Political Theory

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

liberty student — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:56:48 GMT

Snowflake:

april got fwned again

Stay classy please.

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

Jon Irenicus — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:13:05 GMT

Also, taxes gave us the internet. DoD, colleges, Internet. Look them up if you want more details than that.

Actually anyone that uses internet shouldn't whine about taxes and the government.

Is she (?) high or something? Looking them up reveals that the government potentially defrayed nevermind assisted in their emergence.

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

Sieben — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:53:31 GMT

april got fwned again

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

filc — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:51:10 GMT

AprilEast:
Half the advancement's in society, the many amenities to you have. (Think TV Radio Satelite INTERNETS) The emergency numbers (911 411 whatever 11) should something happen. And hopefully emergency healthare.

An arbitrary statement and false at best. Most "Governmental" Derrived technologies were adaptations from pre-existing private enterprise technologies. For example Arpanet would never had existed had Xerox not had their failed Ethernet experiment.

Also inventions and creations are made by individuals, not governments. A government does not create anything.

AprilEast:
Are all provided through the system of taxes.

My TV, Internet, and Radio are provided by private firms thanks. Not sure what country you live in but at least in Liberal Washington State those items you mentioned are managed by private firms.

AprilEast:
A country needs taxes to run properly. Pure and simple. It's a careful balance. To little we go into debt and have terrible roads and services.

At some point I imagine you'll stop speaking out of your rear. At any point our country runs in deficit with or without taxes so whats the point? Furthermore our country doesn't "NEED" to run anything. What is "Our" country? It certainly isn't my country and is no representation of my beliefs.

This is akin to a Mafia lord proclaiming the wonders of his "Neighborhood" and reaping the benefits of coerced security.

AprilEast:
If you are in a prosperous society, you stand to make more. The more you make the more you're taxed. The more you're taxed the more prosperous the society. A very cyclic nature.

Are you saying that prosperity grows linear to tax payments? IF thats the case why don't we all just pay 100% in taxes and live in nirvana?

AprilEast:
This is easily proven by looking at the worth of the American dollar on the international market.

During times of "higher than average" taxes. The American dollar goes up. American influence goes up, and we complete better in global markets. And the American GNP goes a lot higher.

This is a symptom of our monetary system. From the sounds of it you have no idea what your talking about. You've managed to see a coorelation and while in many cases is correct you fail to see why the relation is relevant. You don't know why higher taxes causes the value of the dollar to go up you just know that it does. Therefore without understanding the underlying mechanics you just assume that taxes should always be high to ensure a valueable dollar. So again it comes back to my proposal, why not then have 100% taxes?

AprilEast:
During the years of the Bush tax cuts, our debt went higher. Our dollar went lower. Eventually the GNP declined harshly and mass layoffs began.

The tax cuts by bush were a marginal effect on our Dept, Dollar value, and GNP at best. Again you reveal your lacking in understanding of our monetary system. During the Bush years the Fed lent at record numbers. There are reuters articles explaining how the Fed was lending on average 380+ billion dollars a day. That is the real reason we had problems, the tax cuts were next nothing to compared to that.

AprilEast:
So taxes are fundamental.

In New York Homocide coorelates to the outdoor tempurature. The hotter it is the more murders there are. Cooling New York with a gigantic fan is fundamental to prevening murder.

Do you see how ridiculous your argument is? Taxes are fundamental to nothing accept perpetuating errors and causing more harm to our economic status.

AprilEast:
And no... no private group is gonna run around and repair i95 or route 30, or 66 to keep trucks coming to your stores, so you get food from the farm land. Another tax subsidized program.

They would if they owned them. :)

Does the store clerk not keep his store tidy?

AprilEast:
Private citizens and groups CANNOT handle national development such as multistate highway systems. Well, they technically can. But, I think the nationalization is important. "Sorry this highway's closed til' our workers are done striking cause they have no job security."

Yet the internet exceeds the complexity of the state run highway system and is almost entirely managed cooperatively by private firms.

