Question on Socialism

[Stephan]

Hey everyone, I'm new here. I have a simple question, which I'd like to discuss.

If I live in a socialist country, why is it moral for the government to force me to give up money?

Take a concrete situation. I say I live in socialist country ABC. I never pay my taxes because I believe that I own the fruits of my labor. So, the police show up and try to take me away. I resist arrest until I am killed.

Is this killing justified?

(Thanks in advance for any responses!)

[redstar2000]

Yes, Stephan, it's moral.

And I think you meant to start this topic in Opposing Ideologies, so I will move it there for you.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[BuyOurEverything]

Well if you decided to steal money from the people (ie not paying your taxes) then you would be arrested. Killing you would not be justified unless of course you actually tried to kill the police. Resisting arrest would probably result in you being beaten and yes, that is fine by me.

[peaccenicked]

Stefan, you should be hung, drawn and quartered. I have never heard of such selfishness. Deportation would disgrace the socialist State.

[Bolshevika]

Stephan, I don't think any police force should stop your theft (all forms of private property are theft in my opinion), I think we should organize the peasantry, arm them, and have them get what is rightfully theirs. However, regardless of what happens, yes your death is certainly justified if you resist with violence.

In a socialist state you wouldn't be purged just for having land, we would give you a chance to give up all your land and live a collective, class conscious lifestlye. Violent measures are only taken when you resist with violence.

I do not believe in vast taxation, because a nation can easily survive off the surplus labour (since there is no one person profitting in a socialist state, surplus would be generated) production. It is disgraceful that the working people are forced to pay taxes on things like food, water, and other basic necessities.

[@[email protected]@]

my tax is 20%.

[Monty Cantsin]

You can have your own peace of land; you can in Cuba it just can't be over a certain size. But for being killed only if you tried to kill the police and they couldn’t stop you without being harmed. So pay your tax you do now what’s the differences from now.

[Jaha]

Stephan,

i am one to think that only killing when there is an immediate threat can be justified.

i would have to say that if you were killed, i would argue for the murder trial of the people who killed you.

that begs the question then, how would the socialist system be enforced?

id like to think people would never be greedy and enforcement would be useless, but greed is bound to happen here and there.

well the first thing to know would be that the only effective ways for you as an individual to deny socialism in a socialist society would be by force. if you lock your goods in your house, it isnt really your house, someone else would have a key. you would need to bury them or hide them away and that would make you see your own greed. you would need to hoarde your things and in the end someone would notice your suspicious activity. the other option is by force. carry a gun, for example. if someone approached you to take your goods, you would need to threaten to shoot them. then your killing would be justified.

ultimately though, your first actual punishment would be to have social services denied to you. health, security, fire, food, clothing, shelter would all be denied. you would probably loose your job too. effectively, you would need to become self dependent. . if you got sick, the doctors wouldnt heal you, if you got hungry, nobody would feed you, your clothes would become dirty. you would need to become a beggar or a hermitt. they live harsh lives even if you have a hoarde of goods.... ....you would run out eventually.

ahama

[Stephan]

Redstar, I placed it in theory because I thought that the answer to the question I posed was central to theory of socialism.

I guess I should have asked for a little bit more in my original question. I was curious why it is moral, which would require a little more explanation. Based on this, I guess this topic could even be moved to philosophy.

Alright, so on to bigger and better things...

So, the killing would be justified because you all would view a person who does not pay taxes as someone who is committing a crime. In this instance, you would call such a person a thief.

According to your posts, whatever a person produces rightfully belongs to "the people", "the state", or "the peasantry." If a person decides to act selfishly, i.e. - to keep what they produce, then they are rightfully subject to physical force: being arrested. If they resist such an arrest it is justified for them to be killed.

So, workers under socialism are forced to give what they earn/produce to "the people" etc... Like a form of bound servitude to "the people."

Hmm. This makes a little more sense to me. However, who exactly are "the people"? Could someone define that for me? My first impression is that it is the lower class or something...?

[Misodoctakleidist]

Any form of private property is immoral because the whole concept of private property is based on theft. The first person to claim a bit of unclaimed land stole it becuase prior to that it would have been concidered the shared property of society, this person had to take the land by force.

