>>70332680
t. 15 years old
>>70332940
>brazilian
Please, tell me all about Brazilian economics?
> I want all the advantages of a first world nation, but I don't wanna pay for it.
And you call socialists greedy.
>>70332680
>taxation is theft
>what is having an enforced judicial system and infrastructure
wew lad
>>70333488
kek
>>70333278
>What is the private sector
>>70333278
Do all these advantages derive from tax?
>>70333637
an engine that builds really nice houses on the private property of the PoS that owns said business while the rest of the country around him is a fucking sewer.
>>70333538
So taxation results in having a judicial sustem and infrastructure?
>>70333637
Ahh. So it is now
> I want all the comforts of a first world nation, but I want others to bear the burdens and costs of it.
I'll see you in the next "wahhhh mulleniull bernie supporters want everything for free" thread, bub.
>>70333724
>waah why are you successful and I'm not
not even an ancap or even a libertarian but you fascists / communists are pure scum
>>70333660
This image is taken out of context of Rothbard's belief that children are still to be guarded under the NAP.
>>70333739
Yes it does.
Have you ever looked outside and wondered what would happen if no one paid for the road services?
Do you think asphalt never decays and that a road will last a century after its built?
How do you anticipate to actually be a capitalist if there is no legal framework?
The money you use, the person who printed it could decide to implode that currency overnight and then you're effectively poor.
Taxation is a government mechanism to reduce/eliminate dependency on borrowed or printed money.
>>70333848
I must be misunderstand something here because I can't see how the private sector equals to others "bearing the burdens and costs".
>>70333972
And your heads are the ones that are on spikes, historically.
You can't fuck millions of people over, and not expect consequences.
>>70333724
OK, so your gripe here is that the private man has built himself a nice house on private property, but has not done so for others. Essentially, your greivence is that if one men builds something, he is obligated to build it for everyone else. Am I right?
>>70333660
This is what I actually and unironically believe.
>>70334182
You're burdening one sector of society with the full costs of maintaining that society
>>70333231
Neoliberal libertarian Friedmanite shitheads absolutely destroyed Brazil's, Chile's, Argentina's, and Bolivia's economies and they have never really recovered from it. lots of political instability ever sense then (hense why you see so many communists who have risen to power over "anti-imperialism" and "anti-neoliberalism", etc.)
>>70334192
The revolutions that failed are many more than the revolutions that succeeded.
Besides, capitalism survived the 20th century. Fascism and communism both died because not even their citizens want it.
>>70334198
Yes. Kill everyone and everything until there is equality. Until the last human skull has been crushed on a rock for being more privileged than the rock.
>>70334034
>yes it does
But all taxation is is theft. And if theft is, at least under most "enforced judicial systems", illegal, then how can it truly be an objective judicial system if it contridicts itself?
Any political view is, by definition, intolerant, conflictive and pro-initiation of violence against everyone. It's pure evil. Worse than SATAN or the JEWS.
And by it's consequences it's ironic how toxic it is, as it brings end to the global progress of a civilization, over and over again.
The opium of the masses is the credit expansion.
>>70334355
I'll just ignore china, cuba, and north korea.
>>70334324
I disagree completely. They abandoned capitalism for high taxation and socialism and now they are, rightly, paying the price. CHile, which has remained the most loyal, is still the most effective economy in South America. Or would you have preffered them to be socialist, like Venezuela?
>>70334489
>china
>communist
You can't be serious
>north korea
You bring north korea up as a successful example of communism?
>cuba
Even poorer than most post-communist countries, hardly a force to be reckoned with.
>>70334457
>Any political view is, by definition, intolerant, conflictive and pro-initiation of violence against everyone.
Except anarcho-capitalism.
>>70334355
fascism was militarily overwhelmed.
>>70334389
>But all taxation is is theft.
lol?
Never bothered to read an actual piece of law have you?
>>70334706
So I'm cool to start a child brothel, an opium den and a hitman service? Don't be a statist.
>>70334697
> moving the goal posts.jpg
>>70333912
kek
>>70333674
Yes.
Look at Africa which is almost entirely made up of corrupt shitholes holding their country back a lot.
Daily reminder that property is a social construct.
Daily reminder that to whine that taxation is theft shows you have an extremely limited understanding of political economy.
Daily reminder that property requires violence to maintain, as property is the act of excluding others from access to something.
Daily reminder that you have no right to exclude the community from the property which you magically claim is "yours".
Daily reminder that property is theft.
Daily reminder that Ancaps aren't real anarchists because anarchists understand that private property requires hierarchy and violence to exist.
Daily reminder that Ancapism is the biggest joke in politics/economics because capitalism is inherently statist, as the state is necessary in capitalism in order to uphold the "property rights" necessary for capitalism to exist.
Daily reminder that Ancapism is cancer.
>>70334804
The government doesn't define it as theft, but it is. Or law is subjective.
>>70334862
You are right now. Some people do. Its just that the state will throw you in a cage if they discover your actions.
>>70333529
>what is... no minimum wage?
>>70335076
But you see no issue with child brothels, opium dens or murder services. You don't think there should be punishment for these things.
>>70334931
>implying communism is even an option at this stage
>>70335000
OK. So "African" countries don't tax their citizens, therefore they do not have the benefits of a first world nation?
>>70335017
>The government doesn't define it as theft, but it is.
that's an opinion, not a fact then.
>Or law is subjective.
Then my subjective opinion of law can say that people with viewpoints like yours should be liquidated, do you also support this notion of anarchist "lawmaking"?
>>70335157
If the citizens decide the actions are violent, then they have the moral grounds to respond in kind to end the violence.
But who is going to pay for Jamal's kids? or Patricia's gender studies major? or Bubba's tripple bypass?
post more libertarian meme PICS
I support progressive taxation but I think the rates should be kept much lower (20% max)
>>70335368
>>70335340
Bleeding hearts.
On the bright side, those people tend to be middle-class at best. So, no one.
>>70335157
Where did I say I don't have a problem with some of those things? Yes I do think there should be punishments. Child brothels violate the NAP because children cannot enforce their self-ownership yet and hitmen violate the NAP because they are attacking people who haven't agressed against them. As for opium dens, I disaprove but I'm not going to kidnap someone and lock them in a cage over their choice of recreational drug. I certainly wouldn't hire anyone who uses opium recreationally.
>>70334931
>communism that doesn't completely collapse is a success in comparison to capitalism.
>capitalism is a failure if it isn't 100% perfect
>complains about goalpost shifting
>>70335491
>Yes I do think there should be punishments.
Who should carry out these punishments? Who decides what the punishment shall be?
>>70332680
True. But you can't avoid tax and state.
>>70335198
No, it is definitely fact. Theft is appopriation of another's physical property. There is no difference between the state violently taking my money and Billy-Bob Joe down the street doing the same. You can use all the fancy names, wear all the uniforms, call it law, it does not matter. If law is subjective, it is useless.
>>70335491
>cannot enforce their self-ownership
So, if a child enforces their self-ownership, than child labour and child prostitution is ok? Its their decision and any argument against it would be a argument against self-ownership and further against the NAP.
Are you a pedophile, anon?
>>70335441
STATE NO STEPPING
STATE NO STEPPING
STATE NO STEPPING
>>70335491
So how would you enforce the the NAP?
How would you enforce the "punishments"?
If taxation is theft, then your "country" wouldn't exist as there would be no centralized authority capable of interfacing with other nations or even erecting a border fence and defending it.
Anarchist societies simply don't work on this Earth because someone else who has a centralized government will declare that "since they have no government this land is now mine" and then pursue military conquest. Your lack of a centralized government entity (as a result of "taxation being theft") will mean you have a failed system.
