So, you don't pay taxes. Alright then. Then, suppose I steal your stuff. Police is a branch of the government, so, there won't be anyone to enforce property rights.
Unless you hire thugs. So, you are exchanging government for a thug ridden country. 2012/5/31 Craig Haynie <cchayniepub...@gmail.com> > On 05/31/2012 04:32 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: > >> And then Craig replied: >> >>> How pleasant! Governments take money from people through >>> threats of violence, to subsidize special interests. >>> [...] >>> >> I'm baffled, Craig. How do you go about equating certain government >> funded programs that have occasionally helped out the automobile >> industry, the electrification of the grid, building hiways, airports, >> transistors, integrated circuits, the Internet, and weather satellites >> so "special?" as somehow associated with generating threats of >> violence. >> >> And there's more... >> > > If you don't pay the government's taxes, which it uses to raise money for > these projects, then they threaten you with violence, and will ultimately > put you in jail. > > In _every single case_ there has been a chorus of conservative >>>> people saying "the government should not be picking winners and >>>> loses. If it is real, it will come on its own." Maybe they were >>>> right, but most of those technologies might have been delayed >>>> by 20 to 50 years. >>>> >>> If the technology is cost efficient, then the market will bring >>> it. Even if delayed by 20 to 50 years, this is a small price to >>> pay for a moral society run without threats of violence. >>> >> It seems to me that you have not heard a single thing Jed sed, or >> perhaps you simply are not interested in listening. Certain new >> technologies for which Jed was referring to were not cost efficient at >> the time they were receiving lots of financial assistance from the >> government. >> > At which times, they were bad business decisions, and did not raise > private capital. This provides the justification for the government to get > involved. But if the risk/reward ratio is low enough, then private capital > will be available. This is how entrepreneurs work. Even if some of these > risky investments turn out to be successful for a few people, the people > whose money was taken, are never compensated. > > > Under a 100% free-enterprise system I know of few business >> enterprises that could justify to their stock holders a plan to make >> investments that could take up to 20 - 50 years to start generating >> dividends for their stock holders. If free enterprises was the only >> game in town funding the development new unproven technologies like >> integrated circuitry, electrification of the grid, building highways, >> transistors, etc... could have never gotten off the ground. There was >> no profit in funding new technologies, especially if the investor >> realized he could very well be dead and buried before he gets the >> chance to enjoy the fruits of his investments. >> > And my argument is that if you can't fund the ventures without using > stolen money, then they shouldn't be funded. > > > You also seem to keep bringing up "threats of violence" which I >> presume is somehow equated to government funded programs - I presume >> because governments want to tax you and me. Do I have that right? >> You're giving me the impression that you have little regard whatsoever >> for any kind of government assistance - and what it costs to pay for >> such assistance in regards to the affairs of humanity. Do I have that >> right? >> > Yes, correct. > > When we make an exception for government and say, well we know that > violence, threats of violence, and aggression are wrong, and while we would > never practice these things in our personal relationships, but then we > allow government to have an exception and use aggression, then we open the > door for every type of aggression that people in power can dream up. It's > this very idea that we 'should' use aggression in certain cases, which lead > to all the wars, debt, inflation, taxation, and the blossoming police state > today. It all comes from the idea that government is exempt from moral law, > and when people on this list start presenting their political opinions, > I'll then point out that they are making a moral exception for their > special programs. > > Craig > > -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
