Your daily reminder that taxation is theft.
>roads can be built through private companies
>currency can be built and exchanged through an agreed and translatable note from banks of different membership
>energy (including green energy) can be regulated in house and made more affordable through the reduction in taxes that it will see.
Unfortunately, taxes are required to ensure that politicians and other workers for the government are compensated.
That said, Governments sole responsibility is to protect the liberties and provide for the common welfare of the citizens
>police enforce local ordinances on a state and local level
>federal power is limited to maintaining a local military that works in conjunction with a national volunteer militia that is armed and trained by said government
So when are you going to give up your archaic ways of getting fucked in the ass by your government?
>tfw because of taxes you work for free for at least a month during the year.
>yfw you realize that because of all the taxes you actually do pay you work on average 6 months out of the year for the government
>real tax rate for majority of Americans is 58%
http://www.nowandfutures.com/taxes.html
>Unfortunately, taxes are required to ensure that politicians and other workers for the government are compensated.
That's why government should be gradually abolished.
>That said, Governments sole responsibility is to protect the liberties and provide for the common welfare of the citizens
Which is completely counter-productive, since the government doesn't actually protect your liberties, it takes them away, and it not only takes your liberty away but a huge chunk of your private property and the fruits of your labour too if you let it get big enough, and this idea that the government should take care of it's citizens and their welfare like a fatherly entity is a very dangerous idea since it tends to give the state more authority and control over the people in exchange for a FALSE sense of security.
You know in which countries this idea that the state should be responsible for the citizens and some sort of "common good"? Socialist shitholes like Venezuela, Brazil, North Korea, Cuba and other countries where you have absolutely no freedom and the citizens are basically slaves to the ruling political elite.
You are in right path, you already understand the violent nature of taxation, but you still didn't come to the obvious conclusion, you still think the state is necessary when it's actually not, you're almost there.
>>67998174
>>67998684
>>67999052
ITT: fucking whackjobs who live in their own fantasy Tralala-lala Land.
>>67999146
Soon you will be awoken to the shackles that are taxation and oppression friend.....
He said that before gov decided that income tax should last forever.
>>67999146
This is, in fact, one of the most intelligent arguments a statist bootlicker could possibly think of to protect his bubble of ignorance.
No argument a statist might come up with gets much better than this.
>>67999052
I would slightly disagree that government is irrelevant.
It's common knowledge that the government is the source of the majority of problems in this country. However, people will always need rules to function. A strong government leads to oppression. A weak government leads to possible foreign oppression. What would possibly be a better solution would be collective of individuals who were politicians part time that represented the people but still had to go back to their populous to both answer and converse with them. And of course politicians should never be compensated more than the median salary in the country. Nobody should become a millionaire as a politician.
>So when are you going to give up your archaic ways of getting fucked in the ass by your government?
What the fuck can I do about it?
Also, I would be OK with taxes, but Poles also pay for mandatory social insurance. I wish that was done with.
>>67998174
>muh roads
an-cap death camps when?
>>67998174
>roads can be built through private companies
And who is going to pay these companies anon.
>>67998174
>Your daily reminder that taxation is theft.
It it. But you literally can't do anything about that. Army funded by taxation > any libertarian bullshit. It will come, bend you over and force to pay taxes.
>>67998174
nothing wrong in taxes however the tax rate is far too high we're enslaved by our Government.
>>67999052
>you still think the state is necessary when it's actually not,
It is inevitable. Think of the prisoner dilemma. If you don't have the state someone else will. And they will come and include you in their state by force. So everyone are forced to shit on themselves by having state to defend from other states.
>>67999782
>However, people will always need rules to function
Wrong.
The only valid rule, which is only natural, is the non-agression principle, anything else is arbitrary and therefore imposing it on people who didn't sign a contract agreeing to it is in fact, coercion.
When you say that "people need rules to function" it sounds like you think of yourself as an enlightened human being, somehow morally superior than all the rest and thus capable of understanding what is better for everyone. You can't speak this sort of thing for all of humanity, i don't need any rules other than the NAP to function in a peaceful society and you don't know better than me what i need, and even if you somehow magically understood me better than myself, you still would not have the right to impose any of those rules you think are necessary for humanity to "function" on me.