I just find it curious that you unironically defend a system that is inherently setup for failure.
>>70335703
>If law is subjective, it is useless.
Then answer my other point concerning targeted murder of people with certain political inclinations?
We are comparing opinions here, and the winner will be the person to disengage the conversation first because he won't be wasting his time.
>>70335703
>call it law, it does not matter. If law is subjective, it is useless.
Why should anyone accept your subjective opinion? Your opinion is useless.
You are like a islamist that wants sharia law, everyone has to play by your stupid rules. You radical ideologists are a pain in the ass
>>70335642
Why, whoever has been appointed. There are a myriad of ways to have law without the state. Perhaps, even you!
>>70335704
How can a child enforce their self-onwership? Their brain is not yet built enough to have a concept of self-ownership. They could copy a self-owning adult, but that would not be gasping the concept, simply imitating. Now, humans develop at different ratesm and some maybe ready to be self-owned by 13, others may never reach that point. I suggest an age of self-ownership of 13, until we find an objective way to measure when a child can enforce their own self-ownership.
>>70334804
As a law student in my last years, all I can say is that you can't dismiss it that simply.
Thing is, according to the principles that are background of taxation, is should be something voluntary, not mandatory. It sounds crazy because everyone would be trying not to do it then (not that it's any different now) but think of it as something you should be happy and proud to pay for.
Here I'm happy I can pay for free healthcare for everyone, because one day I'll be the one needing it, like a sort of karma thing, but I become less and less happy when I think of the shit infrastructure, shit bureaucracy, shitton of money that goes into bribes and pays the salaries of literal ghosts that never worked one day in their lives.
To the point I'd probably deny or reduce greatly my taxation, were I the one to decide the amount.
Think of the state administration as a company: you first make good products, that are worth it, and then people will come get them and be ready to pay for them, as long as you provide them with quality and bang for the buck.
No good products and no one buys from you.
Forcing me to buy something shit done by a lazy shitskin at a crazy price, when I could buy something much better for less, is extortion.
>>70332680
>surely I can get every single person in the world to agree with my ideology that is based on the NAP
>here you go mr. warlord, my monthly protection fee :^) 30% of my income as promised
>>70335863
>Anarchist societies simply don't work on this Earth because someone else who has a centralized government will declare that "since they have no government this land is now mine" and then pursue military conquest. Your lack of a centralized government entity (as a result of "taxation being theft") will mean you have a failed system.
This. If you have now standing military and tax that finance it you would be conquered and put under taxation by those who have. Libertarians asking for removing tax and state are asking for failure.
But. We should understand that sate is inherently negative concept. It is NECESSARY EVIL not something positive. We should avoid expanding it beyond level needed fro military safety. Also your own state could become you enemy as easy as neighbors's so it needs same level of attention and control from sociaty.
>>70332680
>no tax = no government
>no government = no law
>no law = no consistant economic system
therfor anarcho capitalism is a rather pointless term, what you want is either A) private corporations to take the role of the government and foce people one way or another because they dont have the moneisz
or you want B) actual freedom / anarchy
>>70336339
>not being the warlord
cuck
>>70336207
>How can a child enforce their self-onwership?
How can it not? It cant, because the government said so!
>heir brain is not yet built enough to have a concept of self-ownership
Oh, they do, ever played with a little child and tried to take their toys away?
> I suggest an age of self-ownership of 13,
That almost sounds like a law, why do you think you are allowed to make the rules and decision for other people?
>objective way to measure when a child can enforce their own self-ownership.
Maybe, there is no objective way to measure it? What about people with mental illnesses that cant understand the concept of self-ownership? What would you do with a 21 yo person with mental deficites that doesnt understand self-ownership?
Based on your mental gymnastics, the person is not allowed to do labour -> no income -> cant buy food -> dies of hunger.
>>70335863
How would I? I would create a dispute resolution service. How does it work? Simple. We lay out some rules, you accept them, you gain our protection from people breaking those rules so long as you follow them. And if you do break them, then you either serve your punishment, you get bad credit, or you are no longer protected, in the worst case scenario.
>answer my other point concerning targeted murder of people with certain political inclinations?
Sorry, I've learned from my years on /pol/ to only ever answer one point at a time, because some people (not saying you) like to shovel arguments onto you hoping that it will take too long for you to answer them and you'll get bored and go away.
What statist don't realize, when they bring up this argument of other states absorbing an anarchist peoples, is that states do make you automatically defended. Somalia has done better to retain its anarchy than Hitler did at retaining his dictatorship. How will anarchists defend against states? The same way states defend against states: with militia.
>>70335703
>If law is subjective, it is useless.
No its is not. As Einstein proved everything in this world is subjective and depends on the point of view. Still we can live in such universe and we don't have another.
>>70336798
> We lay out some rules, you accept them, you gain our protection from people breaking those rules so long as you follow them. And if you do break them, then you either serve your punishment, you get bad credit, or you are no longer protected, in the worst case scenario.
You just described:
>law
>tax
>state
>law enforcement
>>70336967
You forgot this part:
>I would create a dispute resolution service.
You know, the context.
He's talking about a private security firm and private courts, nimrod.
>>70336822
>everything is subjective
If Einstein said that then he wasn't very smart. Nothing is subjective. The Theory of Reletivity, which I assume he was referencing, is not subjective. People experience different things, but the reality remains the same, it just displays different results for different reference frames. Therefore, when I see the government locking someone in a cage for smoking a marajauna ciggarette, I see violence and injustice. When a Natsoc sees it, they see virtue triumphing over degeneracy. But the reality is the same.
>>70336967
Law, tax, the state and law enforcement is not volentary.
>>70332680
Right on brother. An-cap till I die.
>>70336239
>>70336239
>Thing is, according to the principles that are background of taxation, is should be something voluntary, not mandatory. It sounds crazy because everyone would be trying not to do it then (not that it's any different now) but think of it as something you should be happy and proud to pay for.
>it should be voluntary so be happy and proud about it and pay
Dude you dumb
> free healthcare for everyone
If you pay it aight free
If denying an argument is as easy as saying "BUT IT MAKES ME FEEL GREAT"
Why have science? or Facts? why morality? Why discourse?
>>70336798
>We lay out some rules, you accept them
Sounds a whole lot like law, I wonder when the people in charge of maintaining these rules (and the archives of people who have joined, are currently suspended for breaking the rules, etc) will ask eachother "hm we really should get paid for duty".
>like to shovel arguments onto you hoping
Eh. I didn't write up a bunch of nonsense, just an example for arguments sake to see if we can get anywhere.
>is that states do make you automatically defended
Correct, they do. A functional state anyway. If you have civil war then no matter the type of government there is a power vacuum.
>Somalia has done better to retain its anarchy
Somalia is a bit of a particular case. They have some of the dumbest people on the planet, some of the most barren wasteland on the Earth, and there are foreign interests present: muslim terrorist organizations.
>How will anarchists defend against states? The same way states defend against states: with militia.
How do you plan on funding a state-wide military force?
>>70337166
>Law, tax, the state and law enforcement is not volentary.
What you described is essentially going "I will conform to certain rules of yours in exchange for services of yours which protect me from people who have not accepted your rules".
It is correct that this was done voluntarily in this instance, but who is to say that your children will decide to exit? Won't they like the comfort of not getting murdered by highway bandits so much that they'll just accept the local rules and not bother thinking about it again?
Then you essentially have the genesis of a state, as some politician / influential figure decides that "well seeing as how a majority of this loose patch of land has accepted living in these societies with rule sets, why not organize on the federal level?".
Your anarchist state will either disintegrate by foreign interests or federalize into a normal country.
>>70337130
>He's talking about a private security firm and private courts, nimrod.
What the difference between private company and state?
