Quote:
Originally Posted by clowntable
Huh? Taxation=theft makes logical sense as long as taxes are not voluntary. Property=theft makes no sense at all because it is just a self referential cluster****.
I don't equate the meaning of the word "theft" in those 2 examples. I don't agree that property=theft but I think it's an interesting notion that has merit and is worth exploring (for some people, not me
).
Of course taxation=theft makes sense but it's just such an obtuse way to look at taxation I find it utterly silly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by clowntable
Which brings me to an interesting question. Assume your country would do something very radical and switch to an all voluntary form of taxation. You simply look at how much you made in a year and decide what %age you decide to give to government to spend on whatever programs they run.
I take it most ZOMG capitalism is evil folks would think this %age would approach 0?
I'll make a claim that whatever taxrate we'd arrive at in this mental experiment would be an excellent measuring stick for the boundaries of government size.
um, yea 90% of people would pay ~0%(myself included). I believe in the potential of the individual but the individual can be very selfish atm. The collective is can be ****ed. Maybe that's why I don't see taxation as theft and governments as bad. I want to elect a government that would make it illegal for me to do things that are against the interest of the collective (within reason-I like to maximize freedom of the individual, so long as it isn't at the expense of a minority subset of the collective).
fwiw, I do think capitalism was a decent stepping stone for lolhumanity and we'll have some form of capitalism for a long time in the future. It's just lolobvious to me that reforms are necessary and slow steps to shorten the gap between the rich and poor need to be taken (as they have been and will continue to be taken). We need regulations, humans can't handle a free market, imo.
/lolrant with lolterminology