Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (6360)	12/8/2005 12:16:37 PM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542148

If you don't believe in the social contract of being a US citizen with sovereignty vested in the people who elect representatives with authority to tax and spend, and you can't change that system to your liking, it would seem your only option is to try to become a citizen of a country with a system more to your liking. Of course, the IRS slammed the door on that when they imposed the 10-year post-immigration tax burden on US citizens trying to bolt to tax havens. But the principle is the same. By remaining an American citizen, you are part of a contract. You can complain about how that contract is executed, but not the fundamental principles of that contract as long as you choose to remain bound by it.

To: TimF who wrote (6360)	12/8/2005 7:53:19 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542148

I think where we differ, Tim, is as follows. I gather for you the payment of tax dollars is extortion, period, because the state holds the threat of force in the background. For me, it is only extortion if the payment is to an illegitimate government. Obviously, the issue is then the definition of a legitimate government. We are, definitely, not on the same planet on this issue. Enjoy.

To: TimF who wrote (6360)	12/8/2005 8:26:15 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542148

If someone takes money from you by force or threat of force than I think it is properly considered extortion. I think that is the definition of the word. I think that holds true even if they put the money to good use, and even if you would have given over the money had you had a choice. ... I still say its extortion if you don't have a choice. Well, I guess you can feel free to move to any country that is willing to let you pay only those taxes you choose to pay. And provides to each resident only the services they have chosen to fund. Er, what, there are none? But surely somewhere there is a country free of extortion, i.e. where no one pays any taxes they themselves don't wish to pay? Nearest I can think of are those defended and with access limited by a richer and greater power, e.g. the US or EU tax havens. So feel free to move to one. If you can. But these are not applicable general cases, they're boltholes by and for the rich and conscience-free. You want any collective government? You pay the collective taxes. Or, you go for a pure anarchist state where you pay only what you choose to anybody you choose... just ask any Afghani how well this works. Or explain why a strong, healthy and ruthless single man with a gun and no dependents should pay any government extortion? His 4x4 can cross any terrain he meets. He sells crack to willing buyers to pay any bills. If he gets ill and can't pay for care, he'll die, but he's no insurance anyway. Of course, he wants no army defending him - he'll sell to any customer. He wants NO taxes, and anyone trying to demand taxes from him is obviously an extortionist using greater force. Is that your ideal society man? If not, please explain how he's prevented, without being 'extorted' by someone else's army - since in every single weak state (e.g., much of Africa) this is the dominant class.