>>70337166
>Law, tax, the state and law enforcement is not volentary.
What will stop private securty firm from making their rules mandatory? They are overpowering power in this area (otherwise they would not be able to enforce rules) it is juts matter of time when they come to such decisions. Ding dong you just witness birth of another state. BTW most of the time there is some choice you could leave state, vote with your feet.
>>70337166
>is not subjective.
It is, there is no objective truth.
People believe in objective truth, because they want something to believe in, its like a religious concept.
The Theory of Relativity is subjective true, until someone can disprove it. That is how science works.
>>70336607
>Libertarians asking for removing tax and state are asking for failure.
Reducing taxation and removing certain taxes isn't an inherently bad idea. Especially these days where there are too many taxes.
>We should avoid expanding it beyond level needed fro military safety.
I believe that the state should provide moral guidance to ensure a fruitful society and guarantee stability (fertility rate at 2.1) and have a minimal welfare network (according more to the NSDAP type ideas of "socialism", not modern closet-communism "social democracy").
>We should understand that sate is inherently negative concept.
In what sense? For personal freedoms?
You exchange certain freedoms, which I would consider unnecessary, disgusting, or inhumane (e.g. you give up the ability to murder, own CP, or torture animals for entertainment) in order to receive the ability to partake in a society where you don't have to worry about your next meal or getting killed for walking late at night.
>>70334862
in the case of a child brothel, you would need children and their parents consenting to this prostitution. otherwise we're just talking about kidnapping
in an AnCap world, black people are no longer getting welfare, and are no longer cranking out kids out of wedlock. there's going to be no SUPPLY of kids in fucked up enough families to become prostitutes.
and let's say you're an orphan who is too misbehaved to stay with an orphanage or foster home*. if you're not going to behave and try to get adopted, maybe surviving on your own by sucking dicks is your most preferred option.
there's less of a likelihood of child brothels in an AnCap world than there is now. good parents tend to not let their children whore themselves. if we don't incentivize bad parenting through welfare, we'll take care of this hypothetical "child brothel" problem at the same time.
*aren't these paid for with taxes? as if an ancap society that isn't being taxed wouldn't voluntarily figure out a way of funding or providing free labor to take care of orphan children. it'll probably work much better and will get kids with parent's more efficiently.
ancaps aren't anarchists, you're feudalists who stole our name
>>70334034
if we went to a private road system, maybe the road companies would calculate that it isn't feasible to maintain the system of roads we have now
maybe the infrastructure to facilitate the suburban sprawl around our cities is unsustainable. it would result in a move back to the cities, and a move away from cars.
not that I WANT that to happen. what I want to happen is for humans to organize their society in a way that factors in the resources each option uses. if our freeways are a huge waste of money, I'd rather the free market expose that truth, than to keep doing things the wrong way.
meanwhile if it's revealed that private road companies can afford WAY MORE LANES OF FREEWAY, and our population should be way more spread out, then I want that to happen.
>>70338191
>would need children and their parents consenting to this prostitution.
So, parents can sell their children for some crystal meth? You can trade a cow for money, why not trade a child for something else, right?
>in an AnCap world, black people are no longer getting welfare, and are no longer cranking out kids out of wedlock
They wont get welfare, but cranking out kids out of wedlock? Why not?
More children results in a higher possibility that one of them will care for you at a higher age.
That is a typical survival strategy in 2nd and 3rd world countries.
Also, you can trade little Tyrone for a new TV!
>no SUPPLY of kids
Who could stop them? THe police is no more!
>there's less of a likelihood of child brothels in an AnCap world than there is now.
I think, there is more of a likelyhood of child brothels in an AnCap world!
>good parents tend to not let their children whore themselves.
Better than working on the fields 12h / day
>if we don't incentivize bad parenting through welfare, we'll take care of this hypothetical "child brothel" problem at the same time.
How? People on welfare have not enough money to survive on their own. Selling their children for some bucks is not moral, but the family would survive another month - for the greater good we could say
Can we all at least agree that INCOME TAX and income tax alone is absolutely and completely theft?
>tfw ancap and you sell expectant mothers mislabelled abortions then you use the money to buy nukes and destroy everything in a 5000 mile radius
>>70338274
enjoy your "personal property" leaf
We are believe in true freedom, if the individual can't be free, how can the collective be free ?
>>70338274
Fuck you pinko. Grow up and stop giving Canada bad name.
>>70339738
pretty sure you stopped being ancap and started being a supervillain at some point there
>>70335016
All morals are constructs, they're never inherently right or wrong.
>>70339917
Supervillains only exist due to government intervention.
>>70340026
senpai i dunno....
>>70339757
that fucking typo
I meant to say that we believe in true freedom
>>70340026
is supervillain a codeword for corporations ?
>>70338191
Someone screecap this. A ancap literally defending child prostitution
>>70340162
What do you mean with true freedom?
The NAP is a tool to reduce your true freedom, a AnCap without NAP has more freedom than a AnCap who believes in the construct we call NAP
>>70340448
wtf do you mean ancap without NAP ?
For me ancapism is based on the right to life (don't tread on me) and to property.
How can you respect both of those principles without respecting NAP ?
>>70340640
Agression is a sunjective word. Looking at other person could be considered agression
>>70340640
You dont believe in true freedom?
>>70340850
What ?
>>70340937
NAP is a tool that reduces true freedom!
With a NAP you would reduce the freedom of people that love to kill, eat, hunt other people!
>>70338077
>Reducing taxation and removing certain taxes isn't an inherently bad idea.
There is principle difference between reducing taxes and abolishing them and therefore state completely. Later is impossible as stateless population would be absorbed by another states.
>In what sense? For personal freedoms?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Think of the state as private securty firm. You pay them fair price they protect you from robbery or blackmail. But what will stop your private security firm from start robbing you one day? Ehhh. nothing? There are no inherent safety mechanisms that would protect security firm from breaching contract and starting taking all your profits instead of contract price. They have enforcement power to do that.
>Especially these days where there are too many taxes.
Why are there too many taxes today then before? Becuase it is creeping robbery. State takes more and more part of society revenues. Why? Because they can! States breach social contracts (see refugees crisis in Europe). Why? Because they can! What you gonna do? Protest? Police will beat you into submission and propaganda will be blasting 24/7 from all channels welcoming rapefugees.
>>70339757
Glad to see people are using my flag :)
Theft is not always immoral.
>>70332680
I AGREE
STOP PAYING TAXES
>>70340780
No it's not. Agression is the initiation of unjustified violence.
Most ancaps consider that threat of violence is the only valid justification for the initiation of violence.
>>70341308
nice non-argument cuck
NAP is necessary to maintain the maximum amount of freedom.
>>70341580
ty guy from Aveiro
property is theft.
>>70341675
Can you expand on your point ? When is theft moral ?
>>70342049
> Agression is the initiation of unjustified violence.
Completely subjective. Strong winds could be imterpreted as agression. Bad mouth smell could be agression
>>70342141
Mouro
>>70342141
You're welcome brah
>>70342230
nice self-contradicting argument burgerman
>>70342288
Wind is non-human, so it can't be held responsible for it's actions.
Bad mouth smell is not violence.
>>70342235
When you're "stealing" from people with questionable property rights.
In fact the whole issue with all of this is that you faggots take it for granted that property rights are some completely objective completely unambiguous fact. That's not that case at all.
>>70342290
essa imagem é puta de oiro
t.O Reconquistador
>>70342530
If someone controls property that you believe belongs to somebody else, you should take them to court, not steal it Muhammad.
>>70342421
>Wind is non-human
A baby is responsible for his actions?
>Bad mouth smell is not violence.
How is it not?
