you want the community to not treat you when you are sick, but then when you get sick we are stuck with you.  You may now say that the community should let your baby die if you are broke; but when it comes to it, you will not be happy if we let your baby die.

So sadly, you are one of those who need to be compelled to pay their way.  Don't be embarrassed - lots of people are free-loaders and you have no reason be be ashamed that you want to be one too.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:13:43 PM
 #67

cryptoanarchist, you haven't answered this:

Quote
2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:19:14 PM
 #68

You make it sound simple.  If a man leaves his wife and baby and cancels their insurance, you are 100% happy to let that baby die?

If only there were a 100% guarantee that lack of insurance equaled dead baby. Oops, I guess we're all just imagining we exist, because certainly evolution and the eventual persistence of the human race NEVER would have happened without insurance. LOL

But with the government stealing massive chunks of peoples' income and interfering heavily with the industry so that people need insurance, government assistance, and in some cases, to file bankruptcy, to be able to get critical, competent treatment, there's a 100% guarantee that baby would be better off with a mom paying for care with 100% of her income and liberty intact, a competent doctor providing care with 100% of his income and liberty intact, and private charity aid if necessary being granted, instead of tyranny and robbery by proxy.

Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:25:06 PM
 #69

You make it sound simple.  If a man leaves his wife and baby and cancels their insurance, you are 100% happy to let that baby die?

If only there were a 100% guarantee that lack of insurance equaled dead baby. But with the government stealing massive chunks of peoples' income and interfering heavily with the industry so that people need insurance, government assistance, and in some cases, to file bankruptcy, to be able to get critical treatment, there's a 100% guarantee that baby would be better off with a mom paying for care with 100% of her income and liberty intact, a doctor providing care with 100% of his income and liberty intact, and private charity aid if necessary being granted, instead of tyranny and robbery by proxy.

The American health care system is screwed.  But that is nothing to do with taxes.  You guys give drug companies patent monopolies and then say there is a "free market" in the drugs.  What's "free market" about having cancer, the drug company not having a published price list and you have to pay whatever they ask?

Anyway, that's off topic.  We are talking about legitimate use of the tax system to pay for health, roads, whatever.  I was seeing if the guy really accepted the "opt out" and the answer was no.  


.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:26:24 PM
 #70

Dude (=Hawker) you really need to learn to read. I already said I would most definitely come and ask fo healthcare if I had neither money nor insurance. Every rational individual would (please reread my posts before  have to repeat myself again). How hard is it not to give it to me?

Yes - so its reasonable to insist you pay.  I think we are in agreement here aren't we?  Or are you saying that you want some kind of special deal where you don't have to pay?

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:28:20 PM
 #71

...snip...

So do you think it is ok for you to point a gun at my head and tell me I HAVE to pay for your healthcare, OR ELSE?? Is that the kind of thug you are? If so, our conversation is over.

No - you have to pay for your health care.  You may be healthy now but you almost certainly will get sick and you do have to pay for your care.

So now you are saying I should take responsibility for myself? Isn't that my position?

You tell me.  If you live in the UK, you get healthcare free at the point of delivery but you pay for it though the tax system.  So if you are hit by a car, you never pay a penny until you have income again.

Do you feel that is oppressive?

So if I don't want to pay the taxes and instead pay the doctors directly, you want me violently forced into a cage where I'll get raped? How nice of you.

Woah are we an emotional little thing tonight?  

Paying doctors directly would require doctors to charge a fee.  In the UK, doctors don't do that.  Its always a salary and bonus.  You can't expect people to set up a special system just for you.  

Out of curiosity, since what you propose is more expensive, why would you want to do that that?

You still don't get it, Hawker. You are the one asking for a "special system" that requires guns to be pointed  at the heads of productive people so that others can get free healthcare, while bureaucrats use the thug tactics involved to fill their own pockets which drives up the price even more.

My way requires no "special system". It only requires that people like you back the fuck off and let people buy and sell healthcare as they please.

What exactly do you think entitles you to push your ideals onto others by force?
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:29:01 PM
 #72

cryptoanarchist, you haven't answered this:

Quote
2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

Yeah I have. I even gave an example: Wal-Mart
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:36:27 PM
 #73

...snip...

So do you think it is ok for you to point a gun at my head and tell me I HAVE to pay for your healthcare, OR ELSE?? Is that the kind of thug you are? If so, our conversation is over.

No - you have to pay for your health care.  You may be healthy now but you almost certainly will get sick and you do have to pay for your care.

So now you are saying I should take responsibility for myself? Isn't that my position?

You tell me.  If you live in the UK, you get healthcare free at the point of delivery but you pay for it though the tax system.  So if you are hit by a car, you never pay a penny until you have income again.

Do you feel that is oppressive?

So if I don't want to pay the taxes and instead pay the doctors directly, you want me violently forced into a cage where I'll get raped? How nice of you.

Woah are we an emotional little thing tonight?  

Paying doctors directly would require doctors to charge a fee.  In the UK, doctors don't do that.  Its always a salary and bonus.  You can't expect people to set up a special system just for you.  

Out of curiosity, since what you propose is more expensive, why would you want to do that that?

You still don't get it, Hawker. You are the one asking for a "special system" that requires guns to be pointed  at the heads of productive people so that others can get free healthcare, while bureaucrats use the thug tactics involved to fill their own pockets which drives up the price even more.

My way requires no "special system". It only requires that people like you back the fuck off and let people buy and sell healthcare as they please.

What exactly do you think entitles you to push your ideals onto others by force?

The issue here is you must pay for your health care.  No-one, not even children or disabled, gets free health care in the UK.  Everyone has to pay towards the cost.  IF you live here, you too have to make a contribution.  


.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:36:35 PM
 #74

cryptoanarchist, you haven't answered this:

Quote
2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

Yeah I have. I even gave an example: Wal-Mart
Sorry, I missed that post.

Even with a Wal-Mart of healthcare there would still be people that couldn't afford to pay for healthcare. These people would die.



Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:41:19 PM
 #75

So, what is worse:

Letting people die because they haven't accumulated enough wealth (either through lack of effort or through mental/physical deficiencies.

or

Forcing the population to pay a level of tax in order to provide universal healthcare to all.


Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:43:16 PM
 #76

I suggest you read Darwin's work
I suggest you don't take Darwin's work as a system to live by, but merely as a description of the natural world.

Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:44:37 PM
 #77

So, what is worse:

Letting people die because they haven't accumulated enough wealth (either through lack of effort or through mental/physical deficiencies.

or

Forcing the population to pay a level of tax in order to provide universal healthcare to all.



Scott they won't choose.  Free-loaders say "let me die if I get sick or a car hits me" and then show up at emergency clinics desperate not to die when they are sick.  If the tax system provides the best value, you know they are not telling the truth when they say they want to opt out.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:45:28 PM
 #78

cryptoanarchist, you haven't answered this:

Quote
2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

Yeah I have. I even gave an example: Wal-Mart
Sorry, I missed that post.

