Flea markets offer cheaper merchandise that often pays no taxes. This of course benefits consumers and harms state revenue targets. Such tax evasion is illegal but widely accepted by a population that does not desire that part of their money gets diverted to the government coffers. Sales tax evasion, so common at flea markets, is tacitly accepted by the state in many cases because too many people would be against of being taxed simultaneously at flea markets full with thousands of sellers and customers.
Due to this minimum government regulation in transactions made at flea markets, it seems that these economic agents are more in accordance to the wild capitalism idea than the legally incorporated businesses, which count with all services and utilities within the shopping malls. Shopping malls are highly regulated by the state at the tax level, subject to labor laws and quality control standards, which are nevertheless demanded by consumers in many cases.
You are right, generally, when they represent waste.
In the few cases when the taxes are actually spent on services, ie. they are not wasted, that taxation is welcome.
I don’t understand what you mean. Maybe it’s my English. But my answer is that I probably don’t even care what you do about me since it seems that debating every single thing I write is nothing more than a source of entertainment for you.
You used the word coercion in another thread. I assume that means you know what it means.
Do I have the right to coerce you (initiate violence)? It’s a simple question, although you do manage to evade and obfuscate simple questions, so I am ready to be entertained again.
You probably do. It is your love for violence and its sordid relationship to liberty that you are convincing me ever more than before that governments are necessary, to protect peace-loving people from the atrocities a limited number of people like you choose to inflict on the name of a concept of liberty that seems is getting pushed to an extreme.
Another nonsense answer that avoids a direct response.
I’ll rephrase again. In another thread, you asked people to stop coercing you. You seemed to believe that no one had the right to initiate violence against you.
Is that correct? Or do I have a right to coerce (initiate violence) against you? Can I just arbitrarily punch and kick you? Is that my right?
Flea markets are also sometimes more expensive than the shopping mall and the condition of the good is not guaranteed. Also, it can be difficult to haggle the price.
In regards to taxation… I am willing to pay taxes as long as it benefits myself and my fellow countrymen.
This thread is about flea markets. You are avoiding the topic of this thread.
Perhaps you will be of more benefit to society if you concentrated more on your duties than on your rights. Of course, your selfishness and your narrow-mindedness makes you concentrate on only your rights.
I don’t care about your rights. I actually do care about your duties. Your duties are more important to me than your rights. Your adult responsibility to me is more important than your childish “I want”, “I want”.
Yeah, you need to look for bargains carefully. The guarantee of the good comes from the big manufacturers.
When taxes benefit your society, there will always be some free riders who get the benefit but still wish not to pay. I think they have the duty to pay just the same way as you pay voluntarily.
Of course you do not care about my rights. If you do not work, you want the government to break into my home and take the food from my children to feed you. When you do not save for education, or engage in productive labour, you want the government to take one of my shirts, one of my pants and my ability to pay for private health care away so you can live in some manner of style.
That is the essence of the looter. You won’t answer about coercion, because like the questions (which must be near a dozen in measure) you have avoided here, you already know the answer. You have no right to steal from the fruit of my labour. You have no right to my property. You have no right to demand I provide you with things you cannot (or will not) provide for yourself, in essence to make me your slave.
But as long as it is done under the veil of the government, you’re perfectly ok with looting your countrymen, and even citizens of other countries. You rejoice that that you never have to look your victims in the face, or get your knuckles bloody to rob them. You just have to vote, and there is an institution of perpetual violence which will service your needs in return for your obedience.
It’s interesting you mentioned the word duty. Statists always think that someone has a duty. It’s my duty to respect you, it’s my duty to pay my taxes to support you. But you have no duty to respect my right not to be beaten, incarcerated or murdered for the non-crime of wanting to keep the fruits of my labour. The expressions of my creativity, energy and ingenuity made manifest.
I’m not interested in the least about being of benefit to society. I am not robot, slave or drone. I am an individual human being who only wishes to live my life as I see fit, providing for my own welfare, security and comfort.
You better get used to that. I’d say 95% or more of us here feel like that, and can justify those positions objectively, dispassionately. We won’t run from the discussion or try to post diversionary rants. Or you could spend more time on your Marxist forum where I am sure there will be lots of people who believe in the same tyrannies you do.
I don’t feel compelled to comment on these forums often, but this was just too disgusting for me to ignore. Good god, Rubén, do you even listen to the things you say?
Aha, and whence do you derive these “duties”? You do realize their basis is no more and no less solid than that of rights? Rights have nothing to do with “I want, I want”, so please don’t throw in such misconceptions. As for “free riding”, why not tax people “free riding” at the sight of my beautiful garden, say, or the scent of my cologne, regardless of whether they commissioned it or not or requested it?
Anyway, I suggest you all get back on topic or I’m closing this thread.
If you do not want to be a benefit to society but just to yourself, it is clear why your way of looking at libertarianism won’t ever go too far. I am sure scholars on libertarianism have addressed this question much more satisfactorily than you are doing right now.
And if I don’t get used to what you say, so what? I am not here to answer your questions as if this were a quiz. I am here to learn and share my experiences and you are not necessarily the one who will tell me that I earned a passing or failing grade.