Oh, I am sick to my stomach by everything that governments do, I don't see anything extra special in the way that 'first nations' are treated, to me income and property taxation is the same thing.
Correction: fiat is not a store of value, money is. Money is gold and gold stores value. If you find some gold lost at sea hundreds of years ago it will be just as valuable today as it was then and in hundreds of years from now it will be just as valuable.
If a neighbourhood proves to be problematic (too many drone losses), Amazon will avoid it. I imagine that this would more likely hit poor neighbourhoods, so Amazon will probably face discrimination charges. Of course they would be right to avoid neighbourhoods that cause drone damage and loss.
Capitalism is private ownership and private operation of resources. Employing somebody else to help manage private ownership and operation of resources is and was never a requirement at all. Employing workers is simply a side effect but not some kind of a requirement. In the best case scenario you should be able to run your own business without any employees at all. In that case trade happens between 2 and more productive business owners. If one produces food and another produces energy for example, trading for those 2 is beneficial, they exchange completely voluntary and they do it for personal gain.
If you have excess food and the other guy has excess furniture, he and you can trade, etc. Having employees only works because not everybody runs a business, so there are people who rather be hired than bother to own a business, they exchange their labour for products created by the business owners.
If you come even close to understanding this, you will realize that business does not extract money, it creates wealth (products and services), and money only accounts for that wealth. Money is a measurement tool (also it is an exchange mechanism and a value store), it is not in itself wealth. Business creates money, it doesn't extract it.
Of course there are people that extract money, those people are part of the government. Government does not create wealth, but it uses force to extract it from people that create wealth.
Business (private individuals) will do things wrong, where did you see me saying something like that? Business is people, people do wrong/bad things. Collectivism and government oppression is always the wrong answer to anything that people do wrong.
I get alone with others just fine as long as it is profitable both ways and is based on free will.
I don't recognize the concept of 'treason' by the way.
My survival is my business, I see self protection as necessary and automation helps quite a bit. Your desires notwithstanding I stand at least as good a chance to come up on top as you believe you stand and I do quite a bit of long term planning to avoid unnecessary conflicts.
My view is that theft will not be tolerated regardless of any reasons, circumstances and justifications.
If you want a solution: get rid of income and property taxation, get rid of business and labour regulations, get rid of price controls, get the government out of controlling money and out of manipulating interest rates, this will allow the free (from government) market to work out who can be productive and who cannot. Those who cannot can ask for voluntary charity donations. That is the only way to improve the economy for the people who will otherwise lose their jobs and be unemployed. Nobody should be forced to live for anybody else. Nobody should be forced to give up their life's work for anybody else.
Oppression is oppression regardless of reasons, the people that get oppressed by the collectivism will fight it and at the end the oppressors will lose or the economy will die, both of these things will not coexist.
I am very well aware of exactly how 'progressive' tax works, thank you very much. I don't want to see anybody ever paying more taxes in terms of percentage on higher brackets.
See, you are a fucking idiot because your question assumed only 2 possible outcomes: either I do not understand the 'progressive' taxation *or* I am a 'fucking idiot because I do not understand it.
I understand it very well and I am completely against it.
You think I am being obtuse but you don't recognize that the proponents of UBI are obtuse for not understanding this simple thing: it doesn't matter one bit *why* a person is not working (automation, illness, being too dumb, whatever). It doesn't matter why a person is not productive.
The only thing that matters is this: if a person is unproductive he or she will not be able to offer anything of value to exchange for goods and services created by the productive population.
That person can try and become productive or can ask for donations.
However if that person is given an entitlement by a collectivist government to take productive output of the productive people and use it without any form of exchange (just because that person exists basically), then eventually the power of the collective to steal from the productive population will be removed if not de jure then de facto. So whatever that person will get in form of a subsidy will buy nothing because at the end it doesn't matter if all of my productivity is automated completely 100% and I produce a bunch of food (for example) with machines. Those are my machines and I have no reason to give it to anybody under the barrel of a gun.