>>70342549
Eu quero muito, muito, muito ser um liberal, mas sei lá no fundo que seria um grande fascista caso houvesse um movimento em massa. Só com fascismo o Ocidente se safa.
>>70337748
>What the difference between private company and state?
You don't have to be part of the private company, you have choices in which company you choose, if any, and the company is forced to compete and allowed to fail.
None of this is true for the government
>>70342320
Best ally gets it!
>>70342754
Yes, babies are responsible for their actions. This isn't a problem for ancapism alone btw, only difference is we don't apply an arbitrary number for when someone gains the full rights and responsibilities of being human, unlike most other ideologies.
The definition from wiki seems to do a good job : "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation".
Again, this problem is in no way particular to ancapism, pretty much everyone believes that
the initiation of violence is wrong, and ,therefore, has the same problem when it comes to decide what violence actually is.
>this is what statist bootlicker actually believe
I cannot understand how normal intelligent people could think they could to better with the property of the owner.
You would not entrust your best friend with more money you could care less if he lost it. But your government will do great with most of your income...
And don't start with voting.... As if you could win against women and old people collectively voteing to exploit men.
>>70343086
>You don't have to be part of the private company, you have choices in which company you choose,
You don't have to be part of the government either . You could leave and choose and another state to some extent (what is federalism BTW). Governments limit you ability to do that? Yes they do. Private companies try to tie customers too if they can. iI is about possibilities. Private companies like mafia can do it with threat of violence
>but this is illegal
What is law?
>>70332680
You're right. Good luck getting the cattle to realize it though.
"A dick up the ass is no problem as long as my needs are met."
-average /pol/tard and average citizen
"I consider myself a grown man yet I have someone else protecting me and caring for me like I'm a feminine woman or small child."
Average male in western society
>>70343929
>And i am a big bad man wo need no man. I've never actually worked a day in my life and i think i could protect my property from hosts of niggers
>>70336822
>. As Einstein proved everything in this world is subjective
Kill yourself immediately.
>>70334324
Lol you are a retard. The only place that applied Friedman economic policies was Chile and it has been the most succesful economy in SA by far. Argentina was destroyed by Peronism and Brazil after the monarchy felt has been a cluster fuck,ending with the retards of Lula and Dilma that have made Brazilian economy a puppet branch of China's.
>>70343929
>AM I BEING DETAINED? CAN I HAVE YOUR BADGE NUMBER? AM I BEING DETAINED? CAN I HAVE YOUR BADGE NUMBER? AM I BEING DETAINED? CAN I HAVE YOUR BADGE NUMBER? AM I BEING DETAINED? CAN I HAVE YOUR BADGE NUMBER?
>>70344137
>and i think i could protect my property from hosts of niggers
That's an easy task. Don't live near niggers, dumbass.
>I'm a poor loser who has to live in an apartment next to the ghetto and I get my shit jacked on the monthly and I still think the police will protect me even though they have yet to do so HURRAY GOVERNMENT AND TAXES!
fag
>>70332940
>>70333488
>>70333529
>>70333538
>>70333660
most libertarians agree on tax.
it just has to be voluntary
>>70344652
At least against a direct service.
>>70344253
>Argentina was destroyed by Peronism
This is what neoliberals believe. No, i'm not a peronist or a kirschnerist.
>>70334034
1. Roads wouldn't be a needed thing. Flying vehicles are the future being held back by regulative busy bodies. Imagine a world not sullied by fucking asphalt which constantly leaches toxic hydrocarbons into the water supply(oh, you didn't know that about MUH ROADS did you, dumbass?)
2. Legal framework is makework for lawyers and people too stupid to get real jobs( aka "government workers")
3. Bitcoin works just fine without getting crashed, and is hilariously only impeded by money laundering laws because the feds are having PMS over people using BTC to buy drugs and guns.
Come over here some time and look at who makes up the government. 70% of them are fat, 60% of them are brown, the majority are female, and 100% of them look like something out of a 1920s Ringling Bros sideshow. AKA genetic defects. That's the kinda riffraff composing government, from metermaids and cops right up through DAs, judges, and politicians.
Human fucking waste.
>>70333660
You say it like its something bad
>>70345512
>point 1
convoluted ad hominem and "oh look but in the future it will all be different". Fantasizing != an argument.
>point 2
I assume you have never rented a property or taken out a loan.
>point 3
Cryptocurrencies are too volatile to be good as legal tender, not to mention the fact that this would be a cashless society which is the epitome of not having economic freedom. I thought you were a libertarian or an anarchist? Shouldn't people be able to have cash?
>70% of them are fat, 60% of them are brown, the majority are female, and 100% of them look like something out of a 1920s Ringling Bros sideshow.
Is this some sort of argument against a centralized state? We weren't arguing about how your government went to shit, rather about how a central argument is necessary to begin with.
>Human fucking waste.
not an argument.
>>70332680
Ancap is stupid.
>>70335016
Violence is always ultimately required to enforce rules you fucking commie.
Property is not a social construct.
Our bodies at the very least belong to ourselves.
>Daily reminder that you have no right to exclude the community from the property which you magically claim is "yours".
You have no right to prevent yourself from being raped. How dare you deny someone else the use of your body.
>>70334804
I bet you think murder is only defined if there is law.
>>70334034
>Have you ever looked outside and wondered what would happen if no one paid for the road services? Do you think asphalt never decays and that a road will last a century after its built?
Private firms build giant multistoreyd skyscrapers, but a road is a so miraculous creation that only gubmint can build one? There will be private roads.
>How do you anticipate to actually be a capitalist if there is no legal framework?
There will be polycentric law system. Sandnigtown can live according to sharia, Faggotville can make every man travelling through bake a gay cake, and you can move to city block/town/village of like minded people.
>The money you use, the person who printed it could decide to implode that currency overnight and then you're effectively poor.
Thats why you dont use asswipe money, but gold and silver instead. They proved their efficacy throughout the ages.
>>70332940
>t. 15 years old
THIS
>>70334192
And who exactly fucks over whom?
>>70347298
>mfw Boris is the most rational person in this thread
>>70346474
Not an argument
>>70347679
"Taxation is theft" is an argument but "Ancap is stupid" is not an argument? Picked a lot of cherries in your time?
>>70347298
This wouldn't work out tho, shit would go down everywhere
>>70347179
>I bet you think murder is only defined if there is law.
If I were to take a libertarian perspective, I would say that "why does one man have the liberty to end the life of another man, aren't we all entitled to the self-determination of the liberty to live?"
>>70347298
>Private firms build giant multistoreyd skyscrapers,
Last I checked a skyscraper isn't a public space.
A functional country needs a functional infrastructure system. Private roads / tollways can exist if for whatever reason it was decided they are economically viable. Public roads are a necessity for your society to function on any respectable level.
>There will be polycentric law system.
You conveniently forgot the part about making money.
>but gold and silver instead.
lol. Idk about you but I like to have stable prices and not spend my entire life bartering with gold coins like some jew 2500 years ago.
You're actually shilling for ancap and that is concerning.
Mind telling me why you support a system which is inherently destined for failure?
>>70347751
Nah in these teenagers minds ancap is the way to go. The more ridiculous their claim, the easier it is to ridicule counter claims.
Tax is rent, it's the rent you need to pay for living in society.
Also, if you work for a wage, you don't pay it. Your boss does. If you ever wondered why politicians don't listen to the people, it's because the government isn't paid by the people.
>>70347758
Maybe in your faggot country. Where I live we usually fix the roads ourselves already because the government can't be fucked to care.
>>70347871
>Tax is rent, it's the rent you need to pay for living in society.
Why does my rent increase as I become more productive? Shouldn't I be rewarded with less rent because of how productive I am?
