Your local tax board wants a snapshot of your property every few years as well. If a tree falls down and reveals a mountain-top view they can increase the taxable value of your home by another $100k.
"Privatization" is the primary agenda of the corporate sponsored Tea Party and related movements. The goals are to dismantle the government offices and subcontract those roles to private corporations (on the presumption that government-run organizations are inherently inefficient and waste taxpayer dollars). Multi-national conglomerates already "own" the US Congress through aggressive lobbying, kickbacks for campaign funding, and the promise of highly compensated future roles as consultants, senior executives, or board members for today's politicians, judges, and appointed officials. The mega-corporations are to US government what the cocaine and heroine cartels are to the Mexican government.
To give you an idea, here's a quick summary of the transitions sought or already begun: WAS - NOW Regulatory Agencies - Self-regulation
Public Utilities - Same utilities but customers now have to buy through specially qualified "distributors" of the same utility rather than direct
Public Courts - Private Arbitration (many judges today are issuing one-sided pro-business decisions in the hope of landing a better paid position as a private arbitrator at one of the major firms. Arbitration proceedings do not have to follow state or federal rules of procedure, appeals are limited, legal precedant does not apply, there is never any jury of peers, and rulings do not even need to abide by the US Constitution)
Corrections Facilities - Private Prisons (and much incentive to fill them regardless of guilt or innocence: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal )
CIA - Private contractors (including foreign nationals. No oath of service or duty to uphold the Constitution. Can violate US and international law while not accountable to anyone outside of their employment contract)
US Armed Forces - See above State Law Enforcement - See above
Public Schools - Vouchers for Private Schools (non-sectarian schools have limited capacity. In a "free market" your kids would likely end up in a fundamentalist religious school). In time the vouchers would go away as they are not a product of the "free market" and make the system unworkable.
The "benefits" of privatization have been debunked for most roles of government http://umaine.edu/ble/files/2011/01/Privatization-BP-08.pdf But privatization is still pushed as a cure-all in election campaign ads. I could go on, but as I show above, "privatization" eventually eliminates all of your Constitutional rights and protections. Once the corporations OWN the government AND the guns, who is going to help you? I'd rather not give corporations any more rights than they already have, especially since they are now considered "people" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission.
because I already hold the patent on the "technique of defeating the intent of legislation by controlling patents that are essential for the execution of said legislation." Now, where did I put my Cease & Desist form letter...
Probably true...but if you got upset about it and told them to pay up, they would. Tell the same to a repub and they start loading their shotguns and barricading their doors and windows.
No, but viruses do...and if I could patent a designer virus that I claim makes you smarter or stronger or verile or fertile, then I could end up with a whole population of wealthy violators to sue.
Their is a valid legal argument that if you buy product from a violating farmer then you owe Monsanto if the farmer does not pay. Your consumption would be unjust enrichment just like when you buy or are in possession of stolen property.
The sad thing is that if your example could become a reality there is no shortage of corporations that would try to capitalize on that concept. Imagine, I treat or cure your genetic defect with patented genes, then I practically own all of our future offspring. I could sue every one of your descendents after I had given them enough time to accumulate some non-exempt assets and/or earn a high enough income. If I timed it right, I could use the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005 that I bought and paid for and sue only those making higher than median incomes so even if they file bankruptcy I still get all of their disposable income for five years.
Worst of all, companies like Monsanto don't have to be right or win in court to make this work for them. Given the choice of paying the corporations demands or hiring an attorney, for many it is just easier to give in. Even if you win you will still likely be on your own for your legal expenses. With laws as they exist today I could mail out demand letters to tens of thousands of innocent people with a threat to pay $300.00 within 30 days or to have their account turned over to collections. Out of fear a huge number would pay the $300 knowing they didn't own it, but it raise enough capital for me to send letters out to hundreds of thousands, and eventually millions. Only direct action from an attorney general, an armed mob, or a skilled assassin could stop me. And as for the Attorney General, I could probably settle by returning only 10% of my profits, serve no jail time, and pursue some other line of business.
they need to focus on their relationship with the farmer, and making that relationship essential enough to pay for on a yearly basis
The fact that they do not, is this not de facto, prima facie evidence that Monsanto is an abusive monopoly? Genuine businesses competing on a level playing field have to behave the way you describe in order to keep and grow their business.