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2003, 04:58 AM
Hey everyone, I'm new here. I have a simple question, which I'd like to discuss.

If I live in a socialist country, why is it moral for the government to force me to give up money?

Take a concrete situation. I say I live in socialist country ABC. I never pay my taxes because I believe that I own the fruits of my labor. So, the police show up and try to take me away. I resist arrest until I am killed.

Is this killing justified?

(Thanks in advance for any responses!)
YOU DUMBASS...IF YOU EVADE TAXES IN ANY COUNTRY YOU"LL BE ARRESSTED

[Hoppe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2003, 04:58 AM
Hey everyone, I'm new here. I have a simple question, which I'd like to discuss.

If I live in a socialist country, why is it moral for the government to force me to give up money?

Take a concrete situation. I say I live in socialist country ABC. I never pay my taxes because I believe that I own the fruits of my labor. So, the police show up and try to take me away. I resist arrest until I am killed.

Is this killing justified?

(Thanks in advance for any responses!)
Stephan, you could better ask yourself if it is immoral in any society that someone uses force to get your money?


Well if you decided to steal money from the people (ie not paying your taxes) then you would be arrested.

Why I am stealing from the people? I am allowed to defend myself against an armed robber, but not against the government? This means nothing more than slavery to me.

[@[email protected]@]

Perhaps, we should initiate a movement: Let the American soldiers go home crosses the Christmas day?

[Stephan]

Hmm it appears that everyone has evaded my new questions except for the capitalist Hoppe. Hoppe, I suggest that you, with your capitalist sentiments, go to www.capitalismforum.com . That forum is loaded with people like you who view bounded servitude as slavery.

But, again, can someone please define who "the people" are for me? Is it just everyone else?

Also, I see two very different responses.

On one hand, there is Miso, and some others who say that it is perfectly justified for someone to be killed for evading taxes. They say that that individual is stealing from "the people."

Then, there is Jaha's response, which says that an individual who doesn't pay their taxes would have their government services cut off. This is completely different. This means that individuals voluntarily give what they produce to the government, and if they don't want to, they don't get the servivces. So the government is like a company with a monopoly on all services. So, with this view point, force wouldn't be initiated against the individual not paying their taxes.

Which one of these is the correct Socialist response?

After discussing this I'd like to discuss the concept of property, specifically in light of Miso's post. I think this will be a fruitful discussion

[BuyOurEverything]

I think you are misinterpereting people's responses. Nobody is saying that killing you for not paying your taxes is justified. We are saying that killing you would be justified only if you attempted to kill a police officer, how can you disagree with this? Normally, if you didn't pay your taxes, there would be no violent arrest, you would be peacefully escorted to the police station, or the applicable government office. Violence would onyl occur if you initiated it.


But, again, can someone please define who "the people" are for me? Is it just everyone else?

The people are everyone, including you. Taxes go to fund things such as health care, shelters, food, transportation and roads etc. By not paying your taxes, you are stealing money from these institutions. If you want to live off "the fruits of your labour" or somesuch thing, you should move into the wilderness away from everybody else and hunt and pick berries.


On one hand, there is Miso, and some others who say that it is perfectly justified for someone to be killed for evading taxes. They say that that individual is stealing from "the people."

I don't think miso, or anyone lse, said that.


Then, there is Jaha's response, which says that an individual who doesn't pay their taxes would have their government services cut off. This is completely different. This means that individuals voluntarily give what they produce to the government, and if they don't want to, they don't get the servivces. So the government is like a company with a monopoly on all services. So, with this view point, force wouldn't be initiated against the individual not paying their taxes.

The government exists to serve the people. It is elected by the people and distributes the wealth to them. I don't believe simply cutting off someone's services is an appropritate measure to take though. Unless they're in prison (and for that matter even if they are) they are reaping the benefits of society simply by living in it.


Which one of these is the correct Socialist response?


There is no "correct" socialist responce because there are many branches and interperetation of socialism but I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to find someone who actually supports execution for not paying one's taxes.

[elijahcraig]

Morality should have nothing to do with it.