Even with a Wal-Mart of healthcare there would still be people that couldn't afford to pay for healthcare. These people would die.


so where do you stop in your quest to save every human on the planet? If people can't pay for healthcare in a free market that will be their own choice. Or they're just not doing anything productive, and in that case they should die.

I mean its pretty simple: you work for money, then you use that money for healthcare. In a free market, someone will be able to provide it cheaply.

Some people might not have the money for Taco Bell, and starve, but does that mean we should start stealing tacos from productive people to feed them???

Then its the same old race to the bottom, where the capital goes not to those providing for themselves, but to the biggest beggars with the least shame.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:47:27 PM
 #79

cryptoanarchist, you haven't answered this:

Quote
2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

Yeah I have. I even gave an example: Wal-Mart
Sorry, I missed that post.

Even with a Wal-Mart of healthcare there would still be people that couldn't afford to pay for healthcare. These people would die.


so where do you stop in your quest to save every human on the planet? If people can't pay for healthcare in a free market that will be their own choice. Or they're just not doing anything productive, and in that case they should die.

You see Scott?  He says "they should die" but you know if it was his baby, he'd be banging on the hospital door for help.

Free-loader.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:49:17 PM
 #80

cryptoanarchist, you haven't answered this:

Quote
2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

Yeah I have. I even gave an example: Wal-Mart
Sorry, I missed that post.

Even with a Wal-Mart of healthcare there would still be people that couldn't afford to pay for healthcare. These people would die.


so where do you stop in your quest to save every human on the planet? If people can't pay for healthcare in a free market that will be their own choice. Or they're just not doing anything productive, and in that case they should die.

I mean its pretty simple: you work for money, then you use that money for healthcare. In a free market, someone will be able to provide it cheaply.

Some people might not have the money for Taco Bell, and starve, but does that mean we should start stealing tacos from productive people to feed them???
How about disabled or mentally ill people?

Does your callousness extend to them as well?

cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:49:39 PM
 #81

cryptoanarchist, you haven't answered this:

Quote
2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

Yeah I have. I even gave an example: Wal-Mart
Sorry, I missed that post.

Even with a Wal-Mart of healthcare there would still be people that couldn't afford to pay for healthcare. These people would die.


so where do you stop in your quest to save every human on the planet? If people can't pay for healthcare in a free market that will be their own choice. Or they're just not doing anything productive, and in that case they should die.

You see Scott?  He says "they should die" but you know if it was his baby, he'd be banging on the hospital door for help.

Free-loader.

If I had a baby in a free market, I would trade my services for his/her healthcare...its really that simple. You keep repeating "You need to pay" - that's exactly what I would do, but to a doctor, not bureaucrats.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:52:09 PM
 #82

cryptoanarchist, you haven't answered this:

Quote
2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

Yeah I have. I even gave an example: Wal-Mart
Sorry, I missed that post.

Even with a Wal-Mart of healthcare there would still be people that couldn't afford to pay for healthcare. These people would die.


so where do you stop in your quest to save every human on the planet? If people can't pay for healthcare in a free market that will be their own choice. Or they're just not doing anything productive, and in that case they should die.

You see Scott?  He says "they should die" but you know if it was his baby, he'd be banging on the hospital door for help.

Free-loader.

If I had a baby in a free market, I would trade my services for his/her healthcare...its really that simple. You keep repeating "You need to pay" - that's exactly what I would do, but to a doctor, not bureaucrats.

That I believe - of course you don't want to be a free-loader.  But its entirely possible that your services won't be valuable enough.  Then the taxpayer is left picking up the bill.  

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:52:14 PM
 #83

cryptoanarchist, you haven't answered this:

Quote
2/3. Even in a system with lower cost health care due to the free market, there will still be people who cannot afford to pay. They may be living month to month, or they may even be destitute and have no money whatsoever. What happens to them?

Yeah I have. I even gave an example: Wal-Mart
Sorry, I missed that post.

Even with a Wal-Mart of healthcare there would still be people that couldn't afford to pay for healthcare. These people would die.


so where do you stop in your quest to save every human on the planet? If people can't pay for healthcare in a free market that will be their own choice. Or they're just not doing anything productive, and in that case they should die.

You see Scott?  He says "they should die" but you know if it was his baby, he'd be banging on the hospital door for help.

Free-loader.
He certainly would.

And he seems to ignore all the factors that may result in him not having enough money to pay for healthcare. Factors that he would have no influence over.

Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:53:26 PM
 #84

...snip...

so where do you stop in your quest to save every human on the planet? If people can't pay for healthcare in a free market that will be their own choice. Or they're just not doing anything productive, and in that case they should die.

You see Scott?  He says "they should die" but you know if it was his baby, he'd be banging on the hospital door for help.

Free-loader.
He certainly would.

And he seems to ignore all the factors that may result in him not having enough money to pay for healthcare. Factors that he would have no influence over.

Exactly.  And then its the taxpayer gets shafted.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 08:55:06 PM
 #85

Oh I'll most definitely choose and tell you the second is far far worse. The first isn't bad at all it's part of life (deer with three legs have less chances of survival and reproduction). I really do suggest anyone that thinks they are responsible for saving everyone's life to take a look at Darwin's work because you must have missed the point. People dying is not a bad thing.
Darwin did not write On the Origin of Species as a political philosophy.

Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 08:57:32 PM
 #86

Oh I'll most definitely choose and tell you the second is far far worse. The first isn't bad at all it's part of life (deer with three legs have less chances of survival and reproduction). I really do suggest anyone that thinks they are responsible for saving everyone's life to take a look at Darwin's work because you must have missed the point. People dying is not a bad thing.

But not you.  If its you, you want to be able to ask the taxpayer for treatment.  Darwin would say that faced with someone like you, a protective measure is needed or the species will be preyed on.  For example, forcing you to pay your share.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 09:01:57 PM
 #87

And he seems to ignore all the factors that may result in him not having enough money to pay for healthcare. Factors that he would have no influence over.

Like just about everything the government does, by continually electing and reelecting tyrants with votes from corpses, incarcerated felons, people who can read off random names on voter sign-in sheets, and just enough statists to make the elections appear legit.

Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 09:08:23 PM
 #88

No of course he didn't ..........

I give up. You guys are just too retarded to understand or too lazy to try and I not your prent nor your kindergarten teacher, nor a policitian trying to convert you. Good luck figuring it out (maybe e-reading my post in chronological order will help).

Good night

We understand.  You don't want to have to pay for health care.  But you do want health care.  What's not to understand?

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 09:11:13 PM
 #89

We understand.  You don't want to have to pay for health care.  But you do want health care.  What's not to understand?

He doesn't want to have to pay for your healthcare.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 09:13:16 PM
 #90

Who would want to pay for anything if they could just have the government steal the funds for it at gunpoint from their fellow man?

Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 09:13:32 PM
 #91

No of course he didn't ..........

I give up. You guys are just too retarded to understand or too lazy to try and I not your prent nor your kindergarten teacher, nor a policitian trying to convert you. Good luck figuring it out (maybe e-reading my post in chronological order will help).

