patrick.net

And traffic lights will start working on pixie dust. The military will accept IOUs for pay and they will ride unicorns who run on rainbow power as transportation. When they go to war they will kill the enemy with a scary shout and a nasty glare.

Sometimes "survival of the fittest" doesn't work. These idiots are actually slugs who slimed their way out from under a rock in the morning to masquerade as human beings. It's truly stunning how dumb people can be and still draw breath. I'll bet if any one off them were to have a thought, they'd spontaneously combust. They must be friends of Michele Bachmann and her gay husband.

Can we cut medicare too? Look at the demographics of that crowd.

Angry female seniors.

Zero taxes, eh? I suppose that means all the arrowed items would be privately owned.

I wonder what the cost would be to walk down a toll sidewalk, or sit an protest on a privately owned sidewalk? I am sure some enterprising person could snap-up all the prime street corners, and charge $1 to cross the street, or $100 a head to sit and protest on the corner.

Maybe she means zero income taxes and instead feds print a little bit more money out of thin air to make up difference?

Thats the 'hidden inflation/money devaluing tax' though so I guess that makes people angry also. Maybe this is what some 3rd world countries do (zimbabwe) since they cannot collect any significant taxes? Possibly its a bad idea.

MarsAttacks! says

All of those things can be paid for by use fees or outright privatized.

Yeah, what I said:
leoj707 says

...$1 to cross the street, or $100 a head to sit and protest on the corner.

" can be paid for by use fees or outright privatized"

Libertarianism: all the liberty you can afford, and not one drop more!

there should be "use" taxes to pay for all that, not income taxes. Electricity is already paid for that way, why not everything else.

Otherwise we provide politicians with huge sums of money to distribute to their friends sitting at the top while leaving the public with minimal required for the rest.

MarsAttacks! says

There were houses and roads built before governments existed to tax them for far longer in human history than the other way around.

Sure, there were roads. They weren't maintained by anyone in particular, and with potholes and such they were nearly impossible to navigate. Also, roads were subject to private property lines.

Do you ever travel on freeways? Bridges? Interstate road systems? They wouldn't exist without a central entity overseeing them. Do you drink water? Public works projects. Do you use electricity, public transportation, sidewalks...

Do you feel safe, because you know that you can call 911 and someone will show up to protect you? Do you drive the speed limit because there's someone who will make sure you do?

There are so many things that exist because of public works projects, which are funded by taxes.

One of those women was holding a sign that said "Work, not welfare." I wonder how many of them were homemakers and never actually paid into the Medicare system (but are drawing off of a spouse's account).

simchaland says

And traffic lights will start working on pixie dust. The military will accept IOUs for pay and they will ride unicorns who run on rainbow power as transportation. When they go to war they will kill the enemy with a scary shout and a nasty glare.

You forgot that, in war, they could hold a stick and say, "Bangety-bangety bang." That's much more effective than a scary shot and a nasty glare. Unless, of course, another guy is saying, "tankety, tankety tank." Then they're screwed.

thunderlips11 says

And that sheds light about the reliability of a certain Book that strong features a guy found in a floating basket in the Nile...

How so?

elliemae says

How so?

Slaves didn't build the Pyramid.

And there is no archeological evidence for Hebrews living in Egypt in large numbers, and never as slaves.

(There was a vibrant community in Alexandria of traders during the Ptolemies, but that was many, many centuries after the Pyramids were built, and they were there on their own violition).

It's quite possible to fund a military without taxes. It's called plundering and it worked just fine for thousands of years.

Kevin says

It's quite possible to fund a military without taxes. It's called plundering and it worked just fine for thousands of years.

Plunder was undoubtedly a sweetener, and there are indeed stories of fabulous wealth gained this way here and there.

AFAICR, no military ever operated on plunder as a sole means of funding for any extended period. Those that tried, soon descended into simple thievery and fell apart. It's demoralizing for an army in the long run to believe it's not operating for "King & country" but rather "every man for himself".

MarsAttacks! says

Human history goes back hundreds of thousands of years. Central governments do not.

Yes, and that doesn't mean we should go back to feudalism, which is basically what libertarianism/anarcho-capitalism boils down to.

Vicente says

AFAICR, no military ever operated on plunder as a sole means of funding for any extended period. Those that tried, soon descended into simple thievery and fell apart.

