You don't want the government to provide any of these things?
- no.
Tax payer funds paid for much of the lines that utilities use today with hundreds of billions just going in for phone lines let alone cable and other Internet options.
Keep in mind there is much history to support government intervention as the United States didn't originally collect taxes but ultimately had to for funding the military.
Most all laws in existence today are the result of private parties behaving badly such as expensive toll roads and exploitive employment practices.
- no, most laws in existence today to attempt and negate the terrible negative results of other moral hazards through laws and subsidies and regulations that the gov't has provided, case in point FDIC provided a moral hazard and Glass Steagall was 'regulating' it.
Unless you have another way to address those concerns its going to be hard to argue that the government should keep out of economic affairs as the two are fundamentally linked.
- yes, I have addressed those concerns, links are provided.
watch your economies of scale leave for cheaper labor because it works great for them, after years of enjoying special privileges from the gov't, that turned them into monopolies so they became economies of scale, so that no amount of regulation could stop them from doing anything they wanted and only served as a deterrent against newcomers into the business, thus killing any competition preventatively. The economies of scale - just the way big gov't likes it.
So watch these economies take your money in bailouts and now in stimulus and with 0% interest from the Fed and lend it back to the Fed by buying the bonds (that will become worthless soon anyway) and making the spread.
Watch these gov't created monstrosities destroy your economy. You think you have an economy of scale on a gov't level and it'll save your ass now? No you don't. What you have is a bunch of gov't created monopolies that enjoyed all the privileges while killing off all the competition and they'll take the last money there is and will leave. All because you wanted gov't to take care of you rather than doing it yourself.
are you telling me this guy was poor? What was he doing owning a house? House needs maintenance, taxes must be paid, things must be fixed, there are many costs associated with owning a house.
As I said, people are giving up their liberties for exchange for something, they thought they'd get something worthy in return? They got a busted economy in return. Good choice, clear thinking.
The fact you let words offend you simply reinforces my belief of your Republican status.
- that's just stupid, I am not even a US resident.
This crossed state lines - this is interstate commerce between Kentucky and Tennessee, CLEARLY IN FEDERAL JURISDICTION.
- and that's where US Constitution has failed, there shouldn't be such a thing that allows the fed to do whatever they want to the economy in totality. Beside which, nobody actually FORCED the fire department of another state to provide this service, they simply agreed to it for some extra money.
No, they don't have one because they've consistently voted against a tax for it for 20 years. Typical Republican, not bothering to obtain the facts before tossing out hypotheticals.
- again, stupid assertion on my 'republican' status. Also how the hell do you know how much they'd have to actually pay yearly in taxes to own their fire department? It just might be multiple of hundreds of dollars per house. You do not have a point, it looks like for them it is MUCH MORE ECONOMICAL to outsource this service.
Jeeze, because everything would just so happen to be intrinsically linked so as to maintain interoperability between states.
- again, that's where the US Constitution founders have failed the country, by allowing this into the Constitution in the first place.
Yep, typical Republican, can't understand how our system works.
And why oh why? WHY? Why have a bureaucracy on a federal level tabulating these things, when all that's needed is to let the private free market function and it would provide the supply? It's insanity, trying to outsmart the market by tabulating all of the factors, that's no better than predicting weather for one year from now for a continent.
Income tax is an atrocity committed upon free people to deprive them of their liberties and freedoms. Unfortunately the people are apparently not as free in their minds as some would believe, otherwise the income tax would never have passed as an idea in any free society ever.
Income tax requires you to submit to a degrading interrogation by the state, you are supposed to tell the state everything you do, how and why, etc.
Income tax also deprives people of freedoms in another terrible way: it lets the government grow indefinitely, even to the point where over 99% of income is taken away (point in case is USSR).
--
The correct way to provide funding for a minimum government is of-course through a selective sales tax, that would not tax items that are necessary for basic survival (so no taxing the poor). This does the following:
1. Lets you keep your liberties. 2. Lets you control the size of gov't and spending by controlling your own spending on taxable items.
As a libertarian (atheist as well) I take offense at everything you said.
Federal gov't has absolutely nothing to do with local problems and services, such as a fire department for example. WTF do they know where and how many and how big fire departments are needed?
