JEB
Socrates: Shall we discuss the word good
how its very subjective and time sensitive
there is no objective good
there isn't even a constant good, it changes with time
think about it, it might be good for u to smoke right now, but u can't just look at the moment
u have to evaluate it over the entire future effect
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: entire future? as in eternity?
shouldn’t the limit be my lifetime?
Socrates: well that brings in another factor
its your lifetime if u are an individualist
its eternity if u are socialist
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: where to draw the boundaries? how does a person even make decisions about what to do in that instant
if they cant be sure its "subjectively good"
Socrates: whatever the voice in their head tells them to do is subjectively good
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: of course its subjective, but if a lot of people share a specific view of good, then it becomes closer to objective
at least communal good
Socrates: no, i'm looking at each person individually
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: and im a socialist
cause there is a good larger than the individuals definition
Socrates: well that is where u went wrong
to think that there is a larger good is a mistake and a fallacy
and it will only lead to destruction
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: its only larger in the sense that several people share the same sense of good
the same view of it
Socrates: oh i see what u are saying
yes, people can share the same vision of good
but u can't coerce others into sharing your vision
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: no, but knowing how others view good changes how you view good
so ur perception of good isnt developing in a vacuum
Socrates: there is a difference between teaching and forcing
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: yes
does forcing of good occur?
Socrates: yes, taxation for government projects
and religion are two excellent examples
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: in the case of taxes, are we forcing people to believe its good
or are we just taking their money?
if they don't see the value in the taxes, then its coercion i guess
Socrates: forcing your good on others, whether they believe it or not is wrong
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: but there are people that like paying taxes
and buy into it
Socrates: most of them "buy into it" because they are coerced and manipulated by the government through education and the media
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: so would u say people are coerced into thinking murder is bad?
they are taught taxes are good, not coerced
just like they are taught murder is bad
Socrates: yes, some people are
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: so people can be taught. coerced almost anything
what point are you trying to make with religion and taxes
Socrates: i'm making the point that coercing others to follow your subjective understanding of what’s good is wrong
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: is it coercion if they decide its the right thing to believe simply because everyone else around them believes it
and there is safety in numbers
Socrates: that is coercion and weakness, good sir
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: how can I put your principle into action
Socrates: You can make changes through anarchy, civil disobedience, or politics
Cletus Joe Bob Pickins: how do I apply the lessons of your principles?
Socrates: well once you think the way i do, you can apply the lessons yourself
getting u to apply the lessons without fully understanding their basis is just another form of coercion
Furthermore, what I teach is a Science and, “ultimate decisions, the valuations and the choosing of ends, are beyond the scope of any science. Science never tells a man how he should act; it merely shows how a man must act if he wants to attain definite ends.”
THE END
Taxes are a necessary evil if we are to live in a society. Even the strictest libertarian wants the protection of the police and the institution of justice. Those institutions are only possible through taxation. Taxation is the staple that holds the group to common goals of order, justice, and without which true freedom is not possible. I would hope your science, which is simply a guise for "reason," comes to understand as one of its first lessons in interacting with others that as a group we owe duties of honesty, good will, and cooperation with eachother. These duties are manifested in more than mere words, they come in the form of courts, police, local and federal governments, and are paid for with taxes. Unfortunately many people don't practice science enough, so they never quite grasp these concepts.
ReplyDeleteI shall deal with each contention in your response in order.
ReplyDelete1. Taxes are not a necessary evil, as is often presumed. With a sufficiently streamlined government, all necessary functions could be paid for by the money the government is able to make from investment in the form of government bonds. People would buy government bonds to receive a low, longterm, fixed interest rate as they do now; and the incentive to do so would emanate from the stability of purchasing power made possible by the abolishment of the Federal Reserve and the re-establishment of a gold-backed monetary system. The government could then take this money and re-invest it and use the profits to fund its actions.
That would mean only certain people are paying for the right to government protection, justice, and order. Only those that were willing to buy bonds would be the payers. The rest would simply be 'looters' living off of what the others are willing to put in.
