If someone live or carry on a platform at sea will surely have to pay a fee for managing the business like the people who live in a condominium. What is the difference between paying a mandatory fee and pay a tax?
nomar: If someone live or carry on a platform at sea will surely have to pay a fee for managing the business like the people who live in a condominium. What is the difference between paying a mandatory fee and pay a tax?
It would essentially be the same as a sales tax, but as for any other tax, nobody is forcing you to live there...so that's the difference. One is compulsory, the other is voluntary.
If someone live or carry on a platform at sea will surely have to pay a fee for managing the businesslike the people who live in a condominium.
Wait. What? Can you reword that?
I frequently encounter this argument in left-libertarian or socialist spheres, if you're saying what I think you're saying. Paying for the service of a place to live is not a tax but an exchange. If you were living in apartment in building A, paying the rent for that one, but the landlord for building B demanded you pay him, that would be a tax. Simply paying for goods and services is not a tax. To think that such is the truth is to imply that the goods of the world have been promised to you and only by malevolent agents are you made to pay.
By mandatory fee do you mean like how it's 'mandatory' that I pay the cashier when I go grocery shopping?
The Anarch is to the Anarchist what the Monarch is to the Monarchist. -Ernst Jünger
A fee is escapable. A tax is, largely, not. Meaning you can live somewhere else if one place charges a fee for living there. A tax on property is generally on everyone regardless where you live.
so if you live in a appartment, how are you going to escape the fee in your contract? if its both the same building, the tax does not reach further than the fee. one difference could be a tax as a percentage and a fee as a flat fee, and people could pick between the two. another way a fee could be different is it can be more negotiable.
I don't understand your response, but if it says what I think it says, then my response is: one would not take an apartment in a building without contracting the landlord, unless the landlord allowed it.
cab21: so if you live in a appartment, how are you going to escape the fee in your contract?
so if you live in a appartment, how are you going to escape the fee in your contract?
If you signed a contract, then you accepted the fee explicitly up-front. There is never a contract signed to legitimize a tax.
cab21:if its both the same building, the tax does not reach further than the fee. one difference could be a tax as a percentage and a fee as a flat fee, and people could pick between the two. another way a fee could be different is it can be more negotiable.
I think you're saying what if all buildings had a fee. In that case, you're still free to start your own building and escape the fee. Not so with a tax.
In the seasteading scenario I've proposed in other threads, taxation would be illegal. However people could subscribed to initiatives and give willingly to have things done on a coordinated basis, and could withdraw financial support at will. It's a replacement for the taxing mechanism which preserves voluntary choice.
Thus, say if the community wanted to build a bridge. Someone would propose that they build a bridge, write out the initiative, and people would subscribe to it, and assuming enough people funded it (almost like Kickstarter.com), the project would buy the plot of land, hire contractors, and build the bridge. All privately, no government needed, and certainly no taxation.
Similarly, if you want to move to a seasteading community, such as my proposed independent jurisdictions, and a jurisdiction had a required fee to join, you can simply clone their law-base and start a jurisdiction next door minus the required fee. Chances are, people from the fee-community next door would move to your jurisdiction rapidly if they felt the fee wasn't giving them a proper return.
I assume jurisdictional fees might be used to do things like fund contracted services for a jurisdiction, such as refuse pickup, police and fire, emergency services, etc.
The key is that such things would always, always be voluntary and escapable, and the cost of entry, that is the cost of starting your own jurisdiction next door, would be zero.
what system is in place to enforce the illegality of taxes? what else will be illegal to have in the juristictions? would this be one voluntary pay government enforcing laws over all the other voluntary pay governments and fee governments, making sure none implement taxes?
a business licence is a contract which legitimises a tax or fee's however one wants to put that. if someone forms a corporation with the usa government, i don't think they ought to be surprised when it means paying corporate taxes as part of the privalige of having a corporation defended by the government.
so a volunteer pay business model is something you consider will always beat one with mandatory fee's for it's services, and it's easy to copy the assets from one business to another and compete on price? it costs less to make a law than to enforce a law. those without the money to enforce the law might not make their constituants as happy as the ones that do.
so voluntary and escapable, as supposed to invuluntary and escapable? i thought part of the requirement for involuntary is that it's unescapable, and as long as there is freedom of movement, that something is escapable , and thus voluntary? if the way to escape a fee is to move from one area to another, the same applies to taxes.
another way to think of taxes and fees is fees
“Taxes are paid for government services that are supposed to really help everyone. So the idea is … we pay taxes and they go into a pot where they are funding things like K-12 education (and) roads," says Dr. Walden, a professor of agricultural and resource economics. "Those would be two good examples of where all of us directly or indirectly benefit."
"Fees, on the other hand, are paid for government services that directly help that specific person. So, for example, a college student pays tuition, that’s a fee, and the college student obviously is getting the direct benefit of the education," he adds. "Or a driver who parks at a municipal garage pays a few because they are using that parking space. Or a household pays a fee to the city for city water.
"So the difference here is whether the person who is paying the charge directly benefits: In that case, it’s a fee. Or if they benefit as well as everyone else benefits, that’s a tax.
http://www.ncsu.edu/project/calscommblogs/economic/archives/2007/05/the_difference.html
it all depends on the tax code and the fee code how avoidable each are. in usa people can avoid income tax in all sorts of ways in the code.
what system is in place to enforce the illegality of taxes?
Only your hand with a gun in it, and knowledge in heads of would-be taxmen that you will not tolerate them.