[Hoppe]

The people are everyone, including you. Taxes go to fund things such as health care, shelters, food, transportation and roads etc. By not paying your taxes, you are stealing money from these institutions. If you want to live off "the fruits of your labour" or somesuch thing, you should move into the wilderness away from everybody else and hunt and pick berries.


How can you steal something which they don't have?

By the way, Stephan and I have democratically decided to reposses your car, could you please hand it over to us. Or do you think that is ridiculous?

[BuyOurEverything]

How can you steal something which they don't have?

If you steal it, they don't have it. If you don't pay money that you owe, that is just as much theft as simply stealing the money.


By the way, Stephan and I have democratically decided to reposses your car, could you please hand it over to us. Or do you think that is ridiculous?

That is, of course, ridiculous because:

A) Your "democratic" decision represents the interest of two people, not the majority of citizens.
B) This would be illegal because the government cannot arbitrarily decide to confiscate the belongings of citizens. Taxes are equal for everybody and everybody has to pay them.

By the way, you bring up an interesting point. Do you believe in democracy? If you do, then if 51% of the population voted to put all arabs in concentration camps, would you support that?

[Hoppe]

If you steal it, they don't have it. If you don't pay money that you owe, that is just as much theft as simply stealing the money.

I am not stealing anything. Why do I owe them anything, do I have a voluntarily signed contract?


A) Your "democratic" decision represents the interest of two people, not the majority of citizens.


Doesn't matter, we are still the majority. Whether there are 3 or 3.000.000 inhabitants.


B) This would be illegal because the government cannot arbitrarily decide to confiscate the belongings of citizens. Taxes are equal for everybody and everybody has to pay them.

Illegal? Paying taxes is immoral, since tax is taken by force. I am happy to hear rich people don't have to pay more than poor people according to you. :lol:


By the way, you bring up an interesting point. Do you believe in democracy? If you do, then if 51% of the population voted to put all arabs in concentration camps, would you support that?

No, and your example is precisely the reason why all these people here advocating democracy are so naive. All people who believe in the freedom and rights of an individual can never support democracy, except when to decide to order chinese or pizza with friends.

[Pete]

The kind of democracy I advocate is called consensus. That is how things work in the Territories and in many smaller groups. In practice it means 85% majority, but it takes care of minority rights and appeases the majority. A lot better than majority rules or one man on top...making it impossible for such a situation (the arab one) to occur.

-Pete

[Stephan]

Buyoureverything,

"I think you are misinterpereting people's responses. Nobody is saying that killing you for not paying your taxes is justified."

Hold on, I'm not sure I understand. I think people are saying that. HEre's where I think the confusion comes from.

It seems that most people here see that a person who evades taxes is committing a crime. THey are initiating force against "the people." THerefore, they say that the police are not initiating force against them, they are simply rightfully arresting them. This is why you say that I am not acting properly in my self-defense, and that killing me would be justified.

Now, take another example. Buyoureverything, say you are driving down the street, and, while at a stop light, I run out, and without asking you, wash your windshield. Now, should you be forced to pay me for that service? Perhaps you didn't want me to wash that windshield, but I did anyway. So, if you drove off, cursing me for providing you with a service you didn't want, would that constitute theft?

[BuyOurEverything]

Doesn't matter, we are still the majority

No you're not.


Illegal? Paying taxes is immoral, since tax is taken by force. I am happy to hear rich people don't have to pay more than poor people according to you.

Everyone is payed the same so there are no rich or poor people.


No, and your example is precisely the reason why all these people here advocating democracy are so naive. All people who believe in the freedom and rights of an individual can never support democracy, except when to decide to order chinese or pizza with friends.

So you support dectatorship?

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2003, 10:55 PM
Buyoureverything,

"I think you are misinterpereting people's responses. Nobody is saying that killing you for not paying your taxes is justified."

Hold on, I'm not sure I understand. I think people are saying that. HEre's where I think the confusion comes from.

It seems that most people here see that a person who evades taxes is committing a crime. THey are initiating force against "the people." THerefore, they say that the police are not initiating force against them, they are simply rightfully arresting them. This is why you say that I am not acting properly in my self-defense, and that killing me would be justified.