I will use the fact that I have the automated process to produce food to exchange with others who can produce something for me that will protect me from this theft and oppression and I will ensure that my productive output stays mine and does not become redistributed via any form of collectivist action.
This can mean war and this can mean enormous inflation that completely negates the value of the UBI subsidy, whatever it means the effect is going to be the same, the unproductive people will not be able to steal from the productive people for very long.
I see, so what you are saying is that there are / will be people who will be criminal if not for a welfare system. Why have them around? Separate the productive society from these criminals/potential criminals. That will be the outcome eventually anyway.
Tell me something, why is it that when people are talking about so called 'first nations' then their culture and language and family structure is somehow something to be cherished and protected and subsidised by the government? Why is that important?
Because when white non-Muslim people start talking about themselves in those terms (protecting their language, culture, family structure) they are all of a sudden racists/bigots/sexists/whatever?
UBI is enforced, taxes are collected from the productive population and everybody (everybody, isn't it?) gets their UBI.
Lets say that 50% of people decide that now UBI is good enough for them to not work. By how much do the taxes have to go up on the remaining 50% to pay UBI to all?
Let's say 75% decide to drop off the work force. 85%. Why wouldn't a store clerk drop out? Why wouldn't a bathroom attendant drop out? If the benefit is enough just to live on, why not drop out and then do whatever you want, after all - the basics are provided for by somebody, a very large number of people will drop out.
--
Take it to the maximum, what if everybody drops out who pays into UBI? This is the issue with Communism, from everybody according to their abilities to everybody according to their needs doesn't work, nobody wants to work because the more you work the more is asked of you and if you don't work at all then nothing is asked of you.
--
Now, let's say UBI is implemented and a large potion of the population drops out. What is the reason for the productive segment of the population to trade with people who are living off of that very productive segment of the population? They simply wouldn't trade with them - there is nothing to gain by trading with somebody who is not producing anything but pays you *with your own money taken from you by force*.
You are not gaining anything by being paid for your products / services with your own money that was taken from you. In other words there is no reason to trade with people who are not working.
UBI will separate the economy into 2: those who produce will trade with each other somehow and those who don't produce but get this 'UBI' will be able to buy absolutely nothing with it.
I disagree completely, I do not want to pay a single penny for any form of government oppression (and this is oppression) and I do not want anybody to pay a single dime, I don't want anybody to be oppressed for anybody else's benefit at all, children notwithstanding.
I completely disagree with any form of 'proportionate' or 'progressive' taxation scheme, I completely disagree with any form of income, salary and wealth taxation, I completely disagree with all forms of involuntary money transfer from anybody to anybody regardless of the intentions, regardless of the supposed (or real) needs, regardless of anybody's circumstances.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, you are pointing at the government meddling and failures and saying: 'trade is not always fair'. I did not even talk about fair, so called 'fairness' is a garbage concept that means nothing at all and I am not for any form of 'fairness' where to achieve it collectivist oppression has to be used.
I was talking about *voluntary exchange*, that's the only meaningful concept: voluntary, not under duress, not under some form of oppression by a collective action by anybody pointing a gun at ones head.
OK, Orwell. Trade is a voluntary equitable exchange. Transfer is not that. Sure, you can redefine the words but you cannot hide your rotten thieving nature.
I'm back in the USSR You don't know how lucky you are, boy Back in the USSR, yeah
We had exactly that, a UBI of sorts and mandatory employment ( it was even named a 'right' to work).
UBI is one of the last steps before a society empovireshes to the point of no return and then it disintegrates. Good thing there are enough countries on this idiotic planet not to have to suffer in the ones that come up with and pass this type of garbage.
By the metric of USA being a major creditor nation in 1890 and today it is the biggest debtor in history of histories.
By the metric of USA running trade surpluses in 1890 for the last 25 years or so USA has been running about 500 BILLION USD / year in trade deficits, so USA is *not paying for its consumption*, it's been subsidised by the productive world.
By the metric of being on real money in 1890 and today USD is nothing but a ghost.
By the metric of new business formation, by the metric of *not having to pay income, payroll, property taxes* to the government, by the metric of government not being anywhere close to what it is today in terms of power and size, by the metric of all the wars, which seem to be the most profitable business in today's America - murdering people around the world.
By the metric of people not coming to USA for individual freedom anymore at all.
where did you read that I want a government at all? I want no government whatsoever. The only thing that I am for is a mechanism for preventing so called 'legitimate' governments from appearing, funded by voluntary donations, nothing more than that.
It matters quite a bit, if you shoot back with the government you have no chances because supposedly it is 'legal'. With private people that's only your private problem, they kill you or you kill them, nobody has more legitimacy than the other side.
Less freedom, yes. Every new law, every new tax, every new subsidy, every new department, every new war, all of this takes away individual freedom and is another step towards destroying the economy.
I wrote exactly what I am arguing in that comment, I am not arguing what is not written there. My point is that without all of the things that I mentioned in that comment the USA economy today would have been stellar, something that we cannot really imagine because of all the damage that was done that prevented that economy from happening.
Correct, you are assuming correctly. There shouldn't be any public roads or any form of subsidised public education for anybody under any circumstances. There shouldn't be any government money at all, yes, this means no government money for any form of scientific research either.
Every single thing must be completely private, there shouldn't be any 'government' to make agreements, all agreements need to be private. There shouldn't be government police of military or rescue services.
And of-course there shouldn't be any government ever even closely related to any form of health insurance or health care.
All these things need to be completely private and this does not mean going back to 'living in caves', it means not being oppressed by any legitimized outside force, it means being a free person living among other free people.
Right, however a private entity with more physical power than you is only that, it's not the huge all encompassing monster with *legal* power to destroy you. This is what makes all the difference.
I guess it could use this time as a 'told you so' moment but I will wait until the USD crashes and gets destroyed by the inflation that everybody is convinced doesn't exist or is not high enough.
All the idiots that believe that the economy is in the expansion of the money supply. The economy is in the expansion of productivity, it is not in the rising prices for those products. Of-course all that the Fed ever wanted was 'to create a feeling of wealth', as if believing you are wealthy actually makes you wealthy.
The reality is that the USA economy has been going down the hill since 1890, when the Sherman act was passed. Then it was only a number of milestones to get by, the introduction of the income taxes and the IRS, the introduction of the Federal Reserve bank in 1913 and taking away the pretence that it will not be used to monetize US government debt in 1917.
The 1925-1929 with the government of USA with the Fed creating the biggest bubble in farming stocks up to that date by printing money to buy bad UK debt from France.
1929-1945, the depression that the government has created with all the jobs programs, New Deal, growth of the income taxes, minimum wage, all sorts of price and wage controls, getting the gold out of the people's pockets, introduction of the SS (payroll taxes), later leading to the introduction of the Medicare, Medicaid, using paper money not backed by anything to implement the space race, the cold war, hot wars, eventually running out of money to pay for all that and defaulting on the USD in 1971.
After that it was even faster, the companies started moving away from all the inflation created by the government money destruction. The destruction of real interest rates to keep government borrowing going destroyed and prevented even more businesses out of existence. All the rules and laws introduced to promote 'this thing for all' and 'that thing for all', the so called 'rights' (entitlements at the expense of the rights of others and at the expense of the entire economy) to have housing, food, health insurance and care, this and that....
Anyway, the eventual bond and currency collapse will lead to the real government crisis and probably to real civil unrest. It's going to get much worse before it gets any better at all in terms of real healing of the economy.
The fact that the college grads can't get well paying jobs - that's just a consequence of destruction of individual freedoms by the ever growing idea that it is government that should be in control of business, money, of everything. This idea will have to die in order for the economy to live again.
Get the government out of health care and health insurance entirely, no government taxation for purposes of any form of health insurance/care subsidy, no government meddling with health care providers, pharmacies, etc., you will get such cut throat competition you wouldn't believe it.
Of-course I think in this inflationary environment created by the government you have to get government out of everything, including the money and interest rates before good restructuring would take place but still, even just getting government out of business in one particular industry should start healing that sector.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I am sick to my stomach by everything that governments do, I don't see anything extra special in the way that 'first nations' are treated, to me income and property taxation is the same thing.
Correction: fiat is not a store of value, money is. Money is gold and gold stores value. If you find some gold lost at sea hundreds of years ago it will be just as valuable today as it was then and in hundreds of years from now it will be just as valuable.
If a neighbourhood proves to be problematic (too many drone losses), Amazon will avoid it. I imagine that this would more likely hit poor neighbourhoods, so Amazon will probably face discrimination charges. Of course they would be right to avoid neighbourhoods that cause drone damage and loss.
Capitalism is private ownership and private operation of resources. Employing somebody else to help manage private ownership and operation of resources is and was never a requirement at all. Employing workers is simply a side effect but not some kind of a requirement. In the best case scenario you should be able to run your own business without any employees at all. In that case trade happens between 2 and more productive business owners. If one produces food and another produces energy for example, trading for those 2 is beneficial, they exchange completely voluntary and they do it for personal gain.
If you have excess food and the other guy has excess furniture, he and you can trade, etc. Having employees only works because not everybody runs a business, so there are people who rather be hired than bother to own a business, they exchange their labour for products created by the business owners.
If you come even close to understanding this, you will realize that business does not extract money, it creates wealth (products and services), and money only accounts for that wealth. Money is a measurement tool (also it is an exchange mechanism and a value store), it is not in itself wealth. Business creates money, it doesn't extract it.
Of course there are people that extract money, those people are part of the government. Government does not create wealth, but it uses force to extract it from people that create wealth.
Business (private individuals) will do things wrong, where did you see me saying something like that? Business is people, people do wrong/bad things. Collectivism and government oppression is always the wrong answer to anything that people do wrong.
Blackmail should not be the thing that opens doors for some to live off of others.
I get alone with others just fine as long as it is profitable both ways and is based on free will.
I don't recognize the concept of 'treason' by the way.
My survival is my business, I see self protection as necessary and automation helps quite a bit. Your desires notwithstanding I stand at least as good a chance to come up on top as you believe you stand and I do quite a bit of long term planning to avoid unnecessary conflicts.
My view is that theft will not be tolerated regardless of any reasons, circumstances and justifications.
If you want a solution: get rid of income and property taxation, get rid of business and labour regulations, get rid of price controls, get the government out of controlling money and out of manipulating interest rates, this will allow the free (from government) market to work out who can be productive and who cannot. Those who cannot can ask for voluntary charity donations. That is the only way to improve the economy for the people who will otherwise lose their jobs and be unemployed. Nobody should be forced to live for anybody else. Nobody should be forced to give up their life's work for anybody else.
Oppression is oppression regardless of reasons, the people that get oppressed by the collectivism will fight it and at the end the oppressors will lose or the economy will die, both of these things will not coexist.
I am very well aware of exactly how 'progressive' tax works, thank you very much. I don't want to see anybody ever paying more taxes in terms of percentage on higher brackets.
See, you are a fucking idiot because your question assumed only 2 possible outcomes: either I do not understand the 'progressive' taxation *or* I am a 'fucking idiot because I do not understand it.
I understand it very well and I am completely against it.
You think I am being obtuse but you don't recognize that the proponents of UBI are obtuse for not understanding this simple thing: it doesn't matter one bit *why* a person is not working (automation, illness, being too dumb, whatever). It doesn't matter why a person is not productive.
The only thing that matters is this: if a person is unproductive he or she will not be able to offer anything of value to exchange for goods and services created by the productive population.
That person can try and become productive or can ask for donations.
However if that person is given an entitlement by a collectivist government to take productive output of the productive people and use it without any form of exchange (just because that person exists basically), then eventually the power of the collective to steal from the productive population will be removed if not de jure then de facto. So whatever that person will get in form of a subsidy will buy nothing because at the end it doesn't matter if all of my productivity is automated completely 100% and I produce a bunch of food (for example) with machines. Those are my machines and I have no reason to give it to anybody under the barrel of a gun.