Wait, i just gotta ask you - whats the difference between "plunder" and "thievery"? I mean, if a platoon comes to your home and walks away with your sofa set you say "oh thats just plunder, okay, cool." but if a single person wants it it you scream "thief!"? I'm curious.

As for the pic above, i'm mostly grateful they were able to spell defense correctly, but can imagine the world would be a slightly beter place if they kind of just dropped.

MarsAttacks! says

Human history goes back hundreds of thousands of years. Central governments do not.

Hundreds of thousands of years ago humans were savages living in holes eating each others brains. Next point?

Abolish income taxes and get the money from import duties instead.

zzyzzx says

Abolish income taxes and get the money from import duties instead.

Yep, charge a premium for non-members to access the greatest shopping mall in the world.

Let lower added value products (socks, plastic toys) go, but claw back and cling to high value added manufacturing (medical equipment, aerospace, etc.) like hell.

zzyzzx says

Abolish income taxes and get the money from import duties instead.

Henry George was a free trader so he'd probably say tax ground rents first.

I say both, but ground rents are an order of magnitude greater than trade.

A 50% confiscatory tax on the trade deficits with China, Japan, and Mexico would yield ~$200B

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/top/dst/current/deficit.html

A 3% tax on ground rents would yield $900B or so. (SWAG)

thunderlips11 says

elliemae says

How so?

Slaves didn't build the Pyramid.

Correct, the pyramids may have had some small amount of slave labor, but for the most part they were build by professional work crews.

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pyramidworkforce.htm

The pyramids were built. That is the entire amount known about the pyramids. Everything else is a guess.

kentm says

Hundreds of thousands of years ago humans were savages living in holes eating each others brains. Next point?

The world is only 6,000 years old. Everything indicating to the contrary is a lie, a trick of Satan to lead you into sinful thoughts.

Bap33 says

The pyramids were built. That is the entire amount known about the pyramids. Everything else is a guess.

I like your skepticism!
But ... aren't you a religious person? Why apply this sort of skepticism to the pyramids, where there's various pieces of evidence that hint at a history that does not require we resort to mysticism to explain the gaps, but not to the bible? While the bible is also a form of historical evidence, it contains all kinds of crazy things that sound very improbable, impossible to prove (or, conveniently, disprove), and lie well outside the scope of our experiences (assuming you yourself haven't seen people part oceans or walk on water or return from the dead without medical intervention, etc etc).

Just curious, sorry if I'm confusing you for someone else (I seem to recall some religious comments from you)

Bellingham Bob says

A 3% tax on ground rents would yield $900B or so.

Please check your math. The numbers you are giving translates to total ground rent payment at $30Trillion! That's twice the size of the total US GDP! How do people pay for the houses on top of the ground, or food or clothing or the much more expensive medicine and education? if they are spending double their total income on renting ground (before improvement)?

If you are talking about current land value, do you honest believe the land value would stay the same if tax rate on land is raised to 3%? Have you looked around and checked what places with 3% property tax rate are like? They are inner city neighborhods known for their combat zones.

"Please check your math. The numbers you are giving translates to total ground rent payment at $30Trillion!"

yes. I was talking about ~3% land value tax, obviously. But in implementation it would have to be a tax on rental value, for the reason you state about land prices falling in response to higher land taxes.

"Have you looked around and checked what places with 3% property tax rate are like? "

Hellholes like Austin?

Heaven forfend we actually implement the "least worst" tax in the words of Milton Friedman and WFB.

elliemae says

Sure, there were roads. They weren't maintained by anyone in particular, and with potholes and such they were nearly impossible to navigate. Also, roads were subject to private property lines.

What the heck was a pot hole? Roads existed before the clay pot was invented. Roads probably existed before the concept private property came along. How the heck would a hunter-gatherer get to the flint-stone tool maker without roads?

Do you ever travel on freeways? Bridges? Interstate road systems? They wouldn't exist without a central entity overseeing them.

Free ways, bridges and interstate turnpikes all existed before the leviathan of the 20th century. Interstate turnpikes were hot stocks in the mid-19th century just like internet companies were in the late 20th century.

Do you drink water? Public works projects. Do you use electricity, public transportation, sidewalks...

I drink water from my own well. The last time I checked, neither I nor the well driller was part of any public works project. Electricity is provided by a government sanctioned monopoly, part of the reason why the price is so high. Public transportation is also incredibly expensive per mile travelled compared to the privately run bus lines. Sidewalks? Yes I have those, and I built them with my own hands.

