Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What you think is logical may not be what others think is logical, particularly when we are talking points of view, not facts.
Anyone who argues that one person can have the right to rule another is inherently holding contradictory beliefs in their mind, and that is illogical by definition.
Example: Claiming that the state is legitimate (which means the people who are part of the state have the right to rule - that they are "authority" over others and must be obeyed, and they have the right to take people's property by force) is illogical because you can't give rights to others that you never had to begin with.
If I can't take your money to use however I believe it should be used, I can't give anyone else the right to take your money either. The entire point of having the state is to have an organization within society that is "allowed" to do things that would be wrong if done by regular people. Otherwise it wouldn't be government anymore.
If regular people can't do it, having special ceremonies and writing on very official documents can't suddenly make that action okay. There is no logical way of defending that idea. You will contradict yourself every time.
The only logical arguments are that the state is illegitimate, or that people in government are not people...or you could say that every human has the right to take from others by force, impose their will on them, etc., but I've never heard anyone argue that.
I had watched Gen. Colin Powell (the Secretary of State under GWB) go on TV and tell this nation that the word Islam meant peace. Yeah, right. Powell has always been a Saudi ass kisser extraordinaire. That's when I knew that we would soon be in a bull**** war. Bush/Cheney were bull*** artists and so is Trump.
Hmmm...
Was Bill Clinton a bull**** artist when HE said Iraq had and had used WMDs?
Was Bill Clinton a bull**** artist when he signed the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act authorizing the use of the US military to depose Saddam Hussein, which Bush followed through on and later accomplished?
Was UN Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix a bull**** artist when he reported to the UN Security Council on January 27, 2003 that Iraq had acquired hundreds of sanctions-prohibited rocket engines for missiles that are used to deliver biological and chemical WMDs as late as December 2002?
Quote:
"Also associated with these missiles and related developments is the import, which has been taking place during the last few years, of a number of items despite the sanctions, including as late as December 2002. Foremost amongst these is the import of 380 rocket engines which may be used for the Al Samoud 2 [missiles that deliver biological and chemical weapons]."
Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003
Was Bill Clinton a bull**** artist when he signed the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act authorizing the use of the US military to depose Saddam Hussein, which Bush followed through on and later accomplished?
Was UN Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix a bull**** artist when he reported to the UN Security Council on January 27, 2003 that Iraq had acquired hundreds of sanctions-prohibited rocket engines for missiles that are used to deliver biological and chemical WMDs as late as December 2002? Dr. Hans Blix Update to the UN Security Council, 27 January 2003
In all fairness, have you answered a single of mine? Do your off-gridders use imported goods? Do they expect a hospital if they fall ill? In short, do they enjoy the benefits of living in a complex society even for all their off-griddiness?
Yes, he has to purchase the land. People own land. If you want it, you buy it. And no, I see no problem with property taxes.
In all fairness, have you answered a single of mine? Do your off-gridders use imported goods? Do they expect a hospital if they fall ill? In short, do they enjoy the benefits of living in a complex society even for all their off-griddiness?
Yes, he has to purchase the land. People own land. If you want it, you buy it. And no, I see no problem with property taxes.
I think your Stockholm Syndrome is too engrained for me to break through.
To the statist the following act as consent to be ruled over:
* getting squeezed out of a vagina (social contract)
* sitting or standing in a particular location (if you don't like the violence I'm about to inflict on you-move-otherwise you consent)
* breathing (all air has been "regulated" and altered via State regulation)
* using a public road to get from point A to B even though the State's monopoly prohibits you from building your own road or else you'll face the cage or sword
These people think consent can be given when one party is under duress. Its mind-boggling.
Too bad we can't go back in time and leave your infant self on a hillside for the wolves, eh? That'd free you from the social contract, 100%.
So for the umpteenth time: Human beings only survive in some form of society - tribe, klan, city-state, nation. It is only natural to go through a rebellious phase - "I didn't ask to be born" has been uttered by every spoiled teenager, ever. Most manage to abandon that phase. Some keep it al the way into their under-grad years. A few never manage to shake it.
Historically, you are extraordinarily blessed by having the freedom to leave. Remember the guy from Into the Wild? Nobody bothered him. He just took off.
But you don't. Because you want the benefits. You want the Internet (obviously) and the clean water and the roads and trained dentists who know the use of Novocaine. You want the safety and the security that even gives you the opportunity to feel offended that no body stepped up to you and asked you to consent to please contribute. I'd say sorry society can't provide those benefits on terms that are tailored more to your personal liking, but the truth is, I'm not sorry at all.
If you do not use government services why must you purchase your land from them...
Because you don't already own the land in question. That's how ownership works - if it's not yours, you have to purchase it from the owner in order for it to become yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess
...and then a bi-annual tribute to The Crown (property taxes)?
You don't have to pay your property taxes, you just have to be willing to accept the consequences of your actions.
As to why you should be expected to pay taxes - it's already been described above. Even "off grid" folks benefit from infrastructure in direct and indirect ways. You benefit, you pay.
Try. Do your off-gridders use imported goods? Currency? Ammunition? Is the idea of indirect benefits not sinking in?
Translation: Contracted for life to the State because my grandfather drove on a public road.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
