Obama Endangers Israel

[Francisco Ferrer]

With all of your hiding in the dead past making lame excuses and blaming the liberal government and Obama, you've made it perfectly clear that you can't even free yourself from being a slave to the government in the present.

I blame Obama because it wasn't the government in Oslo, Cairo or Columbo that threatened me with prison for not turning over my wealth. It was the government in Washington.

No, I can't free myself at present. Sometimes the bad guys have more firepower than the good guys. Sometimes people like Kira get shot.

And my point all along has been that if you changed how you are living, you could be free.

Really? Tell us exactly what you did in order to get the IRS from taking your income.

The government can't take away your liberty. Obama can't take away your liberty.

But he did. Through the threat of sending me to prison, Obama and his Treasury Dept. got $26,000 from me last year.

You are the only one who has deprived yourself of enjoying your right to liberty by the way you are living right now.

So what exactly did you say in the letter to the IRS to get them to back off?

And if you don't have liberty, you don't deserve it...

...because everyone in America today who lives a life deserving of liberty already has it.

By that stunning logic a business owner who does not have non-arson deserves arson. A woman who does not have non-rape deserves rape.

[moralist]

No, I can't free myself at present.

...and you never will as long as you continue to live the way you do.

Really? Tell us [liberal collective speak ] exactly what you did in order to get the IRS from taking your income.

By personally assuming all of the financial risks and rewards of being an independent American Capitalist entrepreneur, and by becoming my own autonomous business entity, I get to enjoy all of the tax write offs just like any other business. And the taxes I do pay to the government are just another item factored into the cost of doing business and are simply rolled into the cost of products and services I provide to others in the American Capitalist free market.

So by being an American Capitalist producer, I enjoy my God given liberty regardless of the government because the government is NOT the source of that liberty.

There is also another business perk of which I take full advantage... and it is the interaction with other American Capitalist producers who share my ethical values. Within this circle of trust commerce flows freely and each American prospers by helping other Americans to prosper. The goodness of serving others is morally sanctioned by God, and the government can't touch it because goodwill is a treasure stored in Heaven, and no one can ever take it away from you. So I pile up heaps of goodwill treasure in Heaven by doing right by others here on Earth. So prospering on Earth is just the byproduct of the real wealth which is safely stored in Heaven.

You have absolutely no idea of the goodness that can overflow into your life. I literally have fun all day helping others by doing what God called me to do. And the reward for doing what's right is the financial freedom of never having to worry about money for the rest of my life.

As long as the way you live denies the truth of God given liberty right here and now in America... you will always remain a slave of the government just as you deserve. Because that is your "reward" for blaming (unjustly accusing) the government for your own FAILURE to learn how to become an American Capitalist producer.

I got absolutely NO sympathy for ya, Fred... because you only f**ked yourself.

Greg

[Francisco Ferrer]

No, I can't free myself at present.

...and you never will as long as you continue to live the way you do.

Really? Tell us [liberal collective speak ] exactly what you did in order to get the IRS from taking your income.

By personally assuming all of the financial risks and rewards of being an independent American Capitalist entrepreneur, and by becoming my own autonