26 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    cheers for the rep :-)
  2. View Conversation
    No, because I would rather pay private businesses to provide the services otherwise provided by "state." Whether or not I appreciate or would use or fund for any other reason any of the services provided by the state doesn't mean I should or should want to pay the state, specifically, to provide them.
  3. View Conversation
    "If they were purely voluntary I may pay a little less, but I would still pay."

    Voluntary Taxation is an oxymoron. They're no longer taxes once they become voluntary.

    "I currently pay taxes on a voluntary basis."

    I don't. I pay taxes because the alternative is going to jail or having more of my property taken.
  4. View Conversation
    "Much closer to the logistics of how does somebody that did not pay for the roads not get to use the roads. Logistically it is practically impossible. They will inherently gain the benefit with or without payment, regardless of if they like or dislike the project for whatever reason."

    Incorrect. Police remove people who do not belong on the road (whether or not I agree with their reasoning) all the time. Why is it so hard to imagine the same in a society where state-sponsored police do not exist and roads are privately owned?
  5. View Conversation
    I disagree. Your objection only works if you think those people have a right to that service in the first place. If people can't pay for a service, there are options for charity, credit, insurance, and of course no fire and rescue. I don't view fire and rescue, municipal water, security services, public schools, or roads as things which people are entitled to merely because they exist. If they can't pay for them, they go without. And if there's not a monopoly on such things (like fire and rescue), the competition between FDs in your local area would drive the cost down. I fail to see how this is means that anyone must be "coerced," except when they've agreed to pay and have failed to.
  6. View Conversation
    There is no reason why anything which cannot sustain itself completely off of user fees should exist. If it cannot sustain itself from user fees, there is no justification to hold guns to the heads of others in order to subsidize them. Unless I've entered into a contract with them in which I have obligated myself, willingly and explicitly, to contribute to their income even in the event that I am not actively calling on their services, taking my money without my permission or threatening me with jail or theft in order to fund them is the wrong way (morally) to go about things.

    In this way, taxation (which is coercive in nature) needn't exist at all.
  7. View Conversation
    Your "sub-development" is an interesting circumstance, and in a more free world, I don't think they would exist. What's happening in those situations is that owners of properties are essentially being forced to relinquish ownership of their property to an uninterested third party. I'm not sure I understand the process of becoming the member of a housing association, but as far as I'm concerned, there's very little incentive to do so if all they're going to do is bitch about the length of your grass, as opposed to help provide for common protection.

    Did you sign a contract?
  8. View Conversation
    Second, user fees =/= taxation. Taxation is coerced. Otherwise we could suggest I am coerced to buy groceries, use telephones, or park in a parking garage. I choose to do those things, and for that choice, I pay. I choose not to do those things, I lose nothing. The nature of taxation is that I have no [uncoerced] choice to pay should I not receive the benefits for which my taxes are helping to fund. I don't pay, I go to jail, my property gets seized, etc. etc. etc.

    What you're describing is simply not "taxation."
  9. View Conversation
    Several things... First, I don't subscribe to the free-rider problem as a "problem," generally, much less here. If what you does helps me by some off chance, unless I CONSENTED to help fund your endeavor, I am not liable for it. You use a water filter to clean the water on your property. By the forces of nature, that clean water is taken to other properties and used by others. Those others have benefited from your water filter. Should they contribute to it? No. You did what you did for your purposes. I neither consented nor participated. I am not liable, financially. To suggest otherwise is to suggest that I am somehow subject to the terms of contracts between others to which I have not explicitly consented (think "social contract").
  10. View Conversation
    The moral issue here arises when I'm not a member of the group, my property lies outside of your 10 city-block radius, and you decide that no one will enter my property after 9PM, then you send your security force to come kidnap anyone who does enter my property after 9PM and me for allowing it.
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 26
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
About Mehkael

Basic Information

About Mehkael
Northern Michigan
Referred by:


All men SHOULD have equal opportunity to live their life to the fullest. Be as happy, productive, carefree, and content as possible. The trouble is we are NOT created equal.


Total Posts
Total Posts
Posts Per Day
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
Most Recent Message
March 18th, 2011 03:07 PM
General Information
Last Activity
March 13th, 2016 06:11 AM
Join Date
October 24th, 2010

1 Friend

  1. Scarlett44  Scarlett44 is offline

    ODN Community Regular

    • Send a message via Yahoo to Scarlett44
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1
No results to show...

10241 point(s) total

  • Thread: Should I be allowed to fire him, or not?
    For pointing out the important detail that no one else addressed.
    July 16th, 2011 10:55 AM
  • Thread: Should I be allowed to fire him, or not?
    Fantastic post! I wish I could rep this twice.
    July 16th, 2011 09:55 AM
  • Thread: Mind Trapped by "ownership"
    That is actually the specific challenge I am bringing, but you brought a spot light on it better than I did. Good Job.
    June 19th, 2011 09:41 AM
  • Thread: Are Why Questions Useless?
    No Comment Made
    May 21st, 2011 06:45 PM
  • Thread: Mind Trapped by "Fair Share of taxes"
    The "gov-rape-inator" has indicated that your post is excellent.
    April 17th, 2011 12:57 PM
  • Thread: Wisconsin Union Bill
    Correlation vs Causation is probably the most evil point in the political mud-slinging arsenal. Bravo for pointing it out.
    February 27th, 2011 10:40 AM
  • Thread: Wisconsin Union Bill
    very good response, with excellent supporting reason.
    February 26th, 2011 08:11 AM
  • Thread: Discontinue Ten Dollar Bill?
    For presenting an interesting topic.
    November 23rd, 2010 07:46 AM
  • Thread: Education in America is bad because of
    Excellent response to the complaints about high school being too difficult. Drove home the point it only gets harder from there nicely, and that's something they dearly need to learn!
    November 21st, 2010 11:21 PM
  • Thread: Naturopathy
    THAT IS MY POINT! Excellent example. "By the book" a Dr would have considered that, but in application the mind set of Dr's exludes those things and seeks a "pill" to cure it. I'm glad SOMEONE gets it.
    November 14th, 2010 08:04 AM