What about airlines? How is it that we can have international travel managed and operated succesfully while under the oppresion of the state and still succeed?

AprilEast:
Also, taxes gave us the internet. DoD, colleges, Internet. Look them up if you want more details than that.

MY fiber network is privately owned. My Datacenter down town rents server cabinet space all on the open market. I live next to the largest datacenter on the westcoast and to my knowledge the government rents no floors. My college was private. DoD is a legal monopoly what do you expect?

Thats like the mafia Lord stating. "What defense will you have from goons if you don't by my security services? You DO want my security services don't you? I'D HATE FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN TO YOUR DAUGHTER IN HER SLEEP TONIGHT, EH TONI?? MY services offer Security, why would you not want them?"

So in effect your defending the Mafia Lord?

In Summary. You should read a book, and for God Sakes turn off your TV.

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

Eric — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:42:47 GMT

AprilEast:
If you are in a prosperous society, you stand to make more. The more you make the more you're taxed. The more you're taxed the more prosperous the society. A very cyclic nature.

So we should have a 100% tax rate then.

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

Sieben — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:38:00 GMT

OOo ooo let me get it first!

AprilEast:
Half the advancement's in society, the many amenities to you have. (Think TV Radio Satelite INTERNETS) The emergency numbers (911 411 whatever 11) should something happen. And hopefully emergency healthare.

We're claiming that the government takes tax money and thus slows down the growth of the private sector. If government wants to use that money to fund its interests that is at best a zero sum game. However, since the government cannot predict and often does not even try to predict what consumers want, it invariably invests in things we could care less about.

Onto specific examples

Tv/radio/satellite/internetz are bad examples, because while government may have funded the latter 2, these were invented by thinkers trying to get from pt A to pt B as efficiently as possible; this is not something the government explicitly tries to do. More precisely, there was never an "internet" plan. Researchers in Europe just needed a way to share data sets with eachother and the web was born. At BEST government plays the role of accomplice in these inventions. And government has done nothing but regulate and destroy the shit out of these services. Tv/radio and internet provision is monopolized by a few companies, holding these technologies back so that special interests can profit.

The reason "911" was so important was because the gov initially set it up so that all phone numbers had to be 7 digits and area codes and bla bla. They didn't let private companies construct the system so of course its going to be wildly inefficient for private businesses to use it. Learn history. Please.

I know you have no imagination, but the private sector invents amazing things all the time. As a petroleum engineer, I have come across operations many times more expensive than launching a satellite into outer space, all payed for by private dollars.

At worst gov has slowed our society down 10s maybe hundreds of years. Think how much further we'd be down the line if we didn't waste money on <insert your favorite criticism of USG here>

AprilEast:
A country needs taxes to run properly. Pure and simple. It's a careful balance. To little we go into debt and have terrible roads and services.

No, a government needs taxes to run properly. Too little government funding means government collapses and private interests start filling in for public goods and services. Toll roads are typically cheaper and better maintained than government roads (you pay for gov roads w taxes). Actually I'd challenge you to name one service the gov provides that a private industry hasn't done better in. None. You can't. Learn history.

AprilEast:

During times of "higher than average" taxes. The American dollar goes up. American influence goes up, and we complete better in global markets. And the American GNP goes a lot higher.

During the years of the Bush tax cuts, our debt went higher. Our dollar went lower. Eventually the GNP declined harshly and mass layoffs began.

So taxes are fundamental.

Lol. All I can say is that the difference between a 25% tax rate and a 30% tax rate would cause a lot of projects to be shut down. If you can't make money producing something you don't produce it, plain and simple.

AprilEast:

And no... no private group is gonna run around and repair i95 or route 30, or 66 to keep trucks coming to your stores, so you get food from the farm land. Another tax subsidized program.

.................................. Its just the same old song and dance with you isn't it. Let me spell it out for you. Government does not spend its own money. Our problems are not government's problems. Therefore, government has no incentive to solve our problems efficiently even if it is forced to. I love how people like you just say "you need government to repair roads etc" and I bet you don't even know how much they spend on roads.