ReplyDeleteYou misunderstand me. There is no requirement to buy bonds. It is a free market option that many people will be willing to make because it would be one of the safest investments. Merely choosing not to invest in the government doesn't mean you do not receive the government's services. Furthermore, many of the services you list as necessary of the government could be sufficiently cared for at the local level without the aid of the federal government. Police and most justice functions come to mind.
ReplyDeleteYou perceive government to be a safe investment today though under your regime it would be considerably less so. The ability to tax the people and print money is precisely what makes the government (and T-bills, bonds) a safe, nearly fail-proof bet relative to other market players.
ReplyDeleteGovernment bonds may appear to be a good investment in today's market, if you completely ignore the hidden inflation, otherwise known as decreased spending power. Sure, you get a nice interest rate, but if that interest rate doesn't make up for the decreased spending power caused by the Federal Reserve constantly increasing the money supply, then the government ends up on top in the end my friend. Without this inflation the capital you earn from the interest on your investment in the government will be worth the same in twenty years that it is today.
ReplyDeleteSo what do you think of state taxes?
ReplyDeleteThere is no "misunderstanding." Some buy bonds while others don't, meaning SOME PAY while OTHERS DON'T, yet ALL enjoy the benefits. That doesn't sound FAIR to me. My desire for a "safe" investment shouldn't pay for your right to have the cops arrest the guy who attacked JEB. Don't try to squirm out of your bad argument by raising a new one asserting that local governments can handle it. If the local government had all the power, organized crime would take over the nation, and thats just one argument against minimizing the federal government. My science prevails amigo.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid to say it, but there still appears to be a misunderstanding. You see, when you say "SOME PAY," you are incorrect in your terminology. They are investing, not paying. If anything, the ones that don't "pay" are losing out on an excellent investment. As for organized crime, the argument is not that there would be no national level law enforcement. There would still be a military. And instead of being spread out across the globe from Germany to Japan to Afghanistan, it would be concentrated within the homeland, defending our great nation from within.
ReplyDeleteI say just wait and see how we (the world) destroy ourselves in the coming years. Taxes won't be an issue then.
ReplyDeleteA most important lesson is that any person or institution left to the mercy of the free market will ultimately create the most efficient end result. This universal law includes governments. Sleep on that one.
ReplyDeleteI would like this to become a new blog entry, so anyone with the authority to, please post this as a separate entry. This is a quote from the book "Human Action" by Ludwig Von Mises. I could not make this argument better myself, so I chose to post it without interjection.
ReplyDeleteOn Happiness
In colloquial speech we call a man “happy” who has succeeded in attaining his ends. A more adequate description of his state would be that he
is happier than he was before. There is however no valid objection to a usage that defines human action as the striving for happiness.
But we must avoid current misunderstandings. The ultimate goal of human action is always the satisfaction of the acting man’s desire. There is no standard of greater or lesser satisfaction other than individual judgments of value, different for various people and for the same people at various times. What makes a man feel uneasy and less uneasy is established by him from the standard of his own will and judgment, from his personal and subjective valuation. Nobody is in a position to decree what should make a fellow man happier.
To establish this fact does not refer in any way to the antitheses of egoism and altruism, of materialism and idealism, of individualism and collectivism, of atheism and religion. There are people whose only aim is to improve the condition of their own ego. There are other people with whom awareness of the troubles of their fellow men causes as much uneasiness as or even more uneasiness than their own wants. There are people who desire nothing else than the satisfaction of their appetites for sexual intercourse, food, drinks,
fine homes, and other material things. But other men care more for the satisfactions commonly called “higher” and “ideal.” There are individuals eager to adjust their actions to the requirements of social cooperation; there are, on the other hand, refractory people who defy the rules of social life. There are people for whom the ultimate goal of the earthly pilgrimage is the preparation for a life of bliss. There are other people who do not believe in the teachings of any religion and do not allow their actions to be influenced by them.