Good night
A sad post to end your debate with. Reflects badly on you.

We have differing opinions; that doesn't make either of us retarded or lazy.

Edit: But yeah, enough is enough for one night. Bed beckons.


cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 07, 2012, 09:15:51 PM
 #92

No of course he didn't ..........

I give up. You guys are just too retarded to understand or too lazy to try and I not your prent nor your kindergarten teacher, nor a policitian trying to convert you. Good luck figuring it out (maybe e-reading my post in chronological order will help).

Good night
A sad post to end your debate with. Reflects badly on you.

We have differing opinions; that doesn't make either of us retarded or lazy.



I think its because you are oppressing him, not the other way around. You want to force people to pay for things they don't want/need for people they don't know. He has a right to be pissed at you. You want us locked in a rape cage for disagreeing with you. We just want you to leave us alone.

Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 09:18:29 PM
 #93

No of course he didn't ..........

I give up. You guys are just too retarded to understand or too lazy to try and I not your prent nor your kindergarten teacher, nor a policitian trying to convert you. Good luck figuring it out (maybe e-reading my post in chronological order will help).

Good night
A sad post to end your debate with. Reflects badly on you.

We have differing opinions; that doesn't make either of us retarded or lazy.



I think its because you are oppressing him, not the other way around. You want to force people to pay for things they don't want/need for people they don't know. He has a right to be pissed at you. You want us locked in a rape cage for disagreeing with you. We just want you to leave us alone.
I never said I thought the punishment for not paying taxes should be prison. Stop putting words in my mouth.


TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 09:19:22 PM
 #94

We have differing opinions; that doesn't make either of us retarded or lazy.

"Never assume malice when stupidity will suffice."

So you're saying you're malicious in your misinterpretation of the apparent libertarian position, then?

Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 09:20:16 PM
 #95

No of course he didn't ..........

I give up. You guys are just too retarded to understand or too lazy to try and I not your prent nor your kindergarten teacher, nor a policitian trying to convert you. Good luck figuring it out (maybe e-reading my post in chronological order will help).

Good night
A sad post to end your debate with. Reflects badly on you.

We have differing opinions; that doesn't make either of us retarded or lazy.



I think its because you are oppressing him, not the other way around. You want to force people to pay for things they don't want/need for people they don't know. He has a right to be pissed at you. You want us locked in a rape cage for disagreeing with you. We just want you to leave us alone.



Until you need health care and can't afford it.  Then banging on our door time.

BTW, the rape fantasy works better if you mention the race of the guys banging you.  If you are going to use a cliché, then at least get all the fun elements of the cliché.


.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 09:21:00 PM
 #96

I never said I thought the punishment for not paying taxes should be prison. Stop putting words in my mouth.
At least you connect the terms rape-cage and prison correctly.

What do you suggest then?

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 09:21:57 PM
 #97

...snip...
I never said I thought the punishment for not paying taxes should be prison. Stop putting words in my mouth.




I'm happy to say that.  If someone wants to be a free-loader, its definitely in my interest that the punishment encourages him to pay his share.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 09:24:16 PM
 #98

We have differing opinions; that doesn't make either of us retarded or lazy.

"Never assume malice when stupidity will suffice."

So you're saying you're malicious in your misinterpretation of the apparent libertarian position, then?
Your quote doesn't apply.

I have been trying to explain the real world effects of the libertarian position, as I see them.

You are free to disagree.  

Scott J
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


View Profile
July 07, 2012, 09:29:32 PM
 #99

I never said I thought the punishment for not paying taxes should be prison. Stop putting words in my mouth.
At least you connect the terms rape-cage and prison correctly.

What do you suggest then?
I am calling it a night, so don't have time to go into alternative consequences for tax avoision!

But maybe I'll continue this tomorrow.

Good night all.

TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
July 07, 2012, 09:33:15 PM
 #100

We have differing opinions; that doesn't make either of us retarded or lazy.

"Never assume malice when stupidity will suffice."

So you're saying you're malicious in your misinterpretation of the apparent libertarian position, then?
Your quote doesn't apply.

I have been trying to explain the real world effects of the libertarian position, as I see them.

You are free to disagree.  

Just like I'm free not to pay taxes nor demand medical care, and not be imprisoned or in any way punished by others for it in your fantastical world of statism?

This one's for you, statists:

asdf
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 527


View Profile
July 08, 2012, 12:02:43 AM
 #101

You make it sound simple.  If a man leaves his wife and baby and cancels their insurance, you are 100% happy to let that baby die?

Are you %100 happy to pull out a gun, stick it in the face of the nearest guy and say: "give me money to save the baby or else I'll kill you"? or are you willing to explore non-violent solutions, such as charity.

Also, collectivised healthcare is a Tragedy of the Commons scenario; creating scarcity. Which is why, in the socialised system, you have to wait 4 weeks to see a doctor to save your baby. Are you going to deny the baby immediate care because you have squandered health care resources by eliminating the price system?

Also, socialised health is a moral hazard; people take less care of themselves because society has "got it covered" if anything goes wrong. This also drives up costs and waste.
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 08, 2012, 12:09:23 AM
 #102

You make it sound simple.  If a man leaves his wife and baby and cancels their insurance, you are 100% happy to let that baby die?

Are you %100 happy to pull out a gun, stick it in the face of the nearest guy and say: "give me money to save the baby or else I'll kill you"? or are you willing to explore non-violent solutions, such as charity.

Also, collectivised healthcare is a Tragedy of the Commons scenario; creating scarcity. Which is why, in the socialised system, you have to wait 4 weeks to see a doctor to save your baby. Are you going to deny the baby immediate care because you have squandered health care resources by eliminating the price system?

Also, socialised health is a moral hazard; people take less care of themselves because society has "got it covered" if anything goes wrong. This also drives up costs and waste.

Clear, concise, no bullshit. I'll add you to my list of people I'll do business with, asdf.  Smiley
R-
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238

Pasta


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 12:26:19 AM
 #103

Q: Would you pay taxes if you could live off bitcoins?
A: Nah, I'd probably give the money to the Mafia like cbeast does.
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 12:31:08 AM
 #104

Q: Would you pay taxes if you could live off bitcoins?
A: Nah, I'd probably give the money to the Mafia like cbeast does.

Thank you R-, We know you have a choice in who extorts you, and we're glad you went with Don Corleone.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 08, 2012, 12:36:48 AM
 #105

Q: Would you pay taxes if you could live off bitcoins?
A: Nah, I'd probably give the money to the Mafia like cbeast does.

Hey, in the mafia movies they usually only tax the local businesses around 10%, a lot less than the IRS.
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 02:53:55 AM
 #106

http://www.econlib.org/library/Bastiat/basSoph5.html

Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 07:01:43 AM
 #107

You make it sound simple.  If a man leaves his wife and baby and cancels their insurance, you are 100% happy to let that baby die?

Are you %100 happy to pull out a gun, stick it in the face of the nearest guy and say: "give me money to save the baby or else I'll kill you"? or are you willing to explore non-violent solutions, such as charity.