Now, take another example. Buyoureverything, say you are driving down the street, and, while at a stop light, I run out, and without asking you, wash your windshield. Now, should you be forced to pay me for that service? Perhaps you didn't want me to wash that windshield, but I did anyway. So, if you drove off, cursing me for providing you with a service you didn't want, would that constitute theft?
Question do you evade taxes now? Because I"m pretty sure if you are the police will be coming for you.

Tax evasion isn't a crime in socialism..it's a crime period genius

[Stephan]

Hey Lard,

Whether I pay taxes or not is none of your business, and really has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

However, you do almost make a good point by saying "Tax evasion isn't a crime in socialism..it's a crime period genius." You're right, tax evasion in a socialist or fascist country or in a country with a blend of socialism and capitalism (like America) is a crime. However, by saying "it's a crime period" you make it sound like all political systems rely on coerced taxation.

This is simply false. Under laissez-faire capitalism, there is no forced taxation. However, this is a digression from the questions I have raised. So, if you're going to post, I'd appreciate it if it was on topic or at least relevant to the questions I've posted.

Buyoureverything, I am still waiting for your response!

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2003, 11:42 PM
Hey Lard,

Whether I pay taxes or not is none of your business, and really has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

However, you do almost make a good point by saying "Tax evasion isn't a crime in socialism..it's a crime period genius." You're right, tax evasion in a socialist or fascist country or in a country with a blend of socialism and capitalism (like America) is a crime. However, by saying "it's a crime period" you make it sound like all political systems rely on coerced taxation.

This is simply false. Under laissez-faire capitalism, there is no forced taxation. However, this is a digression from the questions I have raised. So, if you're going to post, I'd appreciate it if it was on topic or at least relevant to the questions I've posted.

Buyoureverything, I am still waiting for your response!

However, you do almost make a good point by saying "Tax evasion isn't a crime in socialism..it's a crime period genius." You're right, tax evasion in a socialist or fascist country or in a country with a blend of socialism and capitalism (like America) is a crime. However, by saying "it's a crime period" you make it sound like all political systems rely on coerced taxation.

No governments that provide services for their people require taxes. You don't want a police force? Don't pay taxes. You don't want a fire department? DOn't pay taxes. You don't want an infrastructure? Don't Pay taxes. Governments all require taxes (except of course for your laissez-faire capitalism), now how they spend this tax money is one aspect of whether or not that nation is socialist.



Under laissez-faire capitalism, there is no forced taxation.

And in laisez-faire capitalism you can have 7 year olds working in your mines for 4 cents a day.

You want no government restriction on buisness, ok, you don't want the government to take taxes, fine. But then whats the point of a government?

To create laws that protect the rights of their citizens? Well how will they protect them if you don't want to pay taxes for police forces?

in laissez-faire the government doesn't have any involvement except for the bare minimum to prtect property rights....so even in this you are going to be paying a tax, a very small tax but still a tax

[Stephan]

Lard,

"Governments all require taxes (except of course for your laissez-faire capitalism"
"in laissez-faire the government doesn't have any involvement except for the bare minimum to prtect property rights....so even in this you are going to be paying a tax, a very small tax but still a tax"

All I'm going to say is that a gov't that forces people to pay anything is NOT laissez faire capitalist and has thrown away property rights. However, this is completely off topic from what was being discussed. If you'd like to talk shop about LF capitalism start a new thread.

Otherwise, keep the posts on topic, all of these digressions are just taking away from what I originally posted, which still hasn't been properly addressed.

[Rasta Sapian]

I don't think that you should be killed, just beat around a little bit. A classless socialist society without a global monetary system based on improving the well being of society and its people could easily point you out for your greed and impirialistic values, mao would kill you, i would just beat you around, pick the oranges off the trees and share them with your brothers and sisters and we would all spit the seeds in your sinfull face!

peace yall :)

[Iron Star]

To create laws that protect the rights of their citizens? Well how will they protect them if you don't want to pay taxes for police forces?

Ayn Rand argued that taxes funding military and police forces were ok as every citizen benefits from them.