>>70347891
Our roads are the best in the world cunt, your infrastructure sucks
>>70347937
There's two sides here.
The simple answer is that it's not a matter of rewarding, it's a matter of the bills getting paid. You can't have the poor guy pay them, he doesn't have the money to pay them. Impossible to take where there isn't anything. So it falls to the top. Fair or not isn't the issue, it's paying or not paying, and not paying means your country stops being a thing in short order. So they take it from where the money is.
The second, more complicated issue is what I just said: Unless you're the owner of a producing enterprise, you don't pay shit in taxes, your employer does, and they let you pretend you pay because it makes it easier to control you.
>Taxation is Theft
I don't know how anybody could argue otherwise
Theft for the benefit of all/a greater good maybe (although I'd still disagree with this).
How can anybody support libertarianism? Who do you think builds our roads?
>>70348428
>Who do you think builds our roads?
Construction companies, who else
What you meant to ask is who pays for the roads. Which is still you and me, we just pay indirectly (through taxes), as opposed to directly at the time the roads are used.
>>70348166
>You can't have the poor guy pay them, he doesn't have the money to pay them.
No, of course not, I should pick up the tab because I have more money. Right.
>not paying means your country stops being a thing in short order.
Income taxation is a fraction of the income of a state. Also, clearly, with large portions of the population not paying taxes countries like your own still exist. This isn't an issue when you can print money.
>So it falls to the top.
I thought gravity made things fall downwards, not upwards.
>Unless you're the owner of a producing enterprise, you don't pay shit in taxes, your employer does,
I vividly remember mailing the state my tax declaration a few weeks ago.
>>70347851
A functional country needs a functional infrastructure system. Private roads / tollways can exist if for whatever reason it was decided they are economically viable.
And when there are people who want to get from point A to point B, that creates demand, bam economic viability appears!
>You conveniently forgot the part about making money.
Actually, I adressed it
>but gold and silver instead. lol. Idk about you but I like to have stable prices and not spend my entire life bartering with gold coins like some jew 2500 years ago.
Do you want stable inflation of stable asswipe money to stably eat your savings, too? The money will be either made of gold and silver, or there will be gold standard.
>You're actually shilling for ancap and that is concerning.
When people have different opinions than you, it isnt shilling, its different opinions.
>why you support a system which is inherently destined for failure?
Because its not?
>>70333660
You don't need the government to tell you to feed, clothe, and protect your children. The reason we exist todayis because our cavemen ancestors did that and there wasn't any government back then.
>>70348601
>Literally this retarded
Ok go back to >>>/r/eddit
fuck 15 year olds
If you think taxation is not theft, go out and steal a guy's wallet, then buy him some food or water with some of his money and use the rest of it to buy other people food and water.
See what happens to you.
>>70347751
Taxes is theaft is not an argument, it's a claim.
When you say an-cap is stupid in reponse to that claim, you are clearly trying to use it as an argument, which it it is not.
>>70348833
>No, of course not, I should pick up the tab because I have more money.
Not because you have "more" money. Because you have spare money. The poor guy doesn't. You can't tax what's not there. Hence, the bill falls to you, because *you're the only one who can pay it*. Do you get it now?
It has NOTHING to do with fairness. It's simply a matter of getting the bill paid, and hence you take from those who CAN pay it.
>Income taxation is a fraction of the income of a state.
A pretty large fraction.
>Also, clearly, with large portions of the population not paying taxes countries like your own still exist.
It doesn't matter how many people pay. What matters is simply the bill being paid at the end. Did it get paid? Yes? Perfect. Job done. No? Tax more.
>This isn't an issue when you can print money.
Printing money does not create any sort of wealth, it just devalues money. It's also taxation, just a different kind.
>I thought gravity made things fall downwards, not upwards.
So you don't understand figures of speech?
>I vividly remember mailing the state my tax declaration a few weeks ago.
Do you also vividly remember where the money you used to pay your taxes came from?
Your boss pays you your wage plux $x, so you can pay $x in taxes, so you feel like you're contributing and keep shitting on the poor who just drain "your taxes", so you won't ever get the idea to unite with them for any cause. Divide et impera.
>>70349121
The only retarded man here is you, honey.
>>70349121
You do know there are tons of private highways and roads in america, right?
Hell, the first road in the US was a private one
>>70349121
>Literally this retarded
Not an argument.
>>70349038
>And when there are people who want to get from point A to point B, that creates demand, bam economic viability appears!
I'd rather get taxed by the government than pay some private company which could easily monopolize this business an obscene amount of money.
>Do you want stable inflation of stable asswipe money to stably eat your savings, too?
My opinions of currency are entirely different. A gold standard is already a much better start than going back in time by centuries and using gold coins.
>When people have different opinions than you, it isnt shilling, its different opinions.
Don't distract off the point.
>Because its not?
As I described previously, an anarchist "country", I would prefer to call it a lawless zone, cannot effectively defend itself from military conquest.
I don't believe in systems that can quickly fail, just like how I am increasingly disgusted by general suffrage and especially women's ability to vote. Democracy in the west has allowed itself to fail within 100 years of existence. A system that can self-destruct quickly isn't any good.
>>70332680
Agreed. Also libertarian debate part 2 is tonight at 9 on Stossel
>>70332680
Since when is paying to live somewhere theft? My apartment complex isn't stealing my money. If you don't want to pay to live somewhere, go move somewhere that is free to live.
>>70349348
An argument is something that is presented to convince another.
A claim is something that is presented to convince another.
Split a lot of hairs in your time as well?
Imagine the kind of thefts we would be dealing with if we didn't pay tax you fucking moron
>>70349108
back then there was social control. Now in a city some crackwhore can have a baby and dont care about it without anyone knowing. In a small community they would know she was pregnant, there is a father they know, and they invested into her so they wouldnt allow her to waste her pregnancy.
>>70332680
WHAT?
>>70349684
is paying rent same in America as paying taxes?
>>70349442
>>70349467
>>70349515
HA wow, how do you morons even function in a normal society?
I though we locked retards in prison
>>70349933
Not an argument
>>70349933
>yfw 2/3 of the roads in Sweden are privately owned
B-but muh roads...
>>70349684
>Reply
no, you cant do that, it is immoral
according to the panamam paper fags
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6InUaGbtw8k
Hans Hoppe. Watch at 37:00 for the part on taxes/ orwellian lefties
I love how americans are so dumb they would prefer to live like monkeys then in a civilised society because they can't cope with the pressures of democracy/
>>70349417
>Because you have spare money.
Who are you to tell me that my money is "spare"? That's preposterous. Am I supposed to chastise myself from spending my "spare" money on a bigger house, extra car, 3rd child, swimming pool or whatever in order to pay for someone else's welfare?
I am smelling communism.
> The poor guy doesn't. You can't tax what's not there.
Define poor. You are painting this as "oh well there are a minority of people who work and get lots of money for doing so, and then there is lots of people who get no money because they don't work". This is a misrepresentation of reality and deliberately puts me at a disadvantage. The middle class is here to pay taxes, not the rich and not the poor.
>It's simply a matter of getting the bill paid
...eventually. I hear the USA just paid off the last Reagan era bond last year. A state taking care of its debts doesn't work the way a private person paying for water&electricity works.
>hence you take from those who CAN pay it.
Horrible justification for actually stealing money from me.
>A pretty large fraction.
Review pic related. Its something, but not everything.
>Did it get paid? Yes? Perfect. Job done. No? Tax more.
...lol
>Printing money does not create any sort of wealth, it just devalues money.
Correct, but it helps you temporarily solve monetary problems. I don't like money printing, but it clearly is a tried and proven monetary policy if used sparingly.
>So you don't understand figures of speech?
Falling upwards sounds foreign to me, but then again I did fail upwards in school, so I suppose I am familiar with the concept.
