This Richard Murphy character is such an economic illiterate. I wonder honestly if he’s just a troll
Sovereignty is not provided by the state, it is what I value most…
wow, this guy is either a dumbass or a minion…
His definition of “voluntary”
Voluntary - Something you do at the point of a gun upon threat of death.
This is just sad.
Here is a new post this small brained person made:
"Author: Richard Murphy
Comment:
Truth and Liberty
You, and many of the others commenting here, promote abuse, nothing more or less
You do not argue
Further libertarian comments on this and other economic issues will be blocked for good reason - I do not think the discourse you offer any more acceptable to society than that of the BNP
Your concept of liberty, as is theirs, is one that is deliberately designed to harm - and would
I will not give it space
Richard"
Priceless. Simply priceless.
Oh no! He blocked comments from libertarians that are “promoting abuse”
I got in a comment before the blockage.
It must be that crazy “Far Right” abuse that seeks to enslave people by reducing their taxation and increasing their personal liberty!
Let’s feel sorry for him. He was probably dropped on his head as a child, by one of the socialist doctors that he admires so.
If you disagree with him you’re a tyrant! And need to be silenced immediately!!
On the other hand there are many people that (at least used to) pay taxes and abide legislation, because believe that is the right thing to do[:S].
Those that don’t still use the roads and public places instead of sticking to their “private property”.
He has removed your comment, Spidey. You abuser!
Honestly, why do people get so angry when you point out the problems with their economics?
The most disturbing thing for me is the number of commenters who agree with what he is saying.
I just posted the following comment on his blog.
Well I had to respond. I didn’t go full anarcho-capitalist on him, but I did post the follow:
What obligation is inherent in any social situation? Whether one considers ethics or simply pragmatic means for social harmony, no implicit (nor inherent) obligation shall exist such that it deprives one of the lost time and labor that taxes themselves indeed do. If you tax me for a common road, the time lost from taxes (via time spent on labor to pay the tax) is paid back in unfettered access for the road. If you tax me for a common grounds or square, again this is paid back as unfettered access to that given property.
But at no one time can one logically assume that all taxes are ever equal, regardless of intent. Whether it’s a tax to pay a general fund for school lunches for the needy children, or whether it’s a pension tax, or any other kind of selective tax.
The reality is that the direct remuneration in time lost via the tax must be there for it to be a valid one. Government or State isn’t the apex of social order. Nor should it be given powers to shape that social order for the fact of perverse consequences due to the centralised nature of the State (and/or Government). As such, no sane human being would find it in their best interest (or that of their neighbor) to offer selective services with accompanied selectived taxes, if said person recognizes the distortion that it creates on the social order (depriving charities of vital funds to maintain their purpose, private opportunities lost due to lack of free capital and savings, and many other distorts both positive and negative).
The State in this context can never add value beyond the necessary legal frame work for which the same “social language” is created. Thus, social harmony is improved by a monoculture of law. Beyond this sphere, the State cannot add value in the same kind as yourself, me, or a stranger with a brilliant idea (or plan). This is due to the fact that individuals create, not organizations. And the State as an organization which has monopoly privilege to tax and legislate, should be reigned in as much as possible as to not deprive individuals of given opportunities to act on said ideas (or to impede the creation of them).
Ultimately, you have to show the proof in the pudding for your case, Mister Murphy, not your opponents.
He deleted my follow up. Lol.
While beautifully put, I think it will warp his little mind and he’ll resort to:
Ignoring you
Ad Hominems
More mindless garbage.
And his response was even better - no direct refutation of your comment, ad hominem, followed by an appeal to authority! LOL
It’s a lot easier for him to delete the comment. Lol.
Actually, I think it was Napoleon who invented art.
Who knew?
It’s sad the man is older than me, but shows the immaturity of a 16 y/o /b/tard.
The more and more I read of the United Kingdom, the more and more I start to think my preconceptions regarding it and it’s people are accurate.
Sincerest apologies to any Brits here offended by it, but I say this even as someone who’s entire family originates there.
I’m guessing this guy is an adherent of Public Choice Theory, hence his reference to voluntary taxation.