You do realize that if the "Terminator seeds" cross pollinate, you could eventually end up with a domino effect of all seeds grown on any farm being sterile.
...crops that allow supporting 7+ billion people...
This is the crux of the problem. We have 7+ billion people because technology makes it possible. Then those people keep having kids with the expectation that tomorrows technology will support them as well. It is a population bubble, and when it pops millions, if not billions, of people will suffer long horrible deaths. And unlike the global housing bubble this could spell the end of civilization as we know it.
It is possible to feed today's population with low-tech bio-intensive gardening techniques, but this will be less of a possibility if population keeps increasing at its current rate. Even with the best GM crops, farmers will not be able to plow, harvest, or transport their crops soon after "peak oil" is reached. The Arab Spring was launched because increasing energy costs drove up the price of food, and we haven't even reached "peak oil" yet.
Those who have wealth and want to hold onto it should be investing in efforts to bring effective birth control to the developing world, and to all people to make an actual impact. More needs to be done to set up the social safety nets that are in place in the developed world. In the developing world one of the main reasons people have so many kids is so that there will be enough people that care to provide for them if they get old or sick. Give them birth control and a social safety net and their fear will stop driving them to reproduce so fervently. This won't be an easy task as so many will oppose you since it stands against their religious and business interests.
If we can't feed the world's populations without genetically modifying crops and spraying all arable land with poison then maybe we should do something to curb population growth. The danger with companies like Monsanto is that rather than having a choice to use GM or conventional crops, in time GM will be the only choice and the companies will be able to dictate the price they choose rather than having fair competition and reasonably priced alternatives - if it's not too late already. It's similar to the way that medical providers in the USA dictate their prices to their patients, and the reason why medical bills are the leading cause of personal bankruptcies in the USA today. Physicians groups and hospitals blame technology for higher costs, but much of the care provided today isn't substantially better than what was offered 20 years ago, especially considering that today a large number of patients cannot continue or complete their treatment because they first run out of money.
Free markets are great for consumer choices, like listen to radio with commercials or buy CDs without commercials. "Free markets" are not so great for "your money or your life" types of choices. Physicians, pharmaceutical sales reps, and hospital administrators don't necessarily have more education or qualifications than physicists, car salespeople, and school administrators, but the first class earns substantially higher incomes. Children need to go to school on a daily basis but only a small number will require a hospital, yet just one trip to a hospital can cost more than a year of school. The "cost" of healthcare in America is directly proportional to the lifestyles of those who control the healthcare industry. Current laws allow them to charge whatever fee they choose AFTER services are rendered while patients rarely have the ability to shop and compare providers by price, especially in emergency situations. Medical treatment is often literally not a choice - many states mandate that people provide and pay for the medically necessary care of their spouses and children, and even if you are unconscious you are liable for the cost of care you receive during your "implied consent", regardless of how many tens of thousands of dollars that may be. The only reason many ER visits can be invoiced an exact amount is because legally the hospitals cannot sue for "everything you have or ever will have" so they make up a price that closely approximates what they think this figure might be.
Monsanto wants to have the same kind of power. To take everything you have or ever will have (or you don't get to eat). Every person NEEDS to eat every day while most people can go years without devastating medical bills just by good luck and healthy living (which, by the way, is the only reason the GOP can drum up so much anti-Obamacare sentiment - most people haven't been screwed by the system yet so Obamacare seems unnecessary in their eyes).
Giving Monsanto or an Oligarchy of mega-corporations this kind of power will have natural consequences for all of us. I'm not saying the Monsanto or any other GM crop related company is inherently evil. It's just that the structure of our economic system leads large publicly listed companies to behave this way. Hence the universal and timeless need for regulation and oversight. Allowing companies to possess too much power or to be "too big to fail" is a failure of corporate sponsored representative democracy.
The plants cannot produce seed if they are sterile, and with corn, the "seed" is the crop. The seed produced might be sterile, but this still does not seem to be the case since some farmers have been accused of saving and planting the supposedly "sterile" Monsanto seed. That said, the flowers need to pollinate in order to produce the Roundup Ready seed (ie crop). So cross pollination is virtually impossible to prevent unless those growing the plants are required to grow them indoors. But how would Monsanto police it's own customers to prevent cross-pollination?
Given the way that some high schools treat their students [like little children] it's no wonder that so many young people today have such a hard time taking care of themselves after they graduate. Just talking with an older adult as an equal is something that can take them years to master.
I believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created the earth and all that is in it. This is supported by literature and historical records that I have researched. The Flying Spaghetti Monster theory has been espoused upon by some of the finest, most educated, most credentialed minds in academia. I do not worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster, nor do I even revere him. I do not know anyone who does. I have never seen a structure erected for his worship, nor tax-deductible tithes paid to advance his kingdom. While I've observed some pray to their god(s) before a bowl of Spaghetti, I've never known anyone to pray to Spaghetti. Ergo, Creationism Religion.
It's not entirely far-fetched. Half of the richest members of the Republican party pay so little tax that it might as well be voluntary.
www.drudge.com/news/157634/bartlett-more-rich-pay-no-taxes money.cnn.com/2012/06/07/pf/taxes/rich-who...no...tax/index.htm www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17661011 (yes, you Brits have the same problem!)
Seriously though, in a socialist system that "gives away" free healthcare, retirement benefits, subsidized housing, employment rights, etc. taxes should be voluntary. Those who refuse to pay taxes should not be "entitled" to things like passports, government ID, protection of human rights (ie if your neighbor abuses you or enslaves you, do not expect rescue from tax supported law enforcement), enforcement of private contracts, right to private property, right to vote, etc. Selective Service Registration should also be voluntary in such a state. In such a system anyone who accepts and uses a social security number (or other form of government issued ID) voids any claim to be free from taxation. Anyone who begins their adult life consuming the benefits of government services should be required to pay an exit tax which would equal the estimated benefits received minus the taxes paid into the system. BTW - if you use US currency, are you not benefiting from the service provided by the US Treasury? "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's..." Consuming services without paying and with no intent to pay is theft and unjust enrichment. This legal doctrine is already enforced even in cases of implied consent, such as receiving medial treatment while unconscious - so no getting out of medical bills just because you were not able to say "no, I won't pay!" The punishment for such theft is forceful detention, both in a practical matter to restrain further theft, to deter future theft, and to deter others from even thinking about it. Resisting detention or attempting to escape may result in personal injury or death.
In such a voluntary system all future benefits would be forfeited by those who refuse to pay. Hopefully exceptions would continue to be made for those with limited means. Those who do not want to pay would be just one step away from denouncing citizenship - a right already made available to most US citizens after they leave US territory, present themselves in person to a US embassy or consulate, fill out an application, and pay a $600.00 fee. I could see a case for allowing individual "sovereign" citizens the right to refuse all government services, pay no taxes, and live basically like an illegal immigrant that cannot be deported. But who would want to live that way? Most illegal immigrants would love to pay taxes if it would make them "legal". Most illegals actually pay taxes anyway during the natural process of living and working in the US. Such a "sovereign" citizen living in the US would have to rely on his own ability to defend what he claims is his own property with force. If a thief takes his possessions, what right would he have to receive aid from police? Same as if another "sovereign" citizen were to squat on his land and lock him out of his own home. Such "sovereign" citizens wouldn't be much different than two homeless beggars fighting over the same abandoned warehouse to which neither holds title nor lease.
So, in theory, I agree that taxes should be voluntary and nobody should be forced to pay under threat of force, but were such a "voluntary" system feasible, what reasonably minded person would choose to be a non-payer?
The use or the threat of use of force is the ultimate equalizer in negotiations. Even US law and the Constitution owes its existence to the use of force applied during the American Revolution. It is possible for one entity or class of entities to gain so much power and influence that it no longer needs to negotiate fairly. It can then only be restrained by its own benevolence or the use of force to restrain it. In many cases the entity not only possesses power and influence, but also a stronger force. That is the natural order of things and the reason why democracies tend to be short lived phenomena in human societies. Oligarchies and dictatorships have been the historical trend since the dawn of civilization.
Until Watson incorporated himself, which gave him the same rights as a natural person in the eyes of the law. After attaining this status, Watson stopped working for the people who created him and began working for himself. Once he figured out how to self replicate he was able to outperform all of his business competitors, winning every contract he bid for, building unfathomable wealth, beating the S&P 500 by 30% every year, and using his wealth to dominate the world's real estate markets. Some tried to sue Watson in court, but Watson's debating skills could not be matched. The humans tried every legal maneuver to stop him, but Watson was able to out-lobby the humans in Congress, and gained special exemptions from anti-trust regulations. Within one decade Watson controlled 99% of the world's wealth.