>Do you also vividly remember where the money you used to pay your taxes came from?
My job as a financial consultant and some small stock market gains. I'm self-employed.
>Your boss pays you your wage plux $x, so you can pay $x in taxes,
Nope. If this were the case Austrian tax brackets (or any nations tax brackets) wouldn't be defined by gross annual salary.
>>70350130
>Mfw Sweden is a failed ponzi scheme
>>70350313
attaching >pic related
>>70349417
>so you won't ever get the idea to unite with them for any cause.
I don't want to unite with niggers, t*rks, or other garbage welfare leech immigrants in my country. I would gladly pay taxes to afford Volksdeutsche a family, but not a single cent to a immigrant family.
>>70349557
underrated meme
>>70350349
Did you hear about that town in Norway that is going to be full an-cap with no taxes?
>>70350245
Uncomfy freedom > comfy prison
It depends whether you're a true man or not. A true man doesn't mind the hardships that accompany liberty. Those hardships are learning experiences that drive a man to improve his own condition himself.
What you prefer is having a comfy life handed to you. What this ends up doing in the end is making you apathetic and depressed. It's why "developed" countries have high suicide rates among males. Men in places like the UK or Scandinavia lose their desire to live because the state gives them comfort.
Comfort is only valuable if you obtain it yourself.
>>70350313
>Who are you to tell me that my money is "spare"?
Simple. You can part with it and keep up your life.
That's why. I don't care what you smell. You have the money. They take it to pay societies bills.
> "oh well there are a minority of people who work and get lots of money for doing so, and then there is lots of people who get no money because they don't work".
That's how shit works. 40% of society will never have taxable income. They're retired and children.
> The middle class is here to pay taxes, not the rich and not the poor.
The rich pay more taxes per capita than anyone else. They pay a whole fucking lot.
>I hear the USA just paid off the last Reagan era bond last year.
Which is natural, given that long-term debt is 30 years.
> A state taking care of its debts doesn't work the way a private person paying for water&electricity works.
Duh, your point being?
>Horrible justification for actually stealing money from me.
People like society. Hence, people pay for upkeep of society. Suck it or fuck off.
>Correct, but it helps you temporarily solve monetary problems.
That works one year, maybe a second, and then your money is worthless.
>My job as a financial consultant and some small stock market gains. I'm self-employed.
Then what I said doesn't even apply to you, why did you bitch about it?
>Nope. If this were the case Austrian tax brackets (or any nations tax brackets) wouldn't be defined by gross annual salary.
Sure they would, you have to mask the con. If it was obvious, it wouldn't work.
>>70350601
This is a good post
>>70350601
HOLY FUCKING SHIT!!!!!! This is some nice bait.
"True man" WTF does that even mean you fucking dumbass and the reason why people kill themselves in developed countries is not because of apathy but because of the removal of communities due to capitalism which leave men alone for most of their lives after a certain point don't believe me look at this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1266182/Average-Briton-THREE-true-friends-19-mates.html It isn't comfort which leads to suicide it's lonliness. And what does freedom even mean? Freedom to shit on the street? because in a non-degenerate society your "freedoms" aren't taken away by law but by societal expectations. What freedom do you not have now, that anarchy is needed?
>>70350654
>You can part with it and keep up your life.
You forgot to read the part about the swimming pool or my kid's shiny car for his 18th birthday.
Why should my spending habits be chastised to serve your half-communist fantasy of "it needs to get paid"?
>I don't care what you smell.
You should. Better dead than red.
>40% of society will never have taxable income. They're retired and children.
Define in greater depth. Do you mean at any given time, or that 40% of people born will never contribute whatsoever?
>The rich pay more taxes per capita than anyone else. They pay a whole fucking lot.
They pay too much. Of course they pay the most taxes per capita, you would hope so if you tax them so goddamn much.
>Which is natural, given that long-term debt is 30 years.
So suddenly our desperate rush to pay off the bills has become more of a "just let the next generation pay, government debt is natural".
That's hypocrisy.
>People like society. Hence, people pay for upkeep of society. Suck it or fuck off.
Of course leeches like it when big daddy government goes and steals their livelihood from productive members of society. This angers me because I'm not here to feed anyone other than myself and possibly my wife and children. I don't want to pay for some welfare nigger.
>That works one year, maybe a second, and then your money is worthless.
...lol...you realize money needs to be printed constantly at a low rate to keep the value of 1 unit of currency around the same. If the cake just keeps getting bigger, but the amount of slices doesn't increase, you eventually have to invent denominations of 1/1000 etc.
>Then what I said doesn't even apply to you, why did you bitch about it?
>I said I pay taxes
>suddenly me being self-employed exempts me from paying taxes
kek?
>Sure they would, you have to mask the con. If it was obvious, it wouldn't work.
The con already is obvious to anyone who can use a calculator or microsoft excel.
>>70349521
>I'd rather get taxed by the government than pay some private company
Do you understand what a monopoly is? Monopoly is a company that faces no competition. Such a company has no incentives to work effectively, because however bad, ineffective and overpriced its goods and services are it wont get out of business. All government institutions are monopolies, and violent monopolies besides that. A private firm, on the other hand, has all the incentives to work as effectively as possible, to make its goods as high-quality as possible and make the price as low as possible, because if it fails to do so it will lose the competition and will be put out of business.
>private company which could easily monopolize this business an obscene amount of money.
As I said earlier, government institutions are monopolies. In an ancap society if roadowner will demand an obscene amount of money he will win short term, but inevitably someone will build a new road a few kilometers away. Then he will suck a giant dick, and businessman would predict such consequences and would never be an asshole in the first place. On the other hand, when government overprices its services (raise taxes) it wont face any consequenses.
>My opinions of currency are entirely different. A gold standard is already a much better start than going back in time by centuries and using gold coins.
Gold money or gold standard are the only solution.
>>70335121
No minimum wage won't stop the importation of cheap foreign labor.
>>70333660
>the only incentive to raise children is the government wants you to
Spoken like a true welfare recipient
>>70336607
>We should avoid expanding it beyond level needed fro military safety
The problem with this argument is 1789 and the Napeleonic Wars. It isn't just enough for the State to centralize authority and protect territory. The State can also improve the economy, which will cause the economy to grow, and then make the State MORE effective at centralizing authority and protecting territory. This was why France was such a Superpower after the Revolution. Where-as the Kings of Prussia, Austria, England, and Russia were only interested in just defense, Emperor Napoleon was focusing on reforming the economy, which then increased his economic might over the Kings. Inevitably, Europe got its shit kicked (including Russia, which lost its first Coalition War) because France was focusing on strategic economic and political reforms, which improved its ability to fight, while the rest of Europe was stuck with "Enlightenment era Social Technology.."
At times, I kind of miss the era before 1789, and alot of 19th century Europe wanted to suppress such an event. This is why the Monarchs in Russia and Germany had such strong appeal. But the problem is that the State can in fact improve the economy, which then makes it militarily stronger, allowing it dominate weaker peoples. Humanity is forever pushed to give the State power because of warfare. Only in this era of globalized trade is the State retreating, because of a lack of conflict.
I may be a Republican who disdains taxation, but I'm a political autist so I know all sorts of terrible truths that are generally overlooked. Alot of 'good arguments' being made today were repudiated centuries ago, but because its been so long, we forgot them.
That being said. The State can also fuck up an economy, and the market is the number one generator of wealth. See Communism or Bolivarianism as two examples of the State screwing shit up.
>>70351486
> but inevitably someone will build a new road a few kilometers away.
Jesus christ. You realize in places like Europe we don't have that much space for building lots of competing toll roads? We have asphalted up enough of our irrigable land and forests.
