Saturday, 18 September 2010


From here:

I understand the argument that taxes are wrong but I don’t think that libertarians offer a viable alternative. First off, your claim that the government is completely unaccountable is wrong. We have elections where we can decide we want a change. If you think that the main parties are too close to one another then it’s up to you to form a new party or change the discourse in the existing ones.

Our alternative system is voluntary cooperation. Before slavery was abolished you wouldn’t expect abolitionists to “offer a viable alternative” because some farmers had become used to the slave labour and it might inconvenience them to lose their workers. No, Slavery is wrong, by any empathetic human yardstick, and so it was ended. After that if the plantation owners want to voluntarily offer those people work for a wage they both arrive at, then that’s between them, but slavery is wrong, and so is theft.

I’ll change “completely unaccountable” to “almost completely unaccountable” then. The truth is elections are every 4 years. And just because one candidate gets a majority of “votes” (from people who usually don’t even know what thy’re voting for) it doesn’t make it okay for the minority to be stolen from to pay for things they don’t approve of. In the private sector I can IMMEDIATELY “vote” not to fund something by simply opting out. So no 4 year wait, instead it’s immediate, and no compromising, I can decide EXACTLY what I want to fund.

I often hear that it’s “up to me” to create a new party if I disagree with the existing ones. This is shifting the blame to the victim. If me and my friends all “Vote” that it’s okay to rob you, then you are the victim, and we can hardly ask you to devote every moment of your spare time frantically trying to rally enough support so you’re no longer in the minority and can “vote” not to be stolen from. It’s a crazy idea. Theft is wrong. Tyranny of the majority is wrong. And I’ll pose the same idea back to you: If you think it’s “up to me” to change the system, why can’t I say it’s “up to you” to voluntarily setup your own NHS or Welfare system on the free market and try to persuade people peacefully and voluntarily through persuasion to fund your charity?


VEE6 said...

From the original blog:

"If all of you people genuinely care, then you will help the unfortunate in your community. If you don’t really care, then you can hardly advocate forcing other people to pay for stuff you wouldn’t even pay for yourself."

This reflects my feelings about the Big Government argument. I support my family (although there's only my mother now), and wil continue so to do. She doesn't need welfare handouts because like most right minded individuals I provide the support for her necessary utilities. And I don't mind doing it either.

Anonymous said...

What would she do if she wasn't lucky enough to have you around. Say you were knocked down by the Number 10.

VEE6 said...

That's what insurances and wills are for.

Anonymous said...

What happens if you didn't have anything to leave her and no insurance. She should haves saved enough to look after herself in my opinion.

VEE6 said...

Ok then.

Fascist Hippy said...

"Say you were knocked down by the Number 10"

I think we've all be 'knocked down' by No.10 in recent years!

Anonymous said...

After i pay my bills and taxes i literally have about 10-20 pounds left a month to save.

How am i supposed to save for a pension etc, there are people that need the state to look after them!


If i didnt have to pay 120 in council tax, 140 national insurance and another 250 ish pounds in income tax, tax on all the petrol i buy, VAT on all the goods i buy, 150 a year on the telly tax, plus the taxes my employer has to pay for employing me.

I might actually be able to afford to provide for my own future.