Would you be okay with it if gov spent 10 billion dollars/year on roads in your city? 20 billion? 30 billion? How does this compare to private contractors? Do the research and get back to me.

AprilEast:
Private citizens and groups CANNOT handle national development such as multistate highway systems. Well, they technically can. But, I think the nationalization is important. "Sorry this highway's closed til' our workers are done striking cause they have no job security."

Workers typically don't strike.... especially in a truly free market.... Ugh... Did you know in italy most of their roads are private? And it is just smashing. Here is the link. Go nuts baby.

Oh and thank you for thinking nationalization is important. We would be so lost if you didn't tell us what you thought about nationalization.

AprilEast:
Also, taxes gave us the internet. DoD, colleges, Internet. Look them up if you want more details than that.

You telling us to look things up? Rich... just rich. Okay. I'm pretty sure we all know that the dept of def is funded by government. As we all know this is a giant source of waste in the economy. Bill Clinton ordered the DoD to audit itself and give a financial report annually. It has failed every year since, claiming that it is in such a state is disarray as to make any audit impossible. But it doesn't matter because its taxpayer money.

Austrian thinkers have had the issue of national defense under control for a while now... here is one example.

I think the free market has demonstrated time and time again it can provide education... Even now, when everyone has to pay for public schools (which average 8000 USDs/student-years) private schools thrive at around 2000 USDs/student-years. That's right. EVEN THOUGH government provides this service for free and EVEN THOUGH they pay 4x more on average, public schools are completely inferior to private schools and people choose the latter despite having to pay more.

AprilEast:
Actually anyone that uses internet shouldn't whine about taxes and the government.

Anyone that uses anything invented by free thinkers shouldn't go around vomiting this kind of nonsense.

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

David Z — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:37:13 GMT

AprilEast:
This is easily proven by looking at the worth of the American dollar on the international market

Maybe not the best time to make this argument, April.

AprilEast:
And no... no private group is gonna run around and repair i95 or route 30, or 66 to keep trucks coming to your stores, so you get food from the farm land. Another tax subsidized program.

No private group would've squandered a generation's worth of productivity on highways that stretch thousands of miles like that, either. So we'd have a completely different infrastructure, to which our talents and productive resources would be suited.

AprilEast:
Also, taxes gave us the internet. DoD, colleges, Internet. Look them up if you want more details than that.

There were plans to develop internets (or something quite like them) long before DARPANET, thanks for playing.

AprilEast:
If you are in a prosperous society, you stand to make more. The more you make the more you're taxed. The more you're taxed the more prosperous the society. A very cyclic nature.

Except the thing about such circular reasoning is that it has neither beginning nor end. You presume that someone starts off in a "prosperous society" and therefore earns more and therefore is taxed more. But where did the prosperity come from in the first place? If the prosperity exist in the first place, then its evident that the taxes were not the cause, because taxes never precede prosperity.

Up until the early part of the 20th century, the taxes in the U.S. were by today's standards, effectively ZERO. And the U.S. economy was a job-creating dynamo, absorbing immigrants by the millions all-the-while increasing influence in global manufactur, and finance, and service, etc.

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

Andrew Cain — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:25:01 GMT

AprilEast:
If you are in a prosperous society, you stand to make more. The more you make the more you're taxed. The more you're taxed the more prosperous the society. A very cyclic nature.

AprilEast:
Also, taxes gave us the internet. DoD, colleges, Internet. Look them up if you want more details than that.

Actually anyone that uses internet shouldn't whine about taxes and the government.

Check please...I'd rather settle my bill before we delve into the world of fantasy

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

nirgrahamUK — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:23:06 GMT

'That's not right. It's not even wrong.' "^[2]

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

AprilEast — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:10:37 GMT

filc:
Do you think it was government who brought us out of the dark ages? You think government invented more efficient homes? Faster more efficient cars? Did government invent airplains? Did government find ways of producing food cheaper? Your blinded by your own creed.

