Originally posted by Aster PhoenixLet me decide what it's spent on.
Okay but assume that the tax amount will stay roughly about what it is now. How would you make sure that the government spends it on the right things and doesn't squander it on failed programs and nonsense perks and pay raises for themselves?
Originally posted by inimalist
If a person is unwilling to work in order to keep themselves alive, then I'm not too worried.
a better point for you would be the father who has a job and is addicted to drugs and doesn't feed their kids. No F&CS in an anarchist society.
Its more the idea that they deserve the ability to make a living off of their labor.
True I still think the minimum wage needs to be higher.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, I'd have to calculate. It probably also depends what leaders would do, and how I feel about the person. Personally I am cursed with a "conscience" though, if he was really so evil I might not support him. On the other hand, if I do, there'd still be options for the people living in our community.
Choosing not to help him is bad for the economy, bad for you and bad for him.
Originally posted by inimalist
so, you are again making the argument that people who are out to do evil are a good point against anarchist society?
With nothing at all to restrain them but what it would be nice if people did . . .
Originally posted by inimalist
The point is that, when I look at human behaviour, I don't just see this mega negative.
It exists. If it didn't we would already have an anarchist utopia.
Originally posted by inimalist
Look at Bill Gates. He has, individually, done immense things with his wealth. yes, I know its a huge if, but if capitalism can be harnessed to address local and community based problems, it can work.
The "if" is the problem. You can't kick a ladder out from under someone and say it's okay because he won't be hurt if he learns to fly.
Originally posted by Bardock42
No, quite to the contrary. That would make my vote count **** all compared to the 99% of giant, airheaded twats that walk this earth.
Yeah but you have to assume there are others out there that feel the way you do about spending priorities. Now it just becomes your job to get enough of them to vote with you or try to convince others.
Will of the majority is democracy. Because you can't please everyone.
Originally posted by Bardock42
So you'd like communism?But you give anarchists are hard time for possible minor problems in their ideology.
Some form of totalitarianism. No one gets a choice, no one gets lied to about having one, no one has to rely on basic human goodness to survive, no one pays taxes.
Originally posted by Aster Phoenix
What if they cannot? Seriously, you have to know that it does happen.
cannot how?
Physical or mental disability? You are going to have to buy the line on charity
Originally posted by Aster Phoenix
The government can charge him for negligence.
no, I meant as a point along the lines of what you are saying
the child does not deserve to starve to death, but the father is employed and should be allowed to spend his money on whatever he wants. Pretend the wife is dead.
If there is no family and children's services in an anarchist society, how is this going to be prevented.
Communities largely might get involved, but do they have the right to take the child? Its an interesting situation I just thought of, and way more salient than just saying "poor people will die"
Originally posted by Symmetric ChaosEverything goes to shit. Always a good one...
Some form of totalitarianism. No one gets a choice, no one gets lied to about having one, no one has to rely on basic human goodness to survive, no one pays taxes.
Also, you omitted the most important part of my post, I will restate it.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Originally posted by Bardock42
Minimum wage is another thing that bothers me
Go slavery?
Originally posted by Bardock42
Questionable.I am still wondering how he got that monopoly though.
Manipulating the system to gain increasing control over one section of the market without it being obvious then using his economic power to force competition out of business and purchase them.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Go slavery?
Ironic.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Manipulating the system to gain increasing control over one section of the market without it being obvious then using his economic power to force competition out of business and purchase them.
I know what a monopoly is, I am just not sure how one gets one really in a free market.
Too existent.
A minimum wage is there to insure people get a livable wage.
Originally posted by inimalist
cannot how?
Physical or mental disability?
the child does not deserve to starve to death, but the father is employed and should be allowed to spend his money on whatever he wants.
He's not really allowed to because if the child starves, then he goes to prison.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Ironic.
Indeed?
Originally posted by Bardock42
I know what a monopoly is, I am just not sure how one gets one really in a free market.
Oh, like this:
Manipulating the system to gain increasing control over one section of the market without it being obvious then using his economic power to force competition out of business and purchase them.
Originally posted by Symmetric ChaosNo, I'm playing the Devil's advocate here.
Perhaps both.You want a society where Person B in punished because his parents were poor and so will starve to death or become a slave, yes?
A society where Persons A and C pay a small amount of money (enough that they're living) and keeps Person B alive so that the labor he provides continues to be of use seems better over all.
Personally I'd like a system where none of them would have any money and a dictatorial process would assign them all to whatever they're good at. Fostering skills even in people like Person B so that everything runs efficiently and the excess can go to maintaining society.
You were criticizing Person C for making an apparently poor or irresponsible fiscal choice. But at the same time not holding Person B's parents to the same accountability.