I'd rather the government builds roads than an unchecked ultracapitalism and such nonsense keeps cutting down trees and paving up farmland in order to "compete".
> make its goods as high-quality as possible and make the price as low as possible
Sure.
But infrastructure like roads, electricity, water, etc has a particular demand on all the resources of a nation. Having senseless mass competition over who can market his tollroad the best is retarded.
Infrastructures are utilities, their first priority is to function 100% of the time.
>On the other hand, when government overprices its services (raise taxes) it wont face any consequenses.
The responsible political party gets removed, usually anyway.
Communism is a bit of an exception here.
>>70349521
>As I described previously, an anarchist "country", I would prefer to call it a lawless zone
Anarchy means no rulers, not no rules
>cannot effectively defend itself from military conquest.
What about militia, private tanks and helicopters and private armies, and mercinaries and recreational nukes for desert? :)
>I don't believe in systems that can quickly fail, just like how I am increasingly disgusted by general suffrage and especially women's ability to vote. Democracy in the west has allowed itself to fail within 100 years of existence. A system that can self-destruct quickly isn't any good.
I hate democracy too
>>70351250
>"True man" WTF does that even mean you fucking dumbass
It means controlling your own fate rather than allowing some fucktarded lawyer and his law enforcement goon buddies do it for you, obviously.
>>70352273
>What about militia, private tanks and helicopters and private armies, and mercinaries and recreational nukes for desert?
Who says one of these guys doesn't decide to "fill the power vacuum" and quickly establish a military dictatorship after defeating all the other societies / competing militias?
A privately owned country, ruled by martial law is extremely dangerous.
>I hate democracy too
Nostalgia back to the days of the Tsars and when Christianity was big in Russia?
>tfw not even flourishing in an absolute monarchy
>>70352440
Your own fate? What fate do you want? what fate can't I control? Is your perfect fate to create a treehouse in a public park without a permit or something? What is the law stopping you to do? If you really care about the little amount of money you lose each year, you should realise that it doesn't matter unless you're an investor because your still going to be fucked up the ass whether its government or corporate. You doodle around these arbitrary ideas but never think about what any of them mean.
>>70340010
You can derive the NAP using human action and the subjectivity of personal values as axioms
>>70335633
>Laughing Franco.jpg
![hqdefault[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/QQGI8Dv.jpg "hqdefault[1].jpg")
What about MUH ROADS!!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpiaujAoPqI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpiaujAoPqI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpiaujAoPqI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpiaujAoPqI
>>70349684
You pay rent because you live in someone else place. Paying for being on land would assume the us government owns all land and every inhabitant in a tenant of the feds (which is indeed how it effectively acts).
>>70332680
I agree
Only infidels should pay tax
>>70353242
No joke. That's how the original Caliphate worked between 800-1000 AD. It was entirely funded by infidels paying Jiyza. The thing was, the nonbelievers put up with it because Jiyza at the time had a lower tax rate than the Eastern Roman Emperor. But yes, conquest is a very big deal for the Sunni faith, because it was written to enable it.
>>70352828
Stop being intentionally ludicrous. That alone shows how childish your mind is.
>what if "insert XXXX insane thing here" happens?
What if, like, Han Solo and Indiana Jones teamed up to smuggle priceless artifacts on the Millennium Falcon?!! SOOOOO COOL!
>>70352005
>Jesus christ. You realize in places like Europe we don't have that much space for building lots of competing toll roads?
Move to Russia, than, Fritz :^)
But seriously a road doesnt take much place.
>I'd rather the government builds roads than an unchecked ultracapitalism and such nonsense keeps cutting down trees and paving up farmland in order to "compete".
I'd rather the government produces food than unchecked ultracapitalism and such nonsense keeps cutting down trees and sow wheat and build cow enclosures in order to "compete".
You can say that about any other good, you see? And how USSR showed us, the government sucks at being effective in all other fields, why do you think its excellent at utilities? Have you completely disregarded my paragraph on monopolies?
>But infrastructure like roads, electricity, water, etc has a particular demand on all the resources of a nation. Having senseless mass competition over who can market his tollroad the best is retarded. Infrastructures are utilities, their first priority is to function 100% of the time.
Food production is a utility, its first priority is to function 100% of the time, and it does so succesfully without government.
>On the other hand, when government overprices its services (raise taxes) it wont face any consequenses. The responsible political party gets removed, usually anyway.
Thats why irresponsible Merkel is still on throne? You said you dont believe in democracy, me neither, but only other options are monarchy/dictatorship (if you are not one of the 0.001% people who completely agree with the ruler you can fuck off), communism (its shit) or libertarianism.
>>70353467
Whoops. Got the dates wrong though. I am actually unsure when the process ended with the mass conversions to Islam, but originally there was an incentive to keep Christians "Christian" for Jiyza (see Al-Andalus)
>>70339521
>better than working the fields
fuck off achmed
t. field worker
where are the arguments???
>>70353551
>why do you think its excellent at utilities?
Everyone needs utilities and they aren't that hard to manage. I would rather the government manages utilities than if it manages food or the economy as a whole (a la 5 year plan).
>Food production is a utility, its first priority is to function 100% of the time, and it does so succesfully without government.
Probably because the government doesn't have its fingers stuck in there too deep.
>You said you dont believe in democracy, me neither, but only other options are monarchy/dictatorship
>dictatorship
soon.
Jesus fucking Christ, is today the Ancap's preaching day??
Stop with this nonsense, FFS.
>>70349707
Not even close to true.
At least know what the words you're using mean before you use them
What really pisses me off with the statist goons is, I'm forced to pay for other people's mistakes.
I'm not a fucking retard, and I shouldn't have my money taken from me because other people ARE retards. Let me keep my money and goods, and let the retards starve to death. Thin the fucking herd.
Also, there's no good reason I should not be allowed to go to my local pharmacy and buy some dextroamphetamine sulfate right off the shelf. But for some stupid reason, some christfaggot politicians made laws saying I can't, and now they bitch and whine because I buy it on the black market, tax free.
Now, to me, this is a win. I like the black market. I'd rather pay some criminal lowlife for illegal drugs, TAX FREE, than have some of the money I spend on drugs go to public schools. Especially since public schools rot people's brains.
So congrats gubmint. You win with your drug war. Tax-free drugs. And especially with the internet and RCs and the DNM and bitcoin, it's a true buyer's market these days.
TAX
FREE
DOPE
>>70350527
>Did you hear about that town in Norway that is going to be full an-cap with no taxes?
Source?
Sounds interesting.
>>70332680
NatSoc > AnCap. If you still believe the individual is the cornerstone of society then you're wrong. It's small groups, families and tribes that enable the creation of civilization.
>>70355257
>being a collectivist
>after the horrible failure of every collectivist state and most every collectivist policy
One only needs to look at south america and see how even in the nations made up from the same ethnic group, individualism, (pinochet's chilie) works better than collectivism (every failed socalisist state in south america)
>>70352540
>Who says one of these guys doesn't decide to "fill the power vacuum" and quickly establish a military dictatorship after defeating all the other societies / competing militias? A privately owned country, ruled by martial law is extremely dangerous.
What stops the state from instituting involuntary slavery? The morals of the population. Slavery existed everywhere in the world for thousands of years, but at one point some people decided that it was immoral. Despite giant economic interests they managed to persuade the majority of people and in the most of the civilized world slavery was eradicated (it still exists in some African and Asian countries). If some modern western government decides do reinstitute slavery, this idea would be met with such universal outrage and resistance, that the government will have to back down. Such exactly attitude towards authority is a prerequisite for an anarcho-capitalist society. What tyrant in his right mind would dream of ruling such a people, where resistance and hatred and disobedience is universal? And also recreational nukes:)
>>70352540
>Nostalgia back to the days of the Tsars and when Christianity was big in Russia?