Do you feel safe, because you know that you can call 911 and someone will show up to protect you?

It has long been established in court that the police does not have the responsibility to protect you. Stop dreaming. Officer safety comes first, yours come last. Such is the natural result of monopoly service provider.

Do you drive the speed limit because there's someone who will make sure you do?

No I don't, nor do most other drivers, because everyone knows that the speed limit is put in place for revenue generation. Most of us slow down somewhat when the revenue patrol is out in force.

There are so many things that exist because of public works projects, which are funded by taxes.

The Mafia too claim that widows and orphans depend on their charity collection (at gun point or with bomb threats). The argument you are making is about as silly as all the soviet indoctrination for their kids: since the government officials have forcibly taken over all social services as monopolies, you are not allowed to think market alternatives.

Bellingham Bob says

"Have you looked around and checked what places with 3% property tax rate are like? "

Hellholes like Austin?

What about Austin? It has a property tax rate of 0.45%! That's what 45 cents out of every $100 means. Are you having difficulty with math again?

Heaven forfend we actually implement the "least worst" tax in the words of Milton Friedman and WFB.

What you have in mind is not a tax cutting mechanism as Friedman and even Henry George intended, but just another excuse to raise taxes and kill the economy.

Reality says

What the heck was a pot hole? Roads existed before the clay pot was invented. Roads probably existed before the concept private property came along. How the heck would a hunter-gatherer get to the flint-stone tool maker without roads?

Just to be clear most people define a road as:
"A long, narrow stretch with a smoothed or paved surface, made for traveling by motor vehicle, carriage, etc., between two or more points; street or highway."

It sounds like your definition includes narrow foot paths.

Reality says

No I don't, nor do most other drivers, because everyone knows that the speed limit is put in place for revenue generation. Most of us slow down somewhat when the revenue patrol is out in force.

Really? "everyone knows", eh?

Speed limits are in place primarily for safety, then other things like: road wear, fuel economy, noise, etc.

You probably also hate those damn stop and yield signs, just another way for "the man" to steal from you.

You sure seem to hate the American way of doing things. Good news for you though, sounds like your dream government can be found in Somalia.

leoj707 says

Just to be clear most people define a road as:
"A long, narrow stretch with a smoothed or paved surface, made for traveling by motor vehicle, carriage, etc., between two or more points; street or highway."

It sounds like your definition includes narrow foot paths.

Road is whatever surface that is suitable for land traveling by the prevailing mode of transportation. Roads certainly existed long before motor vehicles and carriages. Otherwise, what the Roman imperial government took over and monopolized were not even "roads" by your proposed definition.

leoj707 says

Really? "everyone knows", eh?

Okay you got me there. I did not account for the really gullible ones.

Speed limits are in place primarily for safety, then other things like: road wear, fuel economy, noise, etc.

So would you beat the ticket if you drive above speed limit in a light aerodyamic car?

You sure seem to hate the American way of doing things. Good news for you though, sounds like your dream government can be found in Somalia.

I hate the subversion of the limited Constitutional government that made America a success, as opposed to all the government-induced chaos in the rest of the world. You are just another lover of Somalia "governments," which has proven worse than the Somalia without a central government.

Reality says

Road is whatever surface that is suitable for land traveling by the prevailing mode of transportation.

So, then in an area where the "prevailing mode of transportation" is a snow shoe, then any spot of snow is a road? If that is the way you want to define roads, you need to understand that most others will not know what you mean when you use the word "road".

Reality says

Otherwise, what the Roman imperial government took over and monopolized were not even "roads" by your proposed definition.

What in the definition I provided does not apply to roman roads?
- Did they create a, long and narrow, paved surface? yes.
- Was it made for travel between two points? yes.
- Did they use carriages, and other vehicles on the surface? yes.

leoj707 says

It sounds like your definition includes narrow foot paths.

We call them "deer roads" up in these parts.

(not really)

Reality says

Okay you got me there. I did not account for the really gullible ones.

No, I think you did.

Reality says

So would you beat the ticket if you drive above speed limit in a light aerodyamic car?

No, are you missing the point?

Reality says

You are just another lover of Somalia "governments," which has proven worse than the Somalia without a central government.

Strange, not sure why you would think that I love the Somalia government. I am not the one espousing ideals that are modeled by Somalia.

