It is pretty easy to apply. You just have to ask, if there were no taxes how high would this person’s income be. Then you instantly see who is a recipient and who is a payer.
This we can agree on. It is really easy to talk high minded principle when the only cost is some time spent posting on the internet.
I have no idea what you’re talking about with the latter part, but the former wrt me is right on. People do rationalize. I am rationalizing applying for a replacement birth certificate, when I know exactly what a birth certificate is, and it really irks me.
Such is life.
Sounds like a canard to me. Stealing is stealing, it doesn’t matter if it is $1 or $100 million. Mine and thine are the foundation of a civil society. If you can justify taking a penny, then like many people in this thread, you will justify taking a dollar, or $10.
Ten million people taking one penny from me adds up. If you can justify you taking a penny, then you can’t exactly poo-poo everyone else from ripping me off. This is EXACTLY how the state works. It nickel and dimes us, obfuscates ownership and takes with force and gives very freely. Government ALWAYS has money for welfare, corporate or otherwise. Money they confiscate from others.
Your rationale is that I can afford the loss because it is small. That’s the reasoning behind progressive taxation. Great job!
“Sounds like a canard to me. Stealing is stealing, it doesn’t matter if it is $1 or $100 million. Mine and thine are the foundation of a civil society. If you can justify taking a penny, then like many people in this thread, you will justify taking a dollar, or $10.”
The foundtaion of civil society (I’m taking it you mean the market economy in todays world) was hardly based on mine and thine. Or are you a natural rights rothardian who believes he can deduce a theory of ethics from one simple axiom (which is th most circular argument ever passed off as politicla philosophy).
“Ten million people taking one penny from me adds up. If you can justify you taking a penny, then you can’t exactly poo-poo everyone else from ripping me off. This is EXACTLY how the state works. It nickel and dimes us, obfuscates ownership and takes with force and gives very freely. Government ALWAYS has money for welfare, corporate or otherwise. Money they confiscate from others.”
I thought we were all methodoligical indiviualists. Since when did groups act? Not to mention, the use of theft in regards to taxation is highy naive. Do you guys strictly read Rothbard and call it a day?
“Your rationale is that I can afford the loss because it is small. That’s the reasoning behind progressive taxation. Great job!”
How is this simple trolling getting by? You create caricaturs of politicians, act as if you know thier intentions, and ignore the fact that many of thes social systems have evolve over time in order to best facilitate trade.
Plus, why do you refuse to make any arguments grounded in some empirical study. Your gross, sadly Rothbardian caricature of the working of American politics is seriously misleading. How can someone who writes so intelligently make an argument so black and white? Is libertarian natural rights theory the only proper framework for analyzing political policy? OF COURSE NOT.
You’re no differenat than rationalists who believe they can create the ideal society through individual action.
If only the black and white world of completely free markets and devoid of the social instutitons (built from practical knowledge and experience, see Lex Mercatoria) could come to frutition, we’d end up like France.
Of your post, only this deserved a response. I don’t care what the intention of a politician is. It is irrelevant. I can’t know their motives, only their actions.
I do know that politicians want to steal from me and run my life because that is what they do. I certainly don’t ask for their interference and they certainly have no authority, moral, legal, voluntary etc. They are neither my father nor my God. They are parasites empowered by people who continue to believe that the state serves some purpose, and I must be subservient to that purpose.
When a man tells me I must pay him money or face time locked in a hole, and the forceful confiscation of my property, that’s stealing whether he claims it is for my good or for his.
PS, I am not a Rothbardian. Most of my cough fans *cough know this.
It is not true that market demand is the only measure of whether or not a service is wanted.
I’m referring to the person who was coerced for its payment. Had they wanted the service, they’d have devoted their resources to its procurement.
The fact that the opportunity cost of government services cannot be measured doesn’t matter in this regard.
Why does it not?
And government money will always be released back to the market. A welfare bum will still buy groceries and liquor. It’s a matter of which market participants actually have a right to it.
Right.
Well, nobody has the right preemptive restitution. until the crime has occur, you can’t take your property back.
If I were to consider it one’s parents delegating them the right to re-appropriate the money taken from them? The right to restitution can be homesteaded and traded, after all.