Half the advancement's in society, the many amenities to you have. (Think TV Radio Satelite INTERNETS) The emergency numbers (911 411 whatever 11) should something happen. And hopefully emergency healthare.

Are all provided through the system of taxes.

A country needs taxes to run properly. Pure and simple. It's a careful balance. To little we go into debt and have terrible roads and services.

If you are in a prosperous society, you stand to make more. The more you make the more you're taxed. The more you're taxed the more prosperous the society. A very cyclic nature.

This is easily proven by looking at the worth of the American dollar on the international market.

During times of "higher than average" taxes. The American dollar goes up. American influence goes up, and we complete better in global markets. And the American GNP goes a lot higher.

During the years of the Bush tax cuts, our debt went higher. Our dollar went lower. Eventually the GNP declined harshly and mass layoffs began.

So taxes are fundamental.

And no... no private group is gonna run around and repair i95 or route 30, or 66 to keep trucks coming to your stores, so you get food from the farm land. Another tax subsidized program.

Private citizens and groups CANNOT handle national development such as multistate highway systems. Well, they technically can. But, I think the nationalization is important. "Sorry this highway's closed til' our workers are done striking cause they have no job security."

Also, taxes gave us the internet. DoD, colleges, Internet. Look them up if you want more details than that.

Actually anyone that uses internet shouldn't whine about taxes and the government.

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

Jon Irenicus — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:49:38 GMT

What you don't seem to understand is that not every field requires competition, and that competition alone is no guarantor of efficiency or innovation or low prices.

There are no guarantees in life when it comes to certain things (a startling conclusion for socialists and other believers in "rationally planned" societies or garbage to that effect), only that if you want a sure way to stifle any of the above a legal monopoly is the best way to do it. Valuation is subjective including so-called needs, and always originates from the individual agent, consequently what you value or not will diverge from what others value, and thus whether you think a sewerage system is "superior" to "mere" consumers goods or not is irrelevant. Try again.

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

Sieben — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:57:19 GMT

Lol april got fwned

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

filc — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:47:36 GMT

eliotn:
Actually, New Orleans is a viable place to put a city, in spite of the hurricane risk, because it is a ready port for trade. However, it might not make sense to develop below sea level...

My point wasn't that New Orleans wouldn't exist at all. Only that it would have existed geographically in a different location. It would not likely have been fully developed below sea level either. It is more likely to have been developed farther away from the Mississippi tributaries and on dry land. It is state intervention that put the town in harms way to begin with.

A private land owner without the state would never have placed his investment in such a location. Though I am speculating to say so, I think it's a fair assessment that there would be less incentive to invest in property that was below sea level as the risk of losing the property is much higher.

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

eliotn — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:33:48 GMT

filc:

I'd like to hit on this point as well as I think this is a katrina reference. Katrina is entirely the governments fault. In the absence of the government no one would be stupid enough to buy and build property below sea level in hurricane alley. New Orleans as it exists today may never have existed at all. Or it may have actually existed, oh I don't know, ABOVE SEA LEVEL like any common nonsensical human being would want.

Such a tragesty would never had happened in the first place. At worst there would have been some wind damage and marginal flood damage above sea level. It's this false sense of protection that people like you feel the state gives us. The truth is not even the collective body of superman you think live in the state can stop a walled in town below sea level from becoming flooded during a hurricane. Honestly the Gov's engineering corp should be ashamed they thought it would work in the first place. Complete idiocy.

It's un-economical and just downright stupid. All you have to blame for that is the Gov. In a free market land owners would be smart, and build their house on dry land. The idiots who don't will loose their home. We don't reward idiots.

So who pays for these idiots to continue building property below sea level? Perhaps we should devote your entire life's savings to maintain a sub level city. We should reward those peoples lunacy with your hard work. That sounds like a great idea!