I don't know what other libertarians had to say on the issue.

[BuyOurEverything]

Now, take another example. Buyoureverything, say you are driving down the street, and, while at a stop light, I run out, and without asking you, wash your windshield. Now, should you be forced to pay me for that service? Perhaps you didn't want me to wash that windshield, but I did anyway. So, if you drove off, cursing me for providing you with a service you didn't want, would that constitute theft?

No it would not constitute theft. In this case, you have not been elected by the people to govern the dispersment of resources and washing my window is not in the interest of society.


All I'm going to say is that a gov't that forces people to pay anything is NOT laissez faire capitalist and has thrown away property rights.

If you oppose any taxes, how do you propose to protect personal property, defend the state, arrest criminals, etc.?


Otherwise, keep the posts on topic, all of these digressions are just taking away from what I originally posted, which still hasn't been properly addressed.

What hasn't been addressed?

[Lardlad95]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2003, 12:35 AM
Lard,

"Governments all require taxes (except of course for your laissez-faire capitalism"
"in laissez-faire the government doesn't have any involvement except for the bare minimum to prtect property rights....so even in this you are going to be paying a tax, a very small tax but still a tax"

All I'm going to say is that a gov't that forces people to pay anything is NOT laissez faire capitalist and has thrown away property rights. However, this is completely off topic from what was being discussed. If you'd like to talk shop about LF capitalism start a new thread.

Otherwise, keep the posts on topic, all of these digressions are just taking away from what I originally posted, which still hasn't been properly addressed.
Um unfortunately you aren't the dictator of the thread you can't control what others post, that isn't how it works. FOr the most part the topic follows the original post but usually they all divert into a new subject.

Second...then what in your opinion is the point of govt. in lf capitalism

[Stephan]

Lard,

I don't see why me not being the dictator of this thread is unfortunate to you. I thought socialists were supposed to be anti-dictatoriship? Anyways, I'm not acting like a dictator, I am simply saying that we should keep the posts on topic. If you want to digress, you are free too; however, I will not reply to any indirect subject changes unless they are brought up in a new thread. If you would like to talk shop about LF capitalism, and know what I think about government, start a new thread, since I don't want to have two different conversations going on in this thread.

Buyoureverything,

"What hasn't been addressed?"

Well, you stated "I think you are misinterpereting people's responses. Nobody is saying that killing you for not paying your taxes is justified."

I disagreed, and talked about why I disagreed, but you haven't responded completely to that post yet. However, I must say, your responses so far have been appreciated.

Now, in response to your last post, which is very interesting....


No it would not constitute theft. In this case, you have not been elected by the people to govern the dispersment of resources and washing my window is not in the interest of society.

So if I, the window washer, forced you into paying for my services it would not be justified. According to you, it's not justified because only someone who has been elected is allowed to enforce the dispersement of resrouces. Also, I take it that only an elected person can determine what is in the interest of society.

So as long as someone is elected into office, they are allowed to force people into accepting services that those people may not want. THe only difference between this and the example I provided with the window washer is that the window washer hasn't been voted into power. So, as long as someone has majority support, they can force people to pay for things they don't want.

I do not see how this democratic-qualification makes it justified to force people to pay for services they do not want. The reason I don't see it as justified in arresting me for tax evasion, even if I used public infrastructure, is because I wasn't given the chance to voluntarily choose that infrastructure. It was basically forced down my throat.

But, here's a new question, would I be allowed to voluntarily leave such a system and go live somewhere else?

[BuyOurEverything]

I don't see why me not being the dictator of this thread is unfortunate to you. I thought socialists were supposed to be anti-dictatoriship?

I don't think you're really that stupid so please stop with the facade.


Well, you stated "I think you are misinterpereting people's responses. Nobody is saying that killing you for not paying your taxes is justified."

I disagreed, and talked about why I disagreed, but you haven't responded completely to that post yet. However, I must say, your responses so far have been appreciated.