Also clearly in this case the property taxes did not include a fire department because the place is remote and very few people live there, so they can't afford to have one, so they outsource services from a neighboring county, who provide the services if the annual $75/year fee is paid, which is insurance, not a cost of a call.
I am actually against federal gov't doing anything and everything except justice system and minimum military and I find it unfortunate that there is no clear separation of Congress and economy.
Well no, now the insurance he had would pay for a new house - bam, you have another house sale, and looks like that's what they want in this market - houses to be bought. So it's arguably 'good thing', but of-course I wouldn't call it that. But it is the correct thing.
As an atheist, I have little respect for Christians who do not follow their own moral teachings though.
No, this was the correct thing. If you don't pay for your insurance you can't expect the insurance company to cover your losses. Hello, this is the real world, where things do have to be paid for and not by some magic Obamafairy and Helicopter Ben, who can just wish the money to appear out of thin air.
Though money appearing out of thin air is a neat trick, realize that it's a tax, it takes away purchase power from all other existing money, thus the huge inflation, thus the inflation of other currencies, who are trying not to get too much behind and thus the gold is going up. Hip hip, hooray.
You are simply wrong, because the fire department stopped the fire from propagating to the house of a neighbor. WTH are you on saying things that are clearly not the case?
As to your 'socialized fire departments' BS, it's also clearly not true, this is case in point.
Unfortunately the fire brigade would have been obligated to save the people in the house if there were any even if the house owner didn't pay the insurance.
I absolutely think it is OK to stand and watch as that property was burning down, because watching is necessary to make sure that the paying houses were not affected.
Emergency help is provided if you are in an accident, but it's provided to the people, NOT TO CARS.
Fire department is not a collection agency, they don't need the hassle of hunting you down if you decide not to pay for the services previously provided.
You really are preaching to me? I am against all gov't intervention into economy, this includes everything you mentioned, you can check my earlier posts, which I have conveniently provided links to.
I am against gov't owning any assets and providing any services except Justice system and minimum military to protect against foreign invasions.
Clearly I am against IRS, FED, FDIC, Freddie/Fannie, income taxes, regulations, wage laws, price fixing, providing any special interests with any special treatment no matter who they are and what they can and do pay.
Fire dep't doesn't always arrive if there is nobody to call it at all, so what are you going to do? Many if not most fire departments have watch towers, but probably in this case the place was very remote and a call was needed.
If there was no call from anybody at all, some houses would have burnt, but again, how is that a problem of payment? It's a problem of notification.
Unfortunately no, it's not paradise for libertarians.
Paradise would be this: no gov't intervention into anything beyond setting up the Justice department and minimum military to protect against foreign invasion, and all of these services would be paid by taxing sales of some, mostly luxury items.
That would be close to the libertarian paradise - a place where no amount of special interest money can influence the gov't and private interest economic outcomes in any way + ability to control gov't growth through control of personal purchase choices - you don't like the size of gov't? Don't buy things that are taxed by the gov't, so that it would have to reduce itself in size. -- Now, the actual word 'paradise'... it's loaded. There is no free lunch and there is no paradise, there is just a system that works economically and a system that doesn't work.
The system that exists today doesn't work. Communist or a fascist or a dictatorial system doesn't work. The closer to the 'libertarian paradise' you get, the stronger the economy will be in total, the more progress would be achieved, 19th century is a good showcase for this.
It's beyond anything I wish to respect when somebody expects the rest of society to provide them with anything they wish free of charge, this includes the fire department insurance.
NO, the correct thing was done. The guy didn't pay the $75 for that year, he set his house on fire and the fire department didn't put it out, so the correct incentive is now in place: you want the fire department to help you, pay the freaking $75 and stop bitching.
Slashdot Mirror
yeah, wait for an audit.
I'm curious, so you also don't believe in public roads? How about the utilities? Electric? Water? Sewer?
- no and no.
You don't want the government to provide any of these things?
- no.
Tax payer funds paid for much of the lines that utilities use today with hundreds of billions just going in for phone lines let alone cable and other Internet options.
- I am against all such actions by gov'ts.
Keep in mind there is much history to support government intervention as the United States didn't originally collect taxes but ultimately had to for funding the military.
- I am keeping it in mind very firmly.