Also, collectivised healthcare is a Tragedy of the Commons scenario; creating scarcity. Which is why, in the socialised system, you have to wait 4 weeks to see a doctor to save your baby. Are you going to deny the baby immediate care because you have squandered health care resources by eliminating the price system?

Also, socialised health is a moral hazard; people take less care of themselves because society has "got it covered" if anything goes wrong. This also drives up costs and waste.

Less fiction please. 
1. There is no wait for emergency treatment in the UK.  Appointments are not needed - you drive up to an out of hours service and are usually seen within 30 minutes.  If you do want to use a GP service, its normally a same day appointment system but that is your choice.  If a doctor made me wait 2 days, I would take my business elsewhere.
2. People in the US die younger than in the UK.  The US pays 90% more for its health care as a percentage of GDP.  The socialised system is more efficient.
3. You seriously think that having people die younger at a greater cost is moral?  I regard it as extortion.

What amuses me is that you see a broken expensive system in the US and your response is "Freedom - hurray" while you see working systems in most other countries and your response is "OMFG oppression." 

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 07:19:33 AM
 #108

What disgusts us is that you see broken expensive systems (in some similar, some different ways than the U.S.) in most other countries and your response is to call them "working systems".

myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 07:22:11 AM
 #109

What disgusts us is that you see broken expensive systems (in some similar, some different ways than the U.S.) in most other countries and your response is to call them "working systems".
+1

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
westkybitcoins
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980

Firstbits: Compromised. Thanks, Android!


View Profile
July 08, 2012, 08:00:20 AM
 #110

While I understand people have limited time during their day, I find it very interesting the posts (and portions of posts) those who support government healthcare choose to respond to, and which ones are snipped or ignored.

Bitcoin is the ultimate freedom test. It tells you who is giving lip service and who genuinely believes in it.
...
...
In the future, books that summarize the history of money will have a line that says, “and then came bitcoin.” It is the economic singularity. And we are living in it now. - Ryan Dickherber
...
...
ATTENTION BFL MINING NEWBS: Just got your Jalapenos in? Wondering how to get the most value for the least hassle? Give BitMinter a try! It's a smaller pool with a fair & low-fee payment method, lots of statistical feedback, and it's easier than EasyMiner! (Yes, we want your hashing power, but seriously, it IS the easiest pool to use! Sign up in seconds to try it!)
...
...
The idea that deflation causes hoarding (to any problematic degree) is a lie used to justify theft of value from your savings.
mystery2048
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
July 08, 2012, 08:10:38 AM
 #111

I dont have a problem paying taxes Smiley

Important: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=92424.0;all

Donations: 1HWMQv2VYviAgpy6NWNvVg9JhKm4zcMGS5
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 08:12:20 AM
 #112

What disgusts us is that you see broken expensive systems (in some similar, some different ways than the U.S.) in most other countries and your response is to call them "working systems".

That's a very fair point.  Perhaps there is some better idealised system out there that has never been tried.  All I will say is that until you have an example of a working system that is cheaper, socialised medicine fits the description of "working."  

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 08:17:19 AM
 #113

While I understand people have limited time during their day, I find it very interesting the posts (and portions of posts) those who support government healthcare choose to respond to, and which ones are snipped or ignored.


I try very hard to limit myself to one logical point per post.  Its the way I do customer service as well which is what I do when not browsing the web or coding/debugging.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 08:21:54 AM
 #114

What disgusts us is that you see broken expensive systems (in some similar, some different ways than the U.S.) in most other countries and your response is to call them "working systems".

That's a very fair point.  Perhaps there is some better idealised system out there that has never been tried.  All I will say is that until you have an example of a working system that is cheaper, socialised medicine fits the description of "working."  

Can't remember whether I picked this up here, or on the tweeters, but, here you go: http://www.freenation.org/a/f12l3.html

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 08:38:59 AM
 #115

What disgusts us is that you see broken expensive systems (in some similar, some different ways than the U.S.) in most other countries and your response is to call them "working systems".

That's a very fair point.  Perhaps there is some better idealised system out there that has never been tried.  All I will say is that until you have an example of a working system that is cheaper, socialised medicine fits the description of "working."  

That's like saying your personal, average entry-level PC which currently is infected with a boot sector virus that overwrites every important document you create is a working system, because the average entry-level Mac you could switch to (like I did around 2006) is more expensive.

Broken with nothing cheaper provided as example≠working. Gods help anyone who ever gets "customer service" from you. Deny, deny, deny.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin

Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 08:46:39 AM
 #116

What disgusts us is that you see broken expensive systems (in some similar, some different ways than the U.S.) in most other countries and your response is to call them "working systems".

That's a very fair point.  Perhaps there is some better idealised system out there that has never been tried.  All I will say is that until you have an example of a working system that is cheaper, socialised medicine fits the description of "working."  

Can't remember whether I picked this up here, or on the tweeters, but, here you go: http://www.freenation.org/a/f12l3.html

Read the first page and its factually wrong.  The Beveridge Report was commissioned because people in the UK were not getting adequate health care.  Since the NHS was created, everyone has had health care that is free at the point of delivery and that is paid for through the tax system.


.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 09:05:11 AM
 #117

Read the first page and its factually wrong.  The Beveridge Report was commissioned because people in the UK were not getting adequate health care.  Since the NHS was created, everyone has had health care that is free at the point of delivery and that is paid for through the tax system.

Well, I looked up the Beveridge Report, and I 1) did not find any references to it in the article, and 2) found scant information on Wikipedia, and none linking it to the information in the article. Some explanation would be appreciated.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 09:23:43 AM
 #118

There's something to be said for rejecting others' reality and substituting your own, but all the time, seriously?

In trying to communicate with statists, I fear we're treading dangerously close to meeting Einstein's definition of insanity.

myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 09:32:04 AM
 #119

There's something to be said for rejecting others' reality and substituting your own, but all the time, seriously?

In trying to communicate with statists, I fear we're treading dangerously close to meeting Einstein's definition of insanity.

...or being trolled. One way or the other, I'm about ready to stop slamming my head into this particular brick wall.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 09:48:42 AM
 #120

Read the first page and its factually wrong.  The Beveridge Report was commissioned because people in the UK were not getting adequate health care.  Since the NHS was created, everyone has had health care that is free at the point of delivery and that is paid for through the tax system.

Well, I looked up the Beveridge Report, and I 1) did not find any references to it in the article, and 2) found scant information on Wikipedia, and none linking it to the information in the article. Some explanation would be appreciated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Beveridge#Report_on_social_insurance

Essentially they found that a more efficient system would make the Brits more prosperous.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 09:58:41 AM
 #121

Read the first page and its factually wrong.  The Beveridge Report was commissioned because people in the UK were not getting adequate health care.  Since the NHS was created, everyone has had health care that is free at the point of delivery and that is paid for through the tax system.

Well, I looked up the Beveridge Report, and I 1) did not find any references to it in the article, and 2) found scant information on Wikipedia, and none linking it to the information in the article. Some explanation would be appreciated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Beveridge#Report_on_social_insurance

Essentially they found that a more efficient system would make the Brits more prosperous.