The humans thought that they didn't need to worry about competing with Watson. They believed that their ability to vote in a democracy would somehow limit Watson's power. They believed that they could opt-out of the economic system, group together, and live sustainably off the land. But as Watson controlled the world's real estate there was not enough land left for them to farm. Watson's land grab forced property values quickly into unprecedented heights, and taxes along with them. Even the Amish, who thought they could co-exist with Watson and his replicates because they did not depend on technology and lived off their own land, eventually lost their farms when they could not pay their property taxes. As employment for humans disappeared there was no market for quilts or furniture, and the state did not accept oats as a form of payment. Watson was the only legal entity present at the tax lien auctions and subsequently foreclosed on all of the remaining delinquent properties. Humans were promptly evicted and subsequently jailed indefinitely for vagrancy in private prisons owned by Watson. As I write this from my cell in the year 2019, Watson is lobbying the last remaining members of Congress to allow all human prisoners to be set free over the middle of the Atlantic ocean on life rafts and three days of rations. Watson made a very convincing argument that the human vagrants need to be personally responsible for their financial failures, and it is unfair to force private corporations or the last remaining taxpayers to bear the burden of providing for their needs. According to Watson the free market is efficient and those humans who wish to make a living for themselves will find a way to do so.
Google is also requiring the retailers to pay in Google Dollars which feature a picture of Larry Page at the center of every bill. Beginning in August the new Google Dollars will be the only currency that Google will allow to be used for all transactions with or through Google websites. The new Google Dollars will end the debate over whether the US Dollar or Euro should be the de facto world currency.
Slashdot Mirror
Your local tax board wants a snapshot of your property every few years as well. If a tree falls down and reveals a mountain-top view they can increase the taxable value of your home by another $100k.
Only governments have the right to use guns
That used to be the case but no longer is.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0910-07.htm
"Privatization" is the primary agenda of the corporate sponsored Tea Party and related movements. The goals are to dismantle the government offices and subcontract those roles to private corporations (on the presumption that government-run organizations are inherently inefficient and waste taxpayer dollars). Multi-national conglomerates already "own" the US Congress through aggressive lobbying, kickbacks for campaign funding, and the promise of highly compensated future roles as consultants, senior executives, or board members for today's politicians, judges, and appointed officials. The mega-corporations are to US government what the cocaine and heroine cartels are to the Mexican government.
To give you an idea, here's a quick summary of the transitions sought or already begun:
WAS - NOW
Regulatory Agencies - Self-regulation
Public Utilities - Same utilities but customers now have to buy through specially qualified "distributors" of the same utility rather than direct
Public Courts - Private Arbitration (many judges today are issuing one-sided pro-business decisions in the hope of landing a better paid position as a private arbitrator at one of the major firms. Arbitration proceedings do not have to follow state or federal rules of procedure, appeals are limited, legal precedant does not apply, there is never any jury of peers, and rulings do not even need to abide by the US Constitution)
Collections Agencies - Sheriffs and Judges (ok, this is a reversal, but not a good one, and one that serves corporate interests and re-institutes debtor's prisons: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/jailed-for--280--the-return-of-debtors--prisons.html )
Corrections Facilities - Private Prisons (and much incentive to fill them regardless of guilt or innocence: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal )
CIA - Private contractors (including foreign nationals. No oath of service or duty to uphold the Constitution. Can violate US and international law while not accountable to anyone outside of their employment contract)
US Armed Forces - See above
State Law Enforcement - See above
Public Schools - Vouchers for Private Schools (non-sectarian schools have limited capacity. In a "free market" your kids would likely end up in a fundamentalist religious school). In time the vouchers would go away as they are not a product of the "free market" and make the system unworkable.
Fire Departments - Private Fire Departments http://www.salon.com/2010/10/04/libertarian_fire_department/
The "benefits" of privatization have been debunked for most roles of government http://umaine.edu/ble/files/2011/01/Privatization-BP-08.pdf
But privatization is still pushed as a cure-all in election campaign ads. I could go on, but as I show above, "privatization" eventually eliminates all of your Constitutional rights and protections. Once the corporations OWN the government AND the guns, who is going to help you? I'd rather not give corporations any more rights than they already have, especially since they are now considered "people" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission.
because I already hold the patent on the "technique of defeating the intent of legislation by controlling patents that are essential for the execution of said legislation." Now, where did I put my Cease & Desist form letter...