Most all laws in existence today are the result of private parties behaving badly such as expensive toll roads and exploitive employment practices.
- no, most laws in existence today to attempt and negate the terrible negative results of other moral hazards through laws and subsidies and regulations that the gov't has provided, case in point FDIC provided a moral hazard and Glass Steagall was 'regulating' it.
Unless you have another way to address those concerns its going to be hard to argue that the government should keep out of economic affairs as the two are fundamentally linked.
- yes, I have addressed those concerns, links are provided.
watch your economies of scale leave for cheaper labor because it works great for them, after years of enjoying special privileges from the gov't, that turned them into monopolies so they became economies of scale, so that no amount of regulation could stop them from doing anything they wanted and only served as a deterrent against newcomers into the business, thus killing any competition preventatively. The economies of scale - just the way big gov't likes it.
So watch these economies take your money in bailouts and now in stimulus and with 0% interest from the Fed and lend it back to the Fed by buying the bonds (that will become worthless soon anyway) and making the spread.
Watch these gov't created monstrosities destroy your economy. You think you have an economy of scale on a gov't level and it'll save your ass now? No you don't. What you have is a bunch of gov't created monopolies that enjoyed all the privileges while killing off all the competition and they'll take the last money there is and will leave. All because you wanted gov't to take care of you rather than doing it yourself.
are you telling me this guy was poor? What was he doing owning a house? House needs maintenance, taxes must be paid, things must be fixed, there are many costs associated with owning a house.
You are poor? Sell the house and rent.
you are preaching to the choir, I don't have any USD anymore.
As I said, people are giving up their liberties for exchange for something, they thought they'd get something worthy in return? They got a busted economy in return. Good choice, clear thinking.
Income taxes is theft of liberties, I know you don't understand, you've been brainwashed by the gov't+corporations for way too long.
If I pay for services, it's my choice to pay or not to pay, what is your point?
The fact you let words offend you simply reinforces my belief of your Republican status.
- that's just stupid, I am not even a US resident.
This crossed state lines - this is interstate commerce between Kentucky and Tennessee, CLEARLY IN FEDERAL JURISDICTION.
- and that's where US Constitution has failed, there shouldn't be such a thing that allows the fed to do whatever they want to the economy in totality. Beside which, nobody actually FORCED the fire department of another state to provide this service, they simply agreed to it for some extra money.
No, they don't have one because they've consistently voted against a tax for it for 20 years. Typical Republican, not bothering to obtain the facts before tossing out hypotheticals.
- again, stupid assertion on my 'republican' status. Also how the hell do you know how much they'd have to actually pay yearly in taxes to own their fire department? It just might be multiple of hundreds of dollars per house. You do not have a point, it looks like for them it is MUCH MORE ECONOMICAL to outsource this service.
Jeeze, because everything would just so happen to be intrinsically linked so as to maintain interoperability between states.
- again, that's where the US Constitution founders have failed the country, by allowing this into the Constitution in the first place.
Yep, typical Republican, can't understand how our system works.
- one more time, stupid assertion.
And why oh why? WHY? Why have a bureaucracy on a federal level tabulating these things, when all that's needed is to let the private free market function and it would provide the supply? It's insanity, trying to outsmart the market by tabulating all of the factors, that's no better than predicting weather for one year from now for a continent.
Personal choice. If people decided not to pay their service bill, they wouldn't get the service. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Income tax is an atrocity committed upon free people to deprive them of their liberties and freedoms. Unfortunately the people are apparently not as free in their minds as some would believe, otherwise the income tax would never have passed as an idea in any free society ever.
Income tax requires you to submit to a degrading interrogation by the state, you are supposed to tell the state everything you do, how and why, etc.
Income tax also deprives people of freedoms in another terrible way: it lets the government grow indefinitely, even to the point where over 99% of income is taken away (point in case is USSR).
--
The correct way to provide funding for a minimum government is of-course through a selective sales tax, that would not tax items that are necessary for basic survival (so no taxing the poor). This does the following:
1. Lets you keep your liberties.
2. Lets you control the size of gov't and spending by controlling your own spending on taxable items.
The case in point is that fire brigades are NOT all paid centrally. Nor should they be.