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Tony Manero says

The US military could easily support itself on a hybrid royalty plunder model.

Attack Alberta and take its oil fields over - get a cut of the extracted value of the primary mineral wealth.

That's a far more rational system than the current Ponzi Military Model.

So how well has the attack and take-over Iraqi oil wells worked out?

The stationing of a US Marine or army soldier over the oil wells in Iraq or Alberta is guaranteed to be more costly than letting the Iraqis and Canadians pump the oil by themselves and willingly sell it to us in exchange for something that they want. This is a fundamental fact underpinning why liberty, freedom and peace work better than violent fascistic looting!

As I suspected, behind every wannabe socialist big-government type is a simpleton mind susceptible to the message of Fascism! Mussolini famously said that ex-socialists and ex-communists were the best targets for recruitment into his Fascist party.

leoj707 says

So, then in an area where the "prevailing mode of transportation" is a snow shoe, then any spot of snow is a road? If that is the way you want to define roads, you need to understand that most others will not know what you mean when you use the word "road".

In a place where the prevailing mode of transportation is a pair of snow shoes, what other roads would you expect aside from a snow covered path cleared of major obstacles like tree branches? Who would be running the snow plows when there were no motor vehicles or even horse/dog drawn sleds? and what would they be using to push the snow plow?

What in the definition I provided does not apply to roman roads?
- Did they create a, long and narrow, paved surface? yes.
- Was it made for travel between two points? yes.
- Did they use carriages, and other vehicles on the surface? yes.

Many Roman road segments were impassable to carriages. They were built for foot and hoof traffic only. Even more segments were unpaved simple dirt roads cut through the woods.

leoj707 says

No, are you missing the point?

Not at all. A light aerodynamics sports car handles better at 70mph than a heavy unwieldy boxy SUV at 60mph, does less damage to road and generate less noise. Why does the former get a ticket whereas the later doesn't?

Strange, not sure why you would think that I love the Somalia government. I am not the one espousing ideals that are modeled by Somalia.

Because Somalia is one place on earth where the lack of a government actually worked out better in the 1990's than the same place with a central government before or since then. Your attriting Somalia's relative economic backwardness despite rapid improvements in the 1990's to the lack of government can only mean that you love the type of totalitarian government that they had under the Siad Barre regime.

Reality says

Not at all. A light aerodynamics sports car handles better at 70mph than a heavy unwieldy boxy SUV at 60mph, does less damage to road and generate less noise. Why does the former get a ticket whereas the later doesn't?

If you can find an area where the sole reasons for a speed limit are road noise and damage, feel free to argue that with the judge, but you are still missing the point. There are many reason for a speed limit.

Reality says

Because Somalia is one place on earth where the lack of a government has actually worked out better in the 1990's than the same place with a central government before or since then.

Great! sounds like they are on the track to ushering in an era of conservative utopia. Don't you want to get in on the ground floor?

Reality says

In a place where the prevailing mode of transportation is a pair of snow shoes, what other roads would you expect aside from a snow covered path cleared of major obstacles like tree branches?

Once again this comes down to semantics. You can choose to define the word "road" any way you want, but others will not understand what you are talking about.

Reality says

Many Roman road segments were impassable to carriages. They were built for foot and hoof traffic only. Even more segments were unpaved simple dirt roads cut through the woods.

Given how you choose to define road, I am not sure there is any point to discuss this because we could very well be talking about two different things. What's the point?

leoj707 says

If you can find an area where the sole reasons for a speed limit are road noise and damage, feel free to argue that with the judge, but you are still missing the point. There are many reason for a speed limit.

The most important and consistent of which is revenue generation.

Great! sounds like they are on the track to ushering in an era of conservative utopia. Don't you want to get in on the ground floor?

Do you have a time machine? In the 1990's, Somalia was a decent place for investment on infrastructure, like cell phone towers. Nowadays, thanks to the US/UN/Ethiopia invasion, the country now has a central government and is as a result in chaos: all the tribes are fighting over who gets to be in control of the central government, and the president's own kinsmen are playing pirates off shore for real keeps as a funding mechanism for the government!

Reality says

the country is has a central government and is as a result in chaos: all the tribes are fighting over who gets to be in control of the central government, and the president's own kinsmen are playing pirates off shore for real keeps!

Sounds great, a very weak or no central government is what you want right?