I don't see how you could have possibly interpereted people's posts as such. They said that if you tried to attack the police and they were forced to defend themselves, then your killing would be justified. Do you disagree with this? Do you think it should be acceptable for you to kill a cop? I mean, I'm against police brutality as much as the next guy, but purely theoretically, if the arrestee initiates the violence, the cop has aright to defend themself.


So if I, the window washer, forced you into paying for my services it would not be justified. According to you, it's not justified because only someone who has been elected is allowed to enforce the dispersement of resrouces. Also, I take it that only an elected person can determine what is in the interest of society.

So as long as someone is elected into office, they are allowed to force people into accepting services that those people may not want. THe only difference between this and the example I provided with the window washer is that the window washer hasn't been voted into power. So, as long as someone has majority support, they can force people to pay for things they don't want.

I do not see how this democratic-qualification makes it justified to force people to pay for services they do not want. The reason I don't see it as justified in arresting me for tax evasion, even if I used public infrastructure, is because I wasn't given the chance to voluntarily choose that infrastructure. It was basically forced down my throat.

Yes, that's the best possible system. Democracy's far from perfect but with enough reforms, I think it could be made to work. The elected officials would decide how best to distribute resources. If taxes were voluntary, nobody would pay them. Also, I don't really believe that anyone would pay taxes because they would just recieve their pay and since everyone is paid the same, there would be no uncertainty about how much tax to pay, thus no tax returns etc.


But, here's a new question, would I be allowed to voluntarily leave such a system and go live somewhere else?

Yes.

[Lardlad95]

I do not see how this democratic-qualification makes it justified to force people to pay for services they do not want. The reason I don't see it as justified in arresting me for tax evasion, even if I used public infrastructure, is because I wasn't given the chance to voluntarily choose that infrastructure. It was basically forced down my throat.

The fuck? I WAS TRYING TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE SAME THING AND YOU SAID I WENT OFF TOPIC!!!!????

Also when I said "unfortunately" I meant unfortunately for you

[Don't Change Your Name]

Aren't you forced to give money to the government where you live? Wow, I didnt know that in capitalist countries you dont pay taxes!!!

[Stephan]

Buyoureverything,

Well, if that's what you believe is the best political system, fine - as long as I can leave, which you say is ok.
One thing though, I want you to know, since it's all out on the table now. If you had answered that people would not be allowed to leave such a society, it would be outright slavery, which is exactly what bounded servitude is. (Still though, I do not see how you can justify anyone whether he is a bum washing windshields or a parasitic beuracrat who has 51% of the vote behind him forcing someone to pay for a service they never asked for. As such, I'd like to see you try to justify it.)

This raises a new question. What makes you think that people will live under such a system? Specifically, what makes you think that professionals in fields such as science, engineering, medicine, etc.. will not leave?

I think it's pretty well known that people who work in these fields generally flee to the countries that give them the most freedom. That is, the countries that allow them to pursue independent research. For example, the "brain drain" in Britain, where scientists were immigrating at an alarming rate to the US because of England's socialist laws that were being passed.

Again, I don't see how capitalism anything directly to do with this. However, I'd be more than happy to talk about it with you if you are genuinely curious about. Based on your comments, it seems that most of you have a very limited understanding of it (this is not intended as an insult).

El Infiltrado, that's right, in LF capitalist countries you don't pay taxes. However, none of these countries exist or ever have existed.

Lard,

I have no desire to control this thread, as such, it is not unfortunate to me.

[SgtPepper369]

As long as everyone is charged the same percentage of their money for taxes I'm fine with it. A rich man's five percent is a bigger amout than a poor mans five percent... but its the same amount in the long run. Also when thinking about not paying taxes just remember where your money comes from... your government. So if you want more money I'd suggest you give up some and that way money curcilation (by my knowlage paid for by taxes) will stay in circulation. Now to make sure you don't spend your money on some leader you'd rather see hanging from a tree, or working at a dairy queen, we have this thing called "voting" every four years you "vote" for the person who you think will spend your tax money the right way. Now if you don't "vote" you can't really complain about your leader can you ?

(I don't know if that made sense)

[el_profe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2003, 10:58 PM



Illegal? Paying taxes is immoral, since tax is taken by force. I am happy to hear rich people don't have to pay more than poor people according to you.