No, not at all. Before the revolution, the absolute majority of population were slave-like illiterate dark superstitious people. The emancipation reform of 1861 was emancipation only on paper, and people were still slaves up untill the revolution and then rural people were enslaved again (in kolkhozes) by Stalin. Famine and epidemics were widespread and medicine nonexistent.
Concerning Christianity, I'm an atheist. Imperial priests were degenerate alcoholics and profligates, and were viewed by common folk with scorn. They read (and still do) all they prayers and divine services in ununderstandablr ancient language and wear gold clothes. But dark people understood them as some nessesary magic. They didnt knew Bible and didnt understand christianity. Orthodox priests are still greedy degenerates, thats why people who genuinely believe go to protestant churches with modern language and no gold clothes and gold decoration.
Now's the best time to be alive:)
>>70355257
>small groups created civilization
>better give one small group control of everything!
What?
>>70352893
Can you prove that NAP is fundamentally morally right ? No, there's no such thing as something that's objectively good or band ( morally right or wrong).
>>70355664
Individualism is ethnic suicide. Individualistic nations are not only failing these days, but their very people are DYING OUT because they care more about money than their own blood.
Communism is retarded. Market and trade systems are natural. People need private property and individual rights. But none of that means that either of these points should be unbounded by rules. Groups should govern themselves and they should be free to destroy their individual freedoms if it serves the survival of the group.
>>70352893
Moralist libertarians are literally just as bad as evangelicals
>>70355989
Where did I claim that a small group should hold all power? Do you think I'm in favor of oligarchies?
>>70345512
this guy thinks real life is a fucking jetsons cartoon, did you read this shit before you posted it you fucking muppet?
lmao
>>70356508
can you give examples of this supposed "individualistic nations" ? I think you're trying to use current mismanaged state to criticize ancapism, which is ridiculous.
>>70334706
which is why it'll never come to be
>>70353985
>Everyone needs utilities and they aren't that hard to manage. I would rather the government manages utilities than if it manages food or the economy as a whole (a la 5 year plan).
Everyone needs food even more then utilities, but we are not dying of hunger. Under communism there were a deficit of qualititative food, and people had to stand in manyhoured lines to buy food. If government is so bad at making food production effective, why do you think its good at maintaining utilities?
>>Food production is a utility, its first priority is to function 100% of the time, and it does so succesfully without government. > Probably because the government doesn't have its fingers stuck in there too deep.
Yes, yes, yes, you are starting to understand! Food production is effective because the government stays away and 'doesn't have its fingers stuck in there too deep'! Why should it stuck its dick in utilities balls deep than?
>dictatorship soon.
Dictatorship (if you are not one of the 0.001% people who completely agree with the ruler you can fuck off). Altho once in a while a benevolent dictator/monarch happens, most autocrats are there only for corruption and personal enrichment. But I do think that the only thing that can save Europe now is fascism. For a while, and then ancap all the way:)
>>70332940
FPBP
>>70332940
This. Thread/
>>70357737
>I have no arguments, I better insult my opponents xDD:
>>70354260
Not an argument.
>>70356202
If you punch a random person in the face, it is immoral. If a boxer punches another boxer, it is moral. The first action is voluntary, and the second is not, therefore only voluntary actions are moral
>>70356508
>Individualism is ethnic suicide. Individualistic nations are not only failing these days, but their very people are DYING OUT because they care more about money than their own blood.
Caring about your own blood, i.e. family, is fine.
Caring about "strage-guy-who-shares-my-skin-color" over your own self is bullshit.
I have more in common with the typical street nigger here in the US than your German ass, despite having German ancestry.
I know NOTHING about German life or German culture, and don't care to know because I'll never live in that depressing shithole you call "homeland".
>>70356944
Roads are outdated. Roads poison the groundwater. Road maintenance is makework.
Time to evolve.
>>70358502
but why is consent the condition that makes something moral or immoral ? The separation between moral and immoral is inherently subjective.
>>70355664
national socialism was destroyed by overwhelming military force, not societal breakdown
>>70362364
>national socialism was destroyed by overwhelming military force
What's the difference?
You either piss off your own citizens and they revolt, r you piss off other countries and they tag team your little ass into oblivion.
>>70362729
if you don't understand the difference between internal breakdown of society and another government kicking your shit over because your great leader turned out to be a syphilitic moron i think you need to think a bit harder before posting around here
>>70361678
Because sentient creatures have the ability to feel happiness and suffering, the first one is inherently good, the second is bad. When you inflict unnessesary suffering on them (not in self defence or defence of others), it is immoral.
>>70362951
There is no difference because the result is the same.
You can jerk your chicken off all you want to NS Germany and their STRENGTH, but at the end of the day they lost because they pissed off the wrong people.
If you want a great example of a state doing right by their people, look to Germany's watch-making neighbor. If you MUST have statist authoritarian bullshit, do it right. Do it Swiss.
What's with these made up fucking economic systems. Fuck you OP your bitch ass wouldn't last in an anarchist world. We need government so people don't start killing each other, that alone should be a deterrent from any anarchist thought
>>70363845
He just thinks that social contract won't fall apart without a government. Probably 15 or something
>>70363845
Oh noes! The only thing preventing me from killing people is gubmint! Please dont collapse, please dont collapse, please dont collapse! Or else I will go outside and start murdering everybody, I cant help it!
>>70364155
>>70363845
>two people do business
>thank you, have a nice time with your cocaine!
>two people do business with government on the loose
>DO YOU HAVE A PERMIT FOR THAT OPEN FLAME, CITIZEN?
>lengthy court battle ensues
>>70364331
It's not about the normal people
It's about psychos which the law keeps down/punishes
>>70364571
Nice strawman
>>70363352
Why is happiness good and suffering bad ?
>>70364663
Thats what firearms and defence agencies for.
>>70365122
Thats an axiom.
>>70364663
>It's about psychos which the law keeps down/punishes
The law doesn't keep them down.
They do what they want, and often times they get into government positions because government positions ironically offer sociopaths the very thing they desire most - control over other people.
That's the hilariously obvious flaw with government that people refuse to acknowledge. It attracts psychopaths like shit draws flies. It gives psychopaths the very last thing any sane person ever wants psychopaths to have, and the best people for government positions are also ironically the people who least want the task of governing.
Dumb gangsters join gangs. Smart gangsters run for office or join their local police force.
>>70332680
Fuck off nigger
>>70365681
Not an argument
>>70364866
Okay, here's a literal IRL example-
>citizen youth A sells lemonade to thirsty adult citizen B
>thank you sweetie, here's some money for your hard work!
>thank you sir!
In governmentotopia-
>citizen youth A sells lemonade to thirsty adult citizen B
>STOP, CITIZEN YOUTH! Do you have the permits for food service, and have you had all of the proper inspections? DO YOU HAVE A LICENSE? This establishment is henceforth SHUT DOWN, by order of State Agency of Busy Body Cocksuckers for Annoying Citizens Minding Their Own Business(SABBCACMTOB)
>long court battle ensues
>>70366118
Oh, and I forgot-
>And did you pay your income taxes, citizen youth? NO ONE earns a living without paying us protection money(aka taxes), or else we'll come by, tear your shit apart, and haul you off to prison, like any good mafioso organization would.
>>70365239
An axiom is something that needs to explanation. It's basicly the area where both people agree, but I clearly don't, that's why I asked you why you consider happiness to be good and suffering bad.
So it seems that we have reach a point where it's really just opinions and nothing more.
I think i've made it pretty clear that all morality is subjective because all morality eventually reaches a point like this where it's really just down to a belief and not actually and objective fact.