I will use the fact that I have the automated process to produce food to exchange with others who can produce something for me that will protect me from this theft and oppression and I will ensure that my productive output stays mine and does not become redistributed via any form of collectivist action.
This can mean war and this can mean enormous inflation that completely negates the value of the UBI subsidy, whatever it means the effect is going to be the same, the unproductive people will not be able to steal from the productive people for very long.
I see, so what you are saying is that there are / will be people who will be criminal if not for a welfare system. Why have them around? Separate the productive society from these criminals/potential criminals. That will be the outcome eventually anyway.
Tell me something, why is it that when people are talking about so called 'first nations' then their culture and language and family structure is somehow something to be cherished and protected and subsidised by the government? Why is that important?
Because when white non-Muslim people start talking about themselves in those terms (protecting their language, culture, family structure) they are all of a sudden racists/bigots/sexists/whatever?
Try this scenario for a moment:
UBI is enforced, taxes are collected from the productive population and everybody (everybody, isn't it?) gets their UBI.
Lets say that 50% of people decide that now UBI is good enough for them to not work. By how much do the taxes have to go up on the remaining 50% to pay UBI to all?
Let's say 75% decide to drop off the work force. 85%. Why wouldn't a store clerk drop out? Why wouldn't a bathroom attendant drop out? If the benefit is enough just to live on, why not drop out and then do whatever you want, after all - the basics are provided for by somebody, a very large number of people will drop out.
--
Take it to the maximum, what if everybody drops out who pays into UBI? This is the issue with Communism, from everybody according to their abilities to everybody according to their needs doesn't work, nobody wants to work because the more you work the more is asked of you and if you don't work at all then nothing is asked of you.
--
Now, let's say UBI is implemented and a large potion of the population drops out. What is the reason for the productive segment of the population to trade with people who are living off of that very productive segment of the population? They simply wouldn't trade with them - there is nothing to gain by trading with somebody who is not producing anything but pays you *with your own money taken from you by force*.
You are not gaining anything by being paid for your products / services with your own money that was taken from you. In other words there is no reason to trade with people who are not working.
UBI will separate the economy into 2: those who produce will trade with each other somehow and those who don't produce but get this 'UBI' will be able to buy absolutely nothing with it.
I disagree completely, I do not want to pay a single penny for any form of government oppression (and this is oppression) and I do not want anybody to pay a single dime, I don't want anybody to be oppressed for anybody else's benefit at all, children notwithstanding.
I completely disagree with any form of 'proportionate' or 'progressive' taxation scheme, I completely disagree with any form of income, salary and wealth taxation, I completely disagree with all forms of involuntary money transfer from anybody to anybody regardless of the intentions, regardless of the supposed (or real) needs, regardless of anybody's circumstances.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, you are pointing at the government meddling and failures and saying: 'trade is not always fair'. I did not even talk about fair, so called 'fairness' is a garbage concept that means nothing at all and I am not for any form of 'fairness' where to achieve it collectivist oppression has to be used.
I was talking about *voluntary exchange*, that's the only meaningful concept: voluntary, not under duress, not under some form of oppression by a collective action by anybody pointing a gun at ones head.
OK, Orwell. Trade is a voluntary equitable exchange. Transfer is not that. Sure, you can redefine the words but you cannot hide your rotten thieving nature.
I'm back in the USSR
You don't know how lucky you are, boy
Back in the USSR, yeah
We had exactly that, a UBI of sorts and mandatory employment ( it was even named a 'right' to work).
UBI is one of the last steps before a society empovireshes to the point of no return and then it disintegrates. Good thing there are enough countries on this idiotic planet not to have to suffer in the ones that come up with and pass this type of garbage.
By the metric of USA being a major creditor nation in 1890 and today it is the biggest debtor in history of histories.
By the metric of USA running trade surpluses in 1890 for the last 25 years or so USA has been running about 500 BILLION USD / year in trade deficits, so USA is *not paying for its consumption*, it's been subsidised by the productive world.
By the metric of being on real money in 1890 and today USD is nothing but a ghost.