Actually, New Orleans is a viable place to put a city, in spite of the hurricane risk, because it is a ready port for trade. However, it might not make sense to develop below sea level...

Re: A minimal central government is needed (or at least it seems that way to me)

filc — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:23:28 GMT

AprilEast:
What you don't seem to understand is that not every field requires competition, and that competition alone is no guarantor of efficiency or innovation or low prices.

No my friend. We understand quiet well. It is you who continues to remain in the state of basic economic ignorance.

What fields don't require competition? What fields operate more effeciently under central planning? Do you know about the calculation problem? We're not saying the system can't be done. What we are saying is the system cannot be done without working in the red, or without wasting precious resources. We are saying your system cannot work without net "Real" economic loss. (Note I'm not talking about monetary loss but that also occurs) You have no economic calculation. There is no good or service that is somehow arbitrarily exempt from this fact.

As I said earlier. Do you have a mathematical formula which predicts the desires of every man, women, and child on earth?

AprilEast:
I turned on my water this morning and clean water came out. I peed and flushed it and the pee went away. Or that time when my mom got cancer and the state paid to have her cured. Hmm, my house hasn't been robbed and when the fire alarm goes off, firefighters show up quite promptly.

When the mafia comes to your store and forces you to buy their security or suffer the violent consequences is it then justified? That is precisely what you have just advocated... lol

When the state comes into your home and forces you to hand over your spare liver to save another is it justified?

You live in a fairy tale of belief that in the absence of state people's mind would just snap madly and run a round frantically looting and stealing. Would you do that?

Do you have any idea what the word "Extortion" means?

AprilEast:
There's a serious difference between consumer goods, especially those subject to fads and fashion, and infrastructure items which require far more investment, which are far more crucial to society's operation, and the construction and maintenance of which are so costly that competition becomes damn near impossible.

If you knew the first thing about the Business Cycle Theory you wouldn't be making such a silly comment. You do realize your posting on an economic forum and your trying to lecture us on economic terms and their meanings? You know you make yourself look silly when you get it wrong. :)

Do you think it was government who brought us out of the dark ages? You think government invented more efficient homes? Faster more efficient cars? Did government invent airplains? Did government find ways of producing food cheaper? Your blinded by your own creed.

AprilEast:
You don't just build sewage pipes and then let them magically work forever. A large degree of centralizd maintenance is required, from central pumping and treatment plants to localized repairs and upgrades. Leaving this to a gallimaufry of firms would lead to a patchwork system or series of systems without any real sort of quality control.

Yet on the open market services provided by private firms are

Cheaper
In better condition and shape
Often a better service.

Compare Fedex or UPS to USPS. You honestly think USPS runs just as effeciently as private firms? Did fedex let their trucks dwindle and break down? What about USPS however? How long are the lines generally? Their process is archaic and I personally have seen USPS trucks from the 80's still driving around. Your fanatic standpoint has hidden from your view that the opposite occurs. Private firms keep their equipment in good running condition, it's in their best interest of business to do so. Government however who operates in deficit does not. There is a reason why most government offices are still using Dot Matrix printers where private firms do not. :)

AprilEast:

You average consumer good doesn't come close to the level of complexity of a sewer system. There have been clear analogues in the past--for example, deregulation of power systems.

Some consumer goods far exceed the complexity of a simple sewage system. Which by the way homeowners manage on their own in rural areas. :)

AprilEast:
Any neophyte economist could tell you that there are classes of goods and services which are qualitatively different from one another. By assuming that a sewage system, army, road system, or any other such public good is equivalent to clothing, television sets, or beer, you betray a stunning ignorance of the subtleties of economics. It's obvious that you would prefer a simple solution to a staggeringly large set of difficult problems.

Any modern economist who states this is being dishonest. Do I need to remind you that your posting on a forum full of students studying economics, and publishers of history and economics alike who would disagree with your statement. Since when were you the authority of economic thought? Your posting folly information on an economic forum funded by a school specialized in economics as if you know more then they? You must have no idea where you are post.