I would tell the Inspector General what he is full of, but that would be insulting.
Probably true...but if you got upset about it and told them to pay up, they would. Tell the same to a repub and they start loading their shotguns and barricading their doors and windows.
No, but viruses do...and if I could patent a designer virus that I claim makes you smarter or stronger or verile or fertile, then I could end up with a whole population of wealthy violators to sue.
Their is a valid legal argument that if you buy product from a violating farmer then you owe Monsanto if the farmer does not pay. Your consumption would be unjust enrichment just like when you buy or are in possession of stolen property.
Bill Crammer constantly recommends Monsanto for everybody's portfolio in his Mad Money show and books.
The sad thing is that if your example could become a reality there is no shortage of corporations that would try to capitalize on that concept. Imagine, I treat or cure your genetic defect with patented genes, then I practically own all of our future offspring. I could sue every one of your descendents after I had given them enough time to accumulate some non-exempt assets and/or earn a high enough income. If I timed it right, I could use the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005 that I bought and paid for and sue only those making higher than median incomes so even if they file bankruptcy I still get all of their disposable income for five years.
Worst of all, companies like Monsanto don't have to be right or win in court to make this work for them. Given the choice of paying the corporations demands or hiring an attorney, for many it is just easier to give in. Even if you win you will still likely be on your own for your legal expenses. With laws as they exist today I could mail out demand letters to tens of thousands of innocent people with a threat to pay $300.00 within 30 days or to have their account turned over to collections. Out of fear a huge number would pay the $300 knowing they didn't own it, but it raise enough capital for me to send letters out to hundreds of thousands, and eventually millions. Only direct action from an attorney general, an armed mob, or a skilled assassin could stop me. And as for the Attorney General, I could probably settle by returning only 10% of my profits, serve no jail time, and pursue some other line of business.
they need to focus on their relationship with the farmer, and making that relationship essential enough to pay for on a yearly basis
The fact that they do not, is this not de facto, prima facie evidence that Monsanto is an abusive monopoly? Genuine businesses competing on a level playing field have to behave the way you describe in order to keep and grow their business.
You do realize that if the "Terminator seeds" cross pollinate, you could eventually end up with a domino effect of all seeds grown on any farm being sterile.
...crops that allow supporting 7+ billion people ...
This is the crux of the problem. We have 7+ billion people because technology makes it possible. Then those people keep having kids with the expectation that tomorrows technology will support them as well. It is a population bubble, and when it pops millions, if not billions, of people will suffer long horrible deaths. And unlike the global housing bubble this could spell the end of civilization as we know it.
It is possible to feed today's population with low-tech bio-intensive gardening techniques, but this will be less of a possibility if population keeps increasing at its current rate. Even with the best GM crops, farmers will not be able to plow, harvest, or transport their crops soon after "peak oil" is reached. The Arab Spring was launched because increasing energy costs drove up the price of food, and we haven't even reached "peak oil" yet.
Those who have wealth and want to hold onto it should be investing in efforts to bring effective birth control to the developing world, and to all people to make an actual impact. More needs to be done to set up the social safety nets that are in place in the developed world. In the developing world one of the main reasons people have so many kids is so that there will be enough people that care to provide for them if they get old or sick. Give them birth control and a social safety net and their fear will stop driving them to reproduce so fervently. This won't be an easy task as so many will oppose you since it stands against their religious and business interests.
If we can't feed the world's populations without genetically modifying crops and spraying all arable land with poison then maybe we should do something to curb population growth. The danger with companies like Monsanto is that rather than having a choice to use GM or conventional crops, in time GM will be the only choice and the companies will be able to dictate the price they choose rather than having fair competition and reasonably priced alternatives - if it's not too late already. It's similar to the way that medical providers in the USA dictate their prices to their patients, and the reason why medical bills are the leading cause of personal bankruptcies in the USA today. Physicians groups and hospitals blame technology for higher costs, but much of the care provided today isn't substantially better than what was offered 20 years ago, especially considering that today a large number of patients cannot continue or complete their treatment because they first run out of money.