I'm not making this personal nor trying to offend you, i'm just trying to get a point across, the point that imposing any rules on anyone that they didn't consent to, is coercion and therefore immoral. Rules against agression and violation of private property don't depend on the existence of the state, knowing that these are wrong is inherent to humanity. Some people, who don't understand much about anarchy or the NAP, usually ask things like "But without government, what stops me from poisoning water fountains everywhere? I'm not physically attacking anyone nor violating private property"
The answer to this is that you ARE violating the NAP and therefore any retaliation against you is legitimate. You don't need to actually hurt someone to initiate agression, the mere threat of violence is already an agression on itself, thus why if someone points a gun at you he doesn't actually need to pull the trigger in order for you to be in a legitimate position to defend yourself. The same idea can be applied to the enviroment.
Cont
As if the cost of running a modern society will suddenly disappear if everything is handled privately.
The cost will still be there. The only thing you're doing is introducing a lot of waste and actually raising the cost for the citizens by putting natural monopolies into private hands.
>Koch brother fanatics in charge of basic economics
>>67999782
2/2
>A weak government leads to possible foreign oppression.
It doesn't, take your country for example.
The US has hundreds of millions of firearms in the private possession of citizens, do you think that, if all the US military forces suddenly disappeared, any other country be able to simply walk in and claim the land for themselves? In a society where there is nearly one firearm PER CITIZEN, ready to shoot back at anyone trying to invade their property or take away their liberty?
Also take into account that without government, nothing would stop the ordinary citizen from owning any military equipment he could afford, including very powerful and advanced military hardware, even nukes, take into account too, that in a free market anyone could start a private company to offer services of military defense and protection.
Do you honestly think it'd a viable idea, for, let's say, Mexico or Canada to attempt conquering the US if all the armed forces suddenly disappeared? It'd be like sending your military forces to a meat grinder, for what?
People can only be opressed when they are unarmed, by people who are armed, and guess what group of people usually claim the right to use firearms only for themselves in most countries around the world? Guess what entity they belong to
How would we protect the environment and animal food supplies in these societies? Wouldn't the air have to be so polluted or the planet simply run out of non-regenerative fuels so companies would say "Yep, time to start investing green."?
>>68002550
>The US has hundreds of millions of firearms in the private possession of citizens, do you think that, if all the US military forces suddenly disappeared, any other country be able to simply walk in and claim the land for themselves?
They will. Disorganized people have nothing against Army. And organized people whose trade is war and who are financed by other non-military people are Army and State.
Let me tell you a story. When Russian Civil War started communist at first tried to work by libertarian and democratic principles. People voulntary donate shit to Red Army. Commanders were appointed by votes in units, important tactic and strategic decisions went through vote procedure too. Guess what? It was complete mess and didn't work. Red Army very fast transformed into rigid structure based on undivided authority like all militaries with commissar executing people left and right for disobeying the discipline and commies started supply themselves by taxation fo controlled territories.
State will come. State will conquer you.
>>67998174
You do the same for oil cracker
>>68003430
And quickly adding people were armed in 1917 Russia. Zero gun control. And half of the army deserted with guns. Libertarian paradise. Didn't stay long.
I see it like this.
The government allow me to live on a country with a lot of advantages. In exchange i pay them through taxes.
If i'm not happy i can go to an other country or living by myself of the grid.
>>68003920
If i have no more money they give me some to be able to be on the track again, finding a job etc.
If the world was only ruled by private companies, when you don't have money you are just screwed.
>>67998174
move to somalia and live free faggot. die of aids after being rapped every day for years by half starved militia members
>>68004102
>he doesn't think Charities will exist without government
>>68004408
You mean the charities where anywhere between 20 and 50% of donations go to "administrative costs", and the remainder goes to third world shit holes so that they can continue to have more children than they can support, instead of local people such as the homeless, in need?
Yeah, nah.
>>67999146
>>68000493
>>68000568
>>68000887
>>68001126
>>68001813
>>68002917
>>68004230
Not an argument.