Again, no indication that the report found that Lodge practice was inefficient, or ineffective, just socialist rhetoric.

So some explanation of how it relates to the article I posted would really be appreciated.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 10:13:03 AM
 #122

Read the first page and its factually wrong.  The Beveridge Report was commissioned because people in the UK were not getting adequate health care.  Since the NHS was created, everyone has had health care that is free at the point of delivery and that is paid for through the tax system.

Well, I looked up the Beveridge Report, and I 1) did not find any references to it in the article, and 2) found scant information on Wikipedia, and none linking it to the information in the article. Some explanation would be appreciated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Beveridge#Report_on_social_insurance

Essentially they found that a more efficient system would make the Brits more prosperous.

Again, no indication that the report found that Lodge practice was inefficient, or ineffective, just socialist rhetoric.

So some explanation of how it relates to the article I posted would really be appreciated.

No - its redundant as we risk repeating the NAP thread. 

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 10:17:09 AM
 #123

No - its redundant as we risk repeating the NAP thread. 

Translation: I don't feel like giving a reason why your article is wrong, it just is.

Sounds like we are indeed repeating the NAP thread. Specifically, the part where you could not explain why sometimes, a behavior is reason to violate someone's property rights, and sometimes it is not.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 10:24:39 AM
 #124

No - its redundant as we risk repeating the NAP thread. 

Translation: I don't feel like giving a reason why your article is wrong, it just is.

Sounds like we are indeed repeating the NAP thread. Specifically, the part where you could not explain why sometimes, a behavior is reason to violate someone's property rights, and sometimes it is not.

Property rights are no different to the right to universal health care. 

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 10:31:07 AM
 #125

No - its redundant as we risk repeating the NAP thread. 

Translation: I don't feel like giving a reason why your article is wrong, it just is.

Sounds like we are indeed repeating the NAP thread. Specifically, the part where you could not explain why sometimes, a behavior is reason to violate someone's property rights, and sometimes it is not.

Property rights are no different to the right to universal health care. 

Wrong. Property rights are the right not to be told what or what not to do with your body, your land or your money.

The "right" to universal healthcare is the right to have healthcare, at the expense of everyone else.


BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 10:32:54 AM
 #126

No - its redundant as we risk repeating the NAP thread. 

Translation: I don't feel like giving a reason why your article is wrong, it just is.

Sounds like we are indeed repeating the NAP thread. Specifically, the part where you could not explain why sometimes, a behavior is reason to violate someone's property rights, and sometimes it is not.

Property rights are no different to the right to universal health care. 

Wrong. Property rights are the right not to be told what or what not to do with your body, your land or your money.

The "right" to universal healthcare is the right to have healthcare, at the expense of everyone else.


All that says is that you like one more than the other. 

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 10:40:57 AM
 #127

No - its redundant as we risk repeating the NAP thread. 

Translation: I don't feel like giving a reason why your article is wrong, it just is.

Sounds like we are indeed repeating the NAP thread. Specifically, the part where you could not explain why sometimes, a behavior is reason to violate someone's property rights, and sometimes it is not.

Property rights are no different to the right to universal health care. 

Wrong. Property rights are the right not to be told what or what not to do with your body, your land or your money.

The "right" to universal healthcare is the right to have healthcare, at the expense of everyone else.


All that says is that you like one more than the other. 

No, one is negative, the other positive. negative rights can be had by all, without infringing upon another. positive rights do not always meet this criteria.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 10:43:18 AM
 #128

...snip...

No, one is negative, the other positive. negative rights can be had by all, without infringing upon another. positive rights do not always meet this criteria.

And we are back to natural law arguments.  Which are in a parallel thread.  Why not address them there?

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 10:53:53 AM
 #129

...snip...

No, one is negative, the other positive. negative rights can be had by all, without infringing upon another. positive rights do not always meet this criteria.

And we are back to natural law arguments.  Which are in a parallel thread.  Why not address them there?

Because inevitably, it gets down to this root level. No matter where we discuss it, you're going to say that some magic piece of paper gives you the ability to force your decisions on me, and me the ability to force my decisions on you, while I say that there is no such right, and we should both leave each other the fuck alone. I have an opinion that I have a negative right to be left the fuck alone, and you have an opinion that you have a positive right to not leave me the fuck alone. There's gonna be conflict there.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
adamas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


VIS ET LIBERTAS


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 10:58:43 AM
 #130

I wonder if the thread starter is a tax office investigator?

"Es ist kein Zeichen geistiger Gesundheit, gut angepasst an eine kranke Gesellschaft zu sein."
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 10:59:37 AM
 #131

...snip...

No, one is negative, the other positive. negative rights can be had by all, without infringing upon another. positive rights do not always meet this criteria.

And we are back to natural law arguments.  Which are in a parallel thread.  Why not address them there?

Because inevitably, it gets down to this root level. No matter where we discuss it, you're going to say that some magic piece of paper gives you the ability to force your decisions on me, and me the ability to force my decisions on you, while I say that there is no such right, and we should both leave each other the fuck alone. I have an opinion that I have a negative right to be left the fuck alone, and you have an opinion that you have a positive right to not leave me the fuck alone. There's gonna be conflict there.

Exactly. So any political system needs a way to resolve these disputes or we will end up needing to kill one another.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 11:03:16 AM
 #132

Exactly. So any political system needs a way to resolve these disputes or we will end up needing to kill one another.

Simple answer: leave each other the fuck alone.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 11:20:27 AM
 #133

Exactly. So any political system needs a way to resolve these disputes or we will end up needing to kill one another.

Simple answer: leave each other the fuck alone.

Not possible.  If I want a road and you don't and it runs across your land, you can be causing me a problem.  I have to deal with that problem that you have imposed on me. 

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 11:25:24 AM
 #134

Exactly. So any political system needs a way to resolve these disputes or we will end up needing to kill one another.

Simple answer: leave each other the fuck alone.

Not possible.  If I want a road and you don't and it runs across your land, you can be causing me a problem.  I have to deal with that problem that you have imposed on me. 

On the contrary, you want to impose upon me. If you want a road, and I don't, build it around my land, or buy my land out. If I won't sell for less than it would cost to build around, well, then that's your choice, isn't it? build around, spend enough money to get me to sell.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 11:29:21 AM
 #135

Exactly. So any political system needs a way to resolve these disputes or we will end up needing to kill one another.

Simple answer: leave each other the fuck alone.

Not possible.  If I want a road and you don't and it runs across your land, you can be causing me a problem.  I have to deal with that problem that you have imposed on me. 

On the contrary, you want to impose upon me. If you want a road, and I don't, build it around my land, or buy my land out. If I won't sell for less than it would cost to build around, well, then that's your choice, isn't it? build around, spend enough money to get me to sell.