Academics are basically shills for the state. They’re sell outs. Their prostitutes who sacrifice their integrity for income. I think its perfectly fair to say so. (http://mises.org/easaran/chap3.asp)
Like I said, angry rhetoric is great at boosting your reputation for being a bad ass, it doesn’t replace a sound argument though. The interesting part later in your post you go on to say that individuals on the right hand side of the intelligence distribution (it’s almost certainly true that intelligent people self select into academia) actually don’t make the much money after spending ~5 years building human capital. So which is it? Are they whoring themselves out for the money or do they actually not make that much money. These two assertions don’t quite sit right with one another.
(And how the fuck does a mathematician or a physicist whore himself out for the state anyway? 2 + 2 = Government is good?)
I’m aware the statistics aren’t great. I said as much myself, but the point is your said education won’t increase your marketability at all. My point was never that doing a doctorate is a good life decision for every individual, but that if you treat it as a consumption good you will still be rewarded with some premium over the rest of the population who are lacking in such a degree. All the more so with a doctorate in math which provides one with ample opportunities for employment.
PhDs are desired in some parts of the private sector and there are certain types of jobs where a PhD is more beneficial than an equal amount of work experience. Primarily, research and development. Coming from the software industry I can say that Google, Microsoft, IBM, HP, etc. all have plenty of job openings for PhD holders because they are looking for people who have a background in academic style research which is very different from research application (what the rest of the company does). Generally only very large companies have a big enough R&D budget to afford paying people to do research that won’t turn into any kind of marketable good in under 10 years so the number of opportunities are limited but they exist in the private sector.
Also, some people enjoy research work while others enjoy application work. For someone interested in doing research, going through school for a PhD isn’t about the money, it’s about the job satisfaction. If they end up in academia doing research or in the private sector doing research what often matters to them is that they are doing research that interests them. Most of them know that they could easily go work in the private sector doing application work and make more money.
I say take the money and sleep soundly. Why? Because you don’t know how much money the government will confiscate from you in the future. Sure, you only gave the government $500 in taxes and it gave you a $50,000 grant. But over your life the government may take that much or more. But by the end of your life it may be too late and the government has stopped giving out such loans or you just can’t take advantage of it for any reason. Thus in the end you were a net tax producer but lived as if you weren’t. Get back what the government will probably take while you have the chance.
My greatest reservation about college is not wanting to be on the bad side of stats. But, I suspect that it might be more a matter of planning, grades and flexibility more than random chance, in which case I would have no problem. During a tour a few weeks ago at Seneca the prof said that about 50% of students show up for class.
I understand what you are saying. What I am saying is that even though a good is not worth the cost (wouldn’t be voluntarily purchased), it is still a good and still has value. If the taxpayer is forced to pay for a good, this only prooves that they don’t value it as much as the alternative goods they could purchase if they weren’t forced. Having already being forced, it is better if they get some goods or services for their money, rather than no goods or services, since this will lower their net loss. It is better if tax money goes into producing something like roads, that taxpayers will actually use, than if it goes to some student, who will give taxpayers nothing in return.
But this argument is different than your earlier one, that you might as well take tax money since you’ll be taxed anyway in the future. You have no right to present tax money, if you haven’t already payed it into the system.
Also, I agree with the point you make about parents transfering their right to reappropriate money taken from them.
There’s not much worth actually replying to here.
They are selling out for money, and doing so at a bargain.
You never said the statistics weren’t great. You said that the data falls pretty squarely against my claim.
I also never said that a PHD won’t increase your marketability at all. I said it wasn’t worth the opportunity cost and that gaining experience increases your marketability more than a degree.
If you’re going to college, absolutely make sure you’re doind co-ops and internships to get experience before you graduate. It will take longer to finish, and it’s more than worth it. Also, if you’re in a highly competitive field, your grades have to be top notch.
I can see the need for higher level degrees if you’re going to be doing research and development. In this case it makes sense.
Co-op is part of the 3 year chemical engineering at Seneca. The length does not change. I don’t know how competitive that field is for certain. I’m trying to choose something difficult to use my skill so that there is less competition. Ideally, I want the most difficult field there is, so I can charge an armandleg for my services.