Topic: Would you pay taxes if you could live off bitcoins? - page 2. (Read 11426 times)

As it happens, I offer arbitration and mediation services....

Maybe you should gather together a mob of 2 million and collectively tell an arbitrator I should be forced to read this "libertarian manifesto" that I don't subscribe to, so the arbitrator and I can laugh in your face.

+1   

You obviously don't have a grasp of economics and unintended consequences. Eminent domain is harmful to economic development because it reduces or eliminates owners' ability to plan and use their property as they want. If you can be held hostage to the whims of others then you cannot effectively plan. So any proper arbitrator will tell you in plain language that you cannot build a road across the land of someone who doesn't agree with your proposal. You are also totally ignoring the fact that there will be many other options besides building that portion of road over the resistor's land. Your attempt to limit the possibilities to only ones that create a conflict are infuriating.

Before I read Machinery of Freedom I was a minarchist. I didn't understand how things could possibly work in an anarchy. I still don't know how every last detail of every economic action by every single actor in the world would happen. What Machinery of Freedom got me to understand was that I don't have to have all the answers. The people making up the market will figure it all out by acting each in their own interest, and so no central planning is necessary. In fact, many things will turn out vastly different than any of us can even conceive. Maybe several technological advances will create options that no one now would expect. Maybe someone will figure out a better philosophy that answers many current social issues. But the point is, not only don't we know how it will all work out, but we don't need to know. We just need to trust that individuals making their own choices and acting in their own interest will provide all that is needed.

Yes, because it only goes back to the people. (Maybe not 100% of it, but whatever).

I already live off of bitcoins and I pay taxes. This thread is ignorant because it assumes that Bitcoin will eliminate localized currencies, which is highly illogical for numerous reasons, and in addition forgets that people are already choosing to pay taxes to the network and pretty much every product and service provider in Bitcoin.

Whoa, wait, was that actually on-topic? You confused me.

No taxation without representation + transparency and complete accountability to the people (people of the human variety - not corporations)

The last two we, in the US, don't have.  

So, no.

I have. It's called the New Libertarian Manifesto, by Sam Konkin. As promised, here it is. There is was a severe typographical error in the first section of most versions online, which while it does not alter the overall tone, does significantly change the meaning of the two paragraphs that it combines.

I have fixed that error, though other lesser ones may remain. If you have any questions, I have the full 25th anniversary edition, in real, dead-tree form to clear up any misunderstandings.

I'd also suggest you read the book I offered up earlier, Universally Preferable Behaviour.

I'm done work and off to the pub.  I wonder if it its worth making a thread to discuss http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf since it seems that most libertarian and anarchists don't actually understand what the book says.

I know why you say that.  You haven't read http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf

Read it.  If you find a better libertarian manifesto, let me know.  But for now, your problem is that you have not studied your own beliefs.

In the nicest way possible, you haven't understood "The Machinery of Freedom."  Read it again - the chapters on market law are of particular interest.  In anarchy, there are no property rights as there is no state.  Its all about the economic value of development.  Arbitrators will be market driven and will consider the value to the 2 million compared to the value to the 1 person and will tell the 1 person to pack their bags.

I don't know why I am having to explain the book you recommended.

Mob rule of 2 people, 2 million, or 2 trillion is not legitimate, therefore there can be no 'interference' with it that an arbitrator will acknowledge. Unless that arbitrator isn't actually one at all.

Free-loading on the NHS is hard.  Like really hard.  You can do it by living outside the UK and then flying home for medical treatment.  You can go to jail young, get sick, be violent and then stay in jail all your life.  You can be mentally ill and never leave institutionalised care.  The vast vast majority of people couldn't possibly avoid paying their dues.

No, I am not. I am interfering with their use of my property. The arbitrator won't even need a nanosecond to tell them to get fucked.

You are the one interfering with the use of their property by 2 million people.  The arbitrator won't even need a nanosecond to tell you to pack your bags.

Why are you arguing about this? This is how you want disputes to be resolved.

So we've come full circle. Because you're on the hook for free-loaders with your NHS.

Rights are not imposed, they are inherent. Your Ugly European act is completely and utterly worn out now. You must really love paving your road to hell in your echo chamber.

Agreed.  Luckily that doesn't matter.  The NAP assumes that there is no state, so there is no body imposing rights.  

Please, do use both a favour.  Read http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf and then post back.  Right now, I think your heart is in the right place but you don't understand anarchism.

Well, that's a lovely theory, but remember:


And if I do not consent to your interference with my continued use of my property, you're stuffed, and the arbitrator will tell you so.