Again that costs me money.   Sitting at home suffering the loss you are imposing on me is not an option.  If we can't agree on this, we need a peaceful way to resolve it.  Or else we have to kill one another.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 11:32:16 AM
 #136

Again that costs me money.   Sitting at home suffering the loss you are imposing on me is not an option.  If we can't agree on this, we need a peaceful way to resolve it.  Or else we have to kill one another.

Well, economic decision time. Which is more costly:

Building around my land,

Buying my land so that you can build straight, or

Kicking me off the land by force?

Think carefully, before you answer, the result may not be as clear cut as it seems.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 11:35:33 AM
 #137

Again that costs me money.   Sitting at home suffering the loss you are imposing on me is not an option.  If we can't agree on this, we need a peaceful way to resolve it.  Or else we have to kill one another.

Well, economic decision time. Which is more costly:

Building around my land,

Buying my land so that you can build straight, or

Kicking me off the land by force?

Think carefully, before you answer, the result may not be as clear cut as it seems.

Lets assume its not 2 people but 2 million people.  1.9 million want the road and 100k don't.  We need a way to resolve the dispute that scales to millions of people.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 11:36:52 AM
 #138

Lets assume its not 2 people but 2 million people.  1.9 million want the road and 100k don't.  We need a way to resolve the dispute that scales to millions of people.

Leaving each other the fuck alone scales beautifully all the way up to infinity.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 11:40:38 AM
 #139

Lets assume its not 2 people but 2 million people.  1.9 million want the road and 100k don't.  We need a way to resolve the dispute that scales to millions of people.

Leaving each other the fuck alone scales beautifully all the way up to infinity.

So the 100,000 don't stop the road being built.  Great - I love your idealism.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 11:42:03 AM
 #140

Lets assume its not 2 people but 2 million people.  1.9 million want the road and 100k don't.  We need a way to resolve the dispute that scales to millions of people.

Leaving each other the fuck alone scales beautifully all the way up to infinity.

So the 100,000 don't stop the road being built.  Great - I love your idealism.

No, of course not. If the 1.9 million want a road, they can build it on their land. Surely they have enough.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 12:03:02 PM
 #141

Lets assume its not 2 people but 2 million people.  1.9 million want the road and 100k don't.  We need a way to resolve the dispute that scales to millions of people.

Leaving each other the fuck alone scales beautifully all the way up to infinity.

So the 100,000 don't stop the road being built.  Great - I love your idealism.

No, of course not. If the 1.9 million want a road, they can build it on their land. Surely they have enough.

There will always be 1 person who doesn't consent and the road has to go straight though their property.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 12:07:15 PM
 #142

There will always be 1 person who doesn't consent and the road has to go straight though their property.

What, roads can't curve in your world?

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 12:14:56 PM
 #143

There will always be 1 person who doesn't consent and the road has to go straight though their property.

What, roads can't curve in your world?

You know, I can play with examples too.  Change the road to a railway.  And please don't do that again.   

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 12:17:22 PM
 #144

There will always be 1 person who doesn't consent and the road has to go straight though their property.

What, roads can't curve in your world?

You know, I can play with examples too.  Change the road to a railway.  And please don't do that again.   

Rails can curve, too. Takes more space, but the cars are jointed for a reason.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 12:24:08 PM
 #145

There will always be 1 person who doesn't consent and the road has to go straight though their property.

What, roads can't curve in your world?

You know, I can play with examples too.  Change the road to a railway.  And please don't do that again.   

Rails can curve, too. Takes more space, but the cars are jointed for a reason.

Perhaps you can post about that on a railway forum?  Meanwhile, do you have anything to say on the 2 million people who have a few thousand houses blocking development of their area?

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 12:40:33 PM
 #146

Perhaps you can post about that on a railway forum?  Meanwhile, do you have anything to say on the 2 million people who have a few thousand houses blocking development of their area?



Build around them. Leave them the fuck alone.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 12:53:09 PM
 #147

Perhaps you can post about that on a railway forum?  Meanwhile, do you have anything to say on the 2 million people who have a few thousand houses blocking development of their area?

...snip...

Build around them. Leave them the fuck alone.

Again playing with the example instead of the issue.

You know, in a NAP world this would be simple.  The representatives of the 2 million would take the hold-outs to arbitration.  The arbitrator would evaluate the economic value of the development and if it was high enough, tell the hold-outs to yield up possession.  In "The Mechanic of Freedom", Friedman has this working even for death penalty disputes.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 08, 2012, 01:13:09 PM
 #148

...snip...

No, one is negative, the other positive. negative rights can be had by all, without infringing upon another. positive rights do not always meet this criteria.

And we are back to natural law arguments.  Which are in a parallel thread.  Why not address them there?

Because inevitably, it gets down to this root level. No matter where we discuss it, you're going to say that some magic piece of paper gives you the ability to force your decisions on me, and me the ability to force my decisions on you, while I say that there is no such right, and we should both leave each other the fuck alone. I have an opinion that I have a negative right to be left the fuck alone, and you have an opinion that you have a positive right to not leave me the fuck alone. There's gonna be conflict there.

Exactly. So any political system needs a way to resolve these disputes or we will end up needing to kill one another.

If you can't leave people the fuck alone...yeah
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 01:17:20 PM
 #149

...snip...

No, one is negative, the other positive. negative rights can be had by all, without infringing upon another. positive rights do not always meet this criteria.

And we are back to natural law arguments.  Which are in a parallel thread.  Why not address them there?

Because inevitably, it gets down to this root level. No matter where we discuss it, you're going to say that some magic piece of paper gives you the ability to force your decisions on me, and me the ability to force my decisions on you, while I say that there is no such right, and we should both leave each other the fuck alone. I have an opinion that I have a negative right to be left the fuck alone, and you have an opinion that you have a positive right to not leave me the fuck alone. There's gonna be conflict there.

Exactly. So any political system needs a way to resolve these disputes or we will end up needing to kill one another.

If you can't leave people the fuck alone...yeah

Correct.  If someone is doing something that costs me money, I have an interest in acting.  If not, then we don't have a problem. When I do have a problem, we need a system to resolve it peacefully so we don't have to kill one another.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 08, 2012, 01:24:26 PM
 #150


If you can't leave people the fuck alone...yeah

Correct.  If someone is doing something that costs me money, I have an interest in acting.  If not, then we don't have a problem. When I do have a problem, we need a system to resolve it peacefully so we don't have to kill one another.

I think you know you're just trolling at this point, but I'm game. If I go to a doctor and pay him for my own healthcare, how does that cost you money? You need to answer this first, or the rest of your post is just more bullshit.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 01:29:14 PM
 #151

Correct.  If someone is doing something that costs me money, I have an interest in acting.  If not, then we don't have a problem. When I do have a problem, we need a system to resolve it peacefully so we don't have to kill one another.
I think you know you're just trolling at this point, but I'm game. If I go to a doctor and pay him for my own healthcare, how does that cost you money? You need to answer this first, or the rest of your post is just more bullshit.

If I have a guarantee that you won't turn around and start pinning the bill on me if you are unable to pay him, we are both OK.  