By the metric of new business formation, by the metric of *not having to pay income, payroll, property taxes* to the government, by the metric of government not being anywhere close to what it is today in terms of power and size, by the metric of all the wars, which seem to be the most profitable business in today's America - murdering people around the world.
By the metric of people not coming to USA for individual freedom anymore at all.
where did you read that I want a government at all? I want no government whatsoever. The only thing that I am for is a mechanism for preventing so called 'legitimate' governments from appearing, funded by voluntary donations, nothing more than that.
It matters quite a bit, if you shoot back with the government you have no chances because supposedly it is 'legal'. With private people that's only your private problem, they kill you or you kill them, nobody has more legitimacy than the other side.
Less freedom, yes. Every new law, every new tax, every new subsidy, every new department, every new war, all of this takes away individual freedom and is another step towards destroying the economy.
I wrote exactly what I am arguing in that comment, I am not arguing what is not written there. My point is that without all of the things that I mentioned in that comment the USA economy today would have been stellar, something that we cannot really imagine because of all the damage that was done that prevented that economy from happening.
Correct, you are assuming correctly. There shouldn't be any public roads or any form of subsidised public education for anybody under any circumstances. There shouldn't be any government money at all, yes, this means no government money for any form of scientific research either.
Every single thing must be completely private, there shouldn't be any 'government' to make agreements, all agreements need to be private. There shouldn't be government police of military or rescue services.
And of-course there shouldn't be any government ever even closely related to any form of health insurance or health care.
All these things need to be completely private and this does not mean going back to 'living in caves', it means not being oppressed by any legitimized outside force, it means being a free person living among other free people.
Right, however a private entity with more physical power than you is only that, it's not the huge all encompassing monster with *legal* power to destroy you. This is what makes all the difference.
I guess it could use this time as a 'told you so' moment but I will wait until the USD crashes and gets destroyed by the inflation that everybody is convinced doesn't exist or is not high enough.
All the idiots that believe that the economy is in the expansion of the money supply. The economy is in the expansion of productivity, it is not in the rising prices for those products. Of-course all that the Fed ever wanted was 'to create a feeling of wealth', as if believing you are wealthy actually makes you wealthy.
The reality is that the USA economy has been going down the hill since 1890, when the Sherman act was passed. Then it was only a number of milestones to get by, the introduction of the income taxes and the IRS, the introduction of the Federal Reserve bank in 1913 and taking away the pretence that it will not be used to monetize US government debt in 1917.
The 1925-1929 with the government of USA with the Fed creating the biggest bubble in farming stocks up to that date by printing money to buy bad UK debt from France.
1929-1945, the depression that the government has created with all the jobs programs, New Deal, growth of the income taxes, minimum wage, all sorts of price and wage controls, getting the gold out of the people's pockets, introduction of the SS (payroll taxes), later leading to the introduction of the Medicare, Medicaid, using paper money not backed by anything to implement the space race, the cold war, hot wars, eventually running out of money to pay for all that and defaulting on the USD in 1971.
After that it was even faster, the companies started moving away from all the inflation created by the government money destruction. The destruction of real interest rates to keep government borrowing going destroyed and prevented even more businesses out of existence. All the rules and laws introduced to promote 'this thing for all' and 'that thing for all', the so called 'rights' (entitlements at the expense of the rights of others and at the expense of the entire economy) to have housing, food, health insurance and care, this and that....
Anyway, the eventual bond and currency collapse will lead to the real government crisis and probably to real civil unrest. It's going to get much worse before it gets any better at all in terms of real healing of the economy.
The fact that the college grads can't get well paying jobs - that's just a consequence of destruction of individual freedoms by the ever growing idea that it is government that should be in control of business, money, of everything. This idea will have to die in order for the economy to live again.
Get the government out of health care and health insurance entirely, no government taxation for purposes of any form of health insurance/care subsidy, no government meddling with health care providers, pharmacies, etc., you will get such cut throat competition you wouldn't believe it.
Of-course I think in this inflationary environment created by the government you have to get government out of everything, including the money and interest rates before good restructuring would take place but still, even just getting government out of business in one particular industry should start healing that sector.