Everyone is payed the same so there are no rich or poor people.


There is no rich that is right, there is no middle either. just poor. that is except the ones in gov. they are the only one's that are rich.

As to everyone is paid the same?
Lets say I live in a perfect communist society, I work at a shoe plant i and others put the pairs of shoes in the boxes, that is my job. What if I put 200 pairs of shoes in boxes but 2 other of my coworkers only put 100 pairs of shoes in boxes and 2 other put 400 pairs of shoes in boxes. Shouldnt the ones that work the most get paid more? and if I am going to get paid the same as people that put in less work than me , then why should I bother working harder than others? :blink:

[Hoppe]

I could expect this question. Why do you think that if one is not supporting democracy he would rather have a dictatorship. I am libertarian so that should solve your question.

My bike example is exactly the same as a majority vote in governments, so you would have to deal with all arabs being put into slaverycamps.



Everyone is payed the same so there are no rich or poor people.

No, only poor. ;)


I don't see how you could have possibly interpereted people's posts as such. They said that if you tried to attack the police and they were forced to defend themselves, then your killing would be justified. Do you disagree with this? Do you think it should be acceptable for you to kill a cop? I mean, I'm against police brutality as much as the next guy, but purely theoretically, if the arrestee initiates the violence, the cop has aright to defend themself.

The police (or the state) is the aggressor in this case. So you therefor have the right to defend yourself.


Ayn Rand argued that taxes funding military and police forces were ok as every citizen benefits from them.

I believe Rand was in favour of voluntary payments in stead of taxation.



But, here's a new question, would I be allowed to voluntarily leave such a system and go live somewhere else?

Yes.

My god, how can you say such a thing and on the other hand claim that people not paying taxes are stealing from society?

[Stephan]

Hoppe raises an excellent question, he has uncovered a contradiction.

If you say that the Earth is owned collectively by "the people" and that someone who claims resources as their own is "stealing" from "the people." Then people shouldn't be allowed to leave your community. Why would you let someone leave and "steal" resources that belong to the state? Hell, if you were to be consistent in your principles, anyone attempting escape should be arrested for attempted "theft."

ALso, Buyoureverything,

The police in my original example are the aggressors. An innocent man has a right to defend himself from imprisonment (or enslavement). I don't understand why you think the police would come in and peacefully persuade me to come along. It would go something like this...

Police: "Sir, you are under arrest for stealing precious resources from the state by tax evasion."
Me: "I refuse to come with you. I do not recognize my actions as theft. You cannot force me to pay for services I had no choice in receiving."
Police: "So be it."
::Police advance, pulling out clubs. I fire on the police to prevent them from imprisoning me::

Even this makes the police look nice. Most likely, I wouldn't have a chance. They'd probably come in the middle of the night, breaking down my door, and quickly suppress me.

PS. Hoppe, you're right. Ayn Rand NEVER said that she supported coerced taxation. Ayn Rand believed that it was immoral for any government to initiate force against an individual to collect tax revenue.

[Stephan]

Come on guys! I've been waiting all day!

Don't let a radical laissez-faire capitalist come into your forum and push you around!

::taps foot::

Proove me wrong!

=D

[Stephan]

Awwww, nobody wants to play with me.

Oh well. It was fun while it lasted, but now I must leave this board, my purpose is accomplished.

[el_profe]

last 5 post all from capitalist, and they could not respond to our questions. Oh well , i gues they just dont know how.

[el_profe]

AND WHY DID NO ONE RESPOND TO OUR last ARGUMENTS HERE?

[el_profe]

WHY DOES EVERYONE IGNORE The last 8 post, including the first 3 of those last 5. where we pose questions or/and arguments, yet none of you can respond to those arguments.

[Urban Rubble]

First off guys, I haven't even been into this thread. I just came in here and read the 4th and 5th pages so I can't contribute to this discussion right now. I just wanted to say, posting 5 messages in a row bragging that nobody could refute your points makes you look like real *****es.

Oh, and el profe, you shouldn't be acting as if you stumped anyone, from what I've read you sound like quite the ignorant little kid. Stephan, you seem alright, you should stick around.