How the hell is the federal gov't supposed to know how many fire departments are needed and where they should be and how large, etc.etc.etc.
It's a local issue, it should stay a local issue, it's not a federal issue at all.
As a libertarian (atheist as well) I take offense at everything you said.
Federal gov't has absolutely nothing to do with local problems and services, such as a fire department for example. WTF do they know where and how many and how big fire departments are needed?
Also clearly in this case the property taxes did not include a fire department because the place is remote and very few people live there, so they can't afford to have one, so they outsource services from a neighboring county, who provide the services if the annual $75/year fee is paid, which is insurance, not a cost of a call.
I am actually against federal gov't doing anything and everything except justice system and minimum military and I find it unfortunate that there is no clear separation of Congress and economy.
Well no, now the insurance he had would pay for a new house - bam, you have another house sale, and looks like that's what they want in this market - houses to be bought. So it's arguably 'good thing', but of-course I wouldn't call it that. But it is the correct thing.
As an atheist, I have little respect for Christians who do not follow their own moral teachings though.
No, this was the correct thing. If you don't pay for your insurance you can't expect the insurance company to cover your losses. Hello, this is the real world, where things do have to be paid for and not by some magic Obamafairy and Helicopter Ben, who can just wish the money to appear out of thin air.
Though money appearing out of thin air is a neat trick, realize that it's a tax, it takes away purchase power from all other existing money, thus the huge inflation, thus the inflation of other currencies, who are trying not to get too much behind and thus the gold is going up. Hip hip, hooray.
You are simply wrong, because the fire department stopped the fire from propagating to the house of a neighbor. WTH are you on saying things that are clearly not the case?
As to your 'socialized fire departments' BS, it's also clearly not true, this is case in point.
I don't care for the dead pets.
Unfortunately the fire brigade would have been obligated to save the people in the house if there were any even if the house owner didn't pay the insurance.
I absolutely think it is OK to stand and watch as that property was burning down, because watching is necessary to make sure that the paying houses were not affected.
Emergency help is provided if you are in an accident, but it's provided to the people, NOT TO CARS.
Fire department is not a collection agency, they don't need the hassle of hunting you down if you decide not to pay for the services previously provided.
You really are preaching to me? I am against all gov't intervention into economy, this includes everything you mentioned, you can check my earlier posts, which I have conveniently provided links to.
I am against gov't owning any assets and providing any services except Justice system and minimum military to protect against foreign invasions.
Clearly I am against IRS, FED, FDIC, Freddie/Fannie, income taxes, regulations, wage laws, price fixing, providing any special interests with any special treatment no matter who they are and what they can and do pay.
Fire dep't doesn't always arrive if there is nobody to call it at all, so what are you going to do? Many if not most fire departments have watch towers, but probably in this case the place was very remote and a call was needed.
If there was no call from anybody at all, some houses would have burnt, but again, how is that a problem of payment? It's a problem of notification.
Unfortunately no, it's not paradise for libertarians.
Paradise would be this: no gov't intervention into anything beyond setting up the Justice department and minimum military to protect against foreign invasion, and all of these services would be paid by taxing sales of some, mostly luxury items.
That would be close to the libertarian paradise - a place where no amount of special interest money can influence the gov't and private interest economic outcomes in any way + ability to control gov't growth through control of personal purchase choices - you don't like the size of gov't? Don't buy things that are taxed by the gov't, so that it would have to reduce itself in size.
--
Now, the actual word 'paradise'... it's loaded. There is no free lunch and there is no paradise, there is just a system that works economically and a system that doesn't work.
The system that exists today doesn't work. Communist or a fascist or a dictatorial system doesn't work. The closer to the 'libertarian paradise' you get, the stronger the economy will be in total, the more progress would be achieved, 19th century is a good showcase for this.
It's beyond anything I wish to respect when somebody expects the rest of society to provide them with anything they wish free of charge, this includes the fire department insurance.
And go through the legal costs and time? Why? No, the correct thing was done.
NO, the correct thing was done. The guy didn't pay the $75 for that year, he set his house on fire and the fire department didn't put it out, so the correct incentive is now in place: you want the fire department to help you, pay the freaking $75 and stop bitching.
How is that a no win situation?
Pay your service fees if you wish to receive your service.
It's a win-win.