EDIT - wtf did you do to the formatting :@

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 08, 2012, 01:32:20 PM
 #152


If you can't leave people the fuck alone...yeah

Correct.  If someone is doing something that costs me money, I have an interest in acting.  If not, then we don't have a problem. When I do have a problem, we need a system to resolve it peacefully so we don't have to kill one another.

Quote
I think you know you're just trolling at this point, but I'm game. If I go to a doctor and pay him for my own healthcare, how does that cost you money? You need to answer this first, or the rest of your post is just more bullshit.

If I have a guarantee that you won't turn around and start pinning the bill on me if you are unable to pay him, we are both OK.  

Isn't that what YOU want to do!?!?! Alright, its confirmed - you're a moron.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 01:35:21 PM
 #153

...snip...

If I have a guarantee that you won't turn around and start pinning the bill on me if you are unable to pay him, we are both OK.  

Isn't that what YOU want to do!?!?! Alright, its confirmed - you're a moron.

No I want you to pay for your care.  That means that if you don't have cover, I am entitled to ask who gets the bill if you get sick. 

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 08, 2012, 01:40:06 PM
 #154

...snip...

If I have a guarantee that you won't turn around and start pinning the bill on me if you are unable to pay him, we are both OK.  

Isn't that what YOU want to do!?!?! Alright, its confirmed - you're a moron.

No I want you to pay for your care.  That means that if you don't have cover, I am entitled to ask who gets the bill if you get sick. 

Now you're just lying. That's NOT what you want. You want me to pay for my care AND other people's as well. If I don't, you want me to be thrown in prison.

So you're lying. You just said in your last statement "you want me to pay for my care" and that is exactly what I've been saying everyone should do. You actually have the audacity to use my argument against you, against ME!!!

It's ME who WANTS YOU to pay for your own fucking shit - including food and rent too. You're the one asking for handouts, buddy, not me.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 01:45:56 PM
 #155

...snip...

If I have a guarantee that you won't turn around and start pinning the bill on me if you are unable to pay him, we are both OK.  

Isn't that what YOU want to do!?!?! Alright, its confirmed - you're a moron.

No I want you to pay for your care.  That means that if you don't have cover, I am entitled to ask who gets the bill if you get sick. 

Now you're just lying. That's NOT what you want. You want me to pay for my care AND other people's as well. If I don't, you want me to be thrown in prison.

So you're lying. You just said in your last statement "you want me to pay for my care" and that is exactly what I've been saying everyone should do. You actually have the audacity to use my argument against you, against ME!!!

It's ME who WANTS YOU to pay for your own fucking shit - including food and rent too. You're the one asking for handouts, buddy, not me.

If you take the time to check my post record, even if you limit yourself to this thread, my objection is to people who refuse to pay for their health care.  If you find a quotation of me asking for someone else to pay, please paste it.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
nevafuse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 248


View Profile
July 08, 2012, 01:52:08 PM
 #156

I too would pay taxes. I think taxation is necessary one way or another, I only question the amount needed to be taxed.

I'd pay taxes too if they covered exactly what I wanted them to.  But I doubt the current government could ever shrink that much.

The government is generally quite expert at recovering taxes they have decided you owe, and at changing the rules to ensure you can't sidestep the system simply by using something such as bitcoin (bitcoin is either a currency or "payment in kind" when it comes to receiving it as compensation for selling to others - although it's more difficult for the law to be enforced here, it's still the law that you have to pay taxes).

I realize bitcoin isn't 100% anonymous & you could catch people based on the physical items they own (houses, cars, boats), but seems like a lot of effort, especially if everyone starts doing it.  And once more & more people stop paying taxes, the government won't have the money to pay for better collectors, prisons, or police.

In a completely free market with no regulation, what is to stop several large corporations with economies of scale colluding on price?

Any smaller companies couldn't compete fairly and therefore the price wouldn't be driven down.

Multiple things.  A new competitor with a better price.  A fall out in the collusion (prisoner's dilemma).  If it's a scarce resource, an alternative.  If there's no alternative, a high enough price will make it worth it to research/create an alternative.

FA by referring to a commodity X and showing that deplting that commidty will increase price (if demand is stable) even ina free mrket shows you are the one missing some things. Firstly aleterntives may exist for the utility that X posseses and second with he right level of technology no commodity can ever be depleted because it can always be replenished.

Long term a free market is the most efficient system and therefore prices will be lowest. Does that make it impossible for short term cartels to exist (and please lt me note that most monopolies are caused by the interferene of goverments)? No. But that is only short term such cartels can never be stable long term. Just look at the prsioners dilemma as an example. In the end one of the cartel members will attempt to overthow the other. Alternatively a newplayer might come into exitence and go into competition with he catel. Eventually this will happen.

This!

Yup, don't wanna to go to prison. Get all the appropriate people, a well known reputable tax man and a lawyer. But that's thinking in the clouds. Unless you have 100Ghash/s machines to pay for all of it.

So you chose "Depends"?

I dont have a problem paying taxes Smiley

That's rare.

I wonder if the thread starter is a tax office investigator?

It's a trap!  I was surprised someone didn't say something early.  But I'm not & doubt anyone on this thread can live off bitcoins enough to make it worth the IRS's while ATM.  And full disclosure - I chose "Depends."

So your view is that the baby dies?

I'm doubt anyone here wants babies to die or anyone for that matter.  But when it comes to feeding my family - that comes first.  Having a free market system doesn't mean babies have to die.  I'm sure there will still be doctors that do pro bono work or charities to help pay for it.  I think most people in this thread against socialized healthcare just want choice.  They may choose to help a baby they know, but could care less about an alcoholic or crack addict.

=============================================

I'm actually quite surprised by the vote results.  I personally think the "Depends" people could be lumped in with the "No" people so it is still 2/3s that wouldn't pay taxes.  1/3 is still a lot of people that would continue paying their taxes even w/o risks.  I think one of the greatest benefits of bitcoin is the ability to pay only exactly what you want to pay because it is so difficult to steal (if you take the right security measures).  And the first thing on that list of things to stop paying for is probably taxes.

The only reason to limit the block size is to subsidize non-Bitcoin currencies
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 08, 2012, 01:54:24 PM
 #157



If you take the time to check my post record, even if you limit yourself to this thread, my objection is to people who refuse to pay for their health care.  If you find a quotation of me asking for someone else to pay, please paste it.

Lying again. You support NHS, which requires productive people to pay for OTHER PEOPLE'S HEALTHCARE. So the people using their system are refusing to pay for their own care.

You can't have it both ways. You can't say your only problem is people who refuse to pay, and then support a system that enables just that.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 01:57:05 PM
 #158



If you take the time to check my post record, even if you limit yourself to this thread, my objection is to people who refuse to pay for their health care.  If you find a quotation of me asking for someone else to pay, please paste it.

Lying again. You support NHS, which requires productive people to pay for OTHER PEOPLE'S HEALTHCARE. So the people using their system are refusing to pay for their own care.

You can't have it both ways. You can't say your only problem is people who refuse to pay, and then support a system that enables just that.

Wow you are so emotional.  The NHS requires that care be free at the point of delivery.  Everyone pays - just not at the time they are sick.

Can you point to an example of someone who you think is using the NHS for free?  I'm just wondering what type of person you have in mind?  

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 08, 2012, 01:59:02 PM
 #159



If you take the time to check my post record, even if you limit yourself to this thread, my objection is to people who refuse to pay for their health care.  If you find a quotation of me asking for someone else to pay, please paste it.

Lying again. You support NHS, which requires productive people to pay for OTHER PEOPLE'S HEALTHCARE. So the people using their system are refusing to pay for their own care.

You can't have it both ways. You can't say your only problem is people who refuse to pay, and then support a system that enables just that.

Wow you are so emotional.

Can you point to an example of someone who is using the NHS for free?  I'm just wondering what type of person you have in mind? 

Let's not ask stupid questions, shall we? If everyone who uses NHS is paying 100% of their health bills, then such a program isn't even necessary, is it?
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 02:08:59 PM
 #160



If you take the time to check my post record, even if you limit yourself to this thread, my objection is to people who refuse to pay for their health care.  If you find a quotation of me asking for someone else to pay, please paste it.

Lying again. You support NHS, which requires productive people to pay for OTHER PEOPLE'S HEALTHCARE. So the people using their system are refusing to pay for their own care.

You can't have it both ways. You can't say your only problem is people who refuse to pay, and then support a system that enables just that.

Wow you are so emotional.

Can you point to an example of someone who is using the NHS for free?  I'm just wondering what type of person you have in mind?  

Let's not ask stupid questions, shall we? If everyone who uses NHS is paying 100% of their health bills, then such a program isn't even necessary, is it?

Of course it is.  Everyone gets sick; everyone pays taxes; it makes sense to use the tax system to pay for health care.  

Your problem is that you are so used to the American system where you pay nothing until you are sick that a system where you pay all the time confuses you.  It has huge benefits.  People who would be tempted to free-load can't - the tax is taken and their health care is covered.  People who have hugely expensive treatments don't have to fund it all at once...they are paying all their lives and get the care as its needed.

EDIT: the severely disabled, life prisoners who go to jail at a young age and are sick a lot and mental patients who never leave institutional care would probably not pay back in as much as they get in care.  So its not 100%.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 08, 2012, 02:17:17 PM
 #161



Of course it is.  Everyone gets sick; everyone pays taxes; it makes sense to use the tax system to pay for health care.  

Your problem is that you are so used to the American system where you pay nothing until you are sick that a system where you pay all the time confuses you.  It has huge benefits.  People who would be tempted to free-load can't - the tax is taken and their health care is covered.  People who have hugely expensive treatments don't have to fund it all at once...they are paying all their lives and get the care as its needed.

EDIT: the severely disabled, life prisoners who go to jail at a young age and are sick a lot and mental patients who never leave institutional care would probably not pay back in as much as they get in care.  So its not 100%.

You're so used to criticizing Americans like a typical propagandized European that you don't know what you're talking about.

Again, if you want people to pay for their own healthcare, why not just have private insurance?
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 02:23:18 PM
 #162



Of course it is.  Everyone gets sick; everyone pays taxes; it makes sense to use the tax system to pay for health care.  

Your problem is that you are so used to the American system where you pay nothing until you are sick that a system where you pay all the time confuses you.  It has huge benefits.  People who would be tempted to free-load can't - the tax is taken and their health care is covered.  People who have hugely expensive treatments don't have to fund it all at once...they are paying all their lives and get the care as its needed.

EDIT: the severely disabled, life prisoners who go to jail at a young age and are sick a lot and mental patients who never leave institutional care would probably not pay back in as much as they get in care.  So its not 100%.

You're so used to criticizing Americans like a typical propagandized European that you don't know what you're talking about.

Again, if you want people to pay for their own healthcare, why not just have private insurance?

I've lived in America.  I've seen your system and it sucks.  You don't have a free market in health - you have a set of patent monopolists gouging the sick at the very time they are in fear of death.  And anyone who says its wrong gets called a "communist."

Private insurance is fine with one condition.  It has to be compulsory.  I've met a lot of Americans with no insurance and it stinks.  You wait until you are very sick and then drive to to an emergency ward for taxpayer treatment.  I know that people who do that probably don't set out to be free-loaders but its basically shafting the taxpayer. 

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄
cryptoanarchist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106



View Profile
July 08, 2012, 02:25:06 PM
 #163



Of course it is.  Everyone gets sick; everyone pays taxes; it makes sense to use the tax system to pay for health care.  

Your problem is that you are so used to the American system where you pay nothing until you are sick that a system where you pay all the time confuses you.  It has huge benefits.  People who would be tempted to free-load can't - the tax is taken and their health care is covered.  People who have hugely expensive treatments don't have to fund it all at once...they are paying all their lives and get the care as its needed.

EDIT: the severely disabled, life prisoners who go to jail at a young age and are sick a lot and mental patients who never leave institutional care would probably not pay back in as much as they get in care.  So its not 100%.

You're so used to criticizing Americans like a typical propagandized European that you don't know what you're talking about.

Again, if you want people to pay for their own healthcare, why not just have private insurance?

I've lived in America.  I've seen your system and it sucks.  You don't have a free market in health - you have a set of patent monopolists gouging the sick at the very time they are in fear of death.  And anyone who says its wrong gets called a "communist."

Private insurance is fine with one condition.  It has to be compulsory.  I've met a lot of Americans with no insurance and it stinks.  You wait until you are very sick and then drive to to an emergency ward for taxpayer treatment.  I know that people who do that probably don't set out to be free-loaders but its basically shafting the taxpayer. 

we have a government that subsidizes healthcare through systems called Medicaid (for the poor), and Medicare (for the old which most use). So no, we don't have free healthcare, but the problems are from it being socialized, not from free market competition.
Hawker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


Goal Bonanza - Football Betting Revolution


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2012, 02:32:51 PM
 #164

...snip...

we have a government that subsidizes healthcare through systems called Medicaid (for the poor), and Medicare (for the old which most use). So no, we don't have free healthcare, but the problems are from it being socialized, not from free market competition.

Please, lets stick with facts.  The US system has very little free market competition at the point that matters - the cost of drugs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/high-health-care-costs-its-all-in-the-pricing/2012/02/28/gIQAtbhimR_story.html

You are giving patent monopolies.  The patent holders don't have published price lists.  The sick are scared of dying and thus they get gouged.   The core of your price problem is patent monopolies.

Anyway, back on topic, health care that uses the tax system to collect its costs is a perfectly valid option.  It avoids free-loaders and saves on marketing costs.  Compulsory private insurance might be as good but I personally don't see the difference between compulsory insurance and tax.

.
▄▄▄▄▄
GOAL BONANZA
.
▄▄▄
...FOOTBALL BETTING REVOLUTION...
▄▄▄  WHITEPΛPER  ▄  FΛCEBOOK  ▄  TELEGRΛM  ▄  SLACK  ▄  TWITTER  ▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄
.
▄▄▄▄▄