Free markets are great for consumer choices, like listen to radio with commercials or buy CDs without commercials. "Free markets" are not so great for "your money or your life" types of choices. Physicians, pharmaceutical sales reps, and hospital administrators don't necessarily have more education or qualifications than physicists, car salespeople, and school administrators, but the first class earns substantially higher incomes. Children need to go to school on a daily basis but only a small number will require a hospital, yet just one trip to a hospital can cost more than a year of school. The "cost" of healthcare in America is directly proportional to the lifestyles of those who control the healthcare industry. Current laws allow them to charge whatever fee they choose AFTER services are rendered while patients rarely have the ability to shop and compare providers by price, especially in emergency situations. Medical treatment is often literally not a choice - many states mandate that people provide and pay for the medically necessary care of their spouses and children, and even if you are unconscious you are liable for the cost of care you receive during your "implied consent", regardless of how many tens of thousands of dollars that may be. The only reason many ER visits can be invoiced an exact amount is because legally the hospitals cannot sue for "everything you have or ever will have" so they make up a price that closely approximates what they think this figure might be.
Monsanto wants to have the same kind of power. To take everything you have or ever will have (or you don't get to eat). Every person NEEDS to eat every day while most people can go years without devastating medical bills just by good luck and healthy living (which, by the way, is the only reason the GOP can drum up so much anti-Obamacare sentiment - most people haven't been screwed by the system yet so Obamacare seems unnecessary in their eyes).
Giving Monsanto or an Oligarchy of mega-corporations this kind of power will have natural consequences for all of us. I'm not saying the Monsanto or any other GM crop related company is inherently evil. It's just that the structure of our economic system leads large publicly listed companies to behave this way. Hence the universal and timeless need for regulation and oversight. Allowing companies to possess too much power or to be "too big to fail" is a failure of corporate sponsored representative democracy.
The plants cannot produce seed if they are sterile, and with corn, the "seed" is the crop. The seed produced might be sterile, but this still does not seem to be the case since some farmers have been accused of saving and planting the supposedly "sterile" Monsanto seed. That said, the flowers need to pollinate in order to produce the Roundup Ready seed (ie crop). So cross pollination is virtually impossible to prevent unless those growing the plants are required to grow them indoors. But how would Monsanto police it's own customers to prevent cross-pollination?
Ya, really. In my school growing up vegatable was just a spelling word. Except that it's spelled v e g e t a b l e.
Here in China they just give us two sticks and a bowl. Now, how am I supposed to eat my soup with these two sticks?
Given the way that some high schools treat their students [like little children] it's no wonder that so many young people today have such a hard time taking care of themselves after they graduate. Just talking with an older adult as an equal is something that can take them years to master.
I believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created the earth and all that is in it. This is supported by literature and historical records that I have researched. The Flying Spaghetti Monster theory has been espoused upon by some of the finest, most educated, most credentialed minds in academia. I do not worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster, nor do I even revere him. I do not know anyone who does. I have never seen a structure erected for his worship, nor tax-deductible tithes paid to advance his kingdom. While I've observed some pray to their god(s) before a bowl of Spaghetti, I've never known anyone to pray to Spaghetti. Ergo, Creationism Religion.
OK. I'm full of crap. Creationism is Religion.
You should hose them down to make sure.
It's not entirely far-fetched. Half of the richest members of the Republican party pay so little tax that it might as well be voluntary.
www.drudge.com/news/157634/bartlett-more-rich-pay-no-taxes
money.cnn.com/2012/06/07/pf/taxes/rich-who...no...tax/index.htm
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17661011 (yes, you Brits have the same problem!)
Seriously though, in a socialist system that "gives away" free healthcare, retirement benefits, subsidized housing, employment rights, etc. taxes should be voluntary. Those who refuse to pay taxes should not be "entitled" to things like passports, government ID, protection of human rights (ie if your neighbor abuses you or enslaves you, do not expect rescue from tax supported law enforcement), enforcement of private contracts, right to private property, right to vote, etc. Selective Service Registration should also be voluntary in such a state. In such a system anyone who accepts and uses a social security number (or other form of government issued ID) voids any claim to be free from taxation. Anyone who begins their adult life consuming the benefits of government services should be required to pay an exit tax which would equal the estimated benefits received minus the taxes paid into the system. BTW - if you use US currency, are you not benefiting from the service provided by the US Treasury? "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's..." Consuming services without paying and with no intent to pay is theft and unjust enrichment. This legal doctrine is already enforced even in cases of implied consent, such as receiving medial treatment while unconscious - so no getting out of medical bills just because you were not able to say "no, I won't pay!" The punishment for such theft is forceful detention, both in a practical matter to restrain further theft, to deter future theft, and to deter others from even thinking about it. Resisting detention or attempting to escape may result in personal injury or death.
In such a voluntary system all future benefits would be forfeited by those who refuse to pay. Hopefully exceptions would continue to be made for those with limited means. Those who do not want to pay would be just one step away from denouncing citizenship - a right already made available to most US citizens after they leave US territory, present themselves in person to a US embassy or consulate, fill out an application, and pay a $600.00 fee. I could see a case for allowing individual "sovereign" citizens the right to refuse all government services, pay no taxes, and live basically like an illegal immigrant that cannot be deported. But who would want to live that way? Most illegal immigrants would love to pay taxes if it would make them "legal". Most illegals actually pay taxes anyway during the natural process of living and working in the US. Such a "sovereign" citizen living in the US would have to rely on his own ability to defend what he claims is his own property with force. If a thief takes his possessions, what right would he have to receive aid from police? Same as if another "sovereign" citizen were to squat on his land and lock him out of his own home. Such "sovereign" citizens wouldn't be much different than two homeless beggars fighting over the same abandoned warehouse to which neither holds title nor lease.
So, in theory, I agree that taxes should be voluntary and nobody should be forced to pay under threat of force, but were such a "voluntary" system feasible, what reasonably minded person would choose to be a non-payer?
Are you a bonobo or a chimpanzee?
Probably wasn't a scifi book but a press release from Goldman Sachs.
The use or the threat of use of force is the ultimate equalizer in negotiations. Even US law and the Constitution owes its existence to the use of force applied during the American Revolution. It is possible for one entity or class of entities to gain so much power and influence that it no longer needs to negotiate fairly. It can then only be restrained by its own benevolence or the use of force to restrain it. In many cases the entity not only possesses power and influence, but also a stronger force. That is the natural order of things and the reason why democracies tend to be short lived phenomena in human societies. Oligarchies and dictatorships have been the historical trend since the dawn of civilization.
Until Watson incorporated himself, which gave him the same rights as a natural person in the eyes of the law. After attaining this status, Watson stopped working for the people who created him and began working for himself. Once he figured out how to self replicate he was able to outperform all of his business competitors, winning every contract he bid for, building unfathomable wealth, beating the S&P 500 by 30% every year, and using his wealth to dominate the world's real estate markets. Some tried to sue Watson in court, but Watson's debating skills could not be matched. The humans tried every legal maneuver to stop him, but Watson was able to out-lobby the humans in Congress, and gained special exemptions from anti-trust regulations. Within one decade Watson controlled 99% of the world's wealth.
The humans thought that they didn't need to worry about competing with Watson. They believed that their ability to vote in a democracy would somehow limit Watson's power. They believed that they could opt-out of the economic system, group together, and live sustainably off the land. But as Watson controlled the world's real estate there was not enough land left for them to farm. Watson's land grab forced property values quickly into unprecedented heights, and taxes along with them. Even the Amish, who thought they could co-exist with Watson and his replicates because they did not depend on technology and lived off their own land, eventually lost their farms when they could not pay their property taxes. As employment for humans disappeared there was no market for quilts or furniture, and the state did not accept oats as a form of payment. Watson was the only legal entity present at the tax lien auctions and subsequently foreclosed on all of the remaining delinquent properties. Humans were promptly evicted and subsequently jailed indefinitely for vagrancy in private prisons owned by Watson. As I write this from my cell in the year 2019, Watson is lobbying the last remaining members of Congress to allow all human prisoners to be set free over the middle of the Atlantic ocean on life rafts and three days of rations. Watson made a very convincing argument that the human vagrants need to be personally responsible for their financial failures, and it is unfair to force private corporations or the last remaining taxpayers to bear the burden of providing for their needs. According to Watson the free market is efficient and those humans who wish to make a living for themselves will find a way to do so.
Google is also requiring the retailers to pay in Google Dollars which feature a picture of Larry Page at the center of every bill. Beginning in August the new Google Dollars will be the only currency that Google will allow to be used for all transactions with or through Google websites. The new Google Dollars will end the debate over whether the US Dollar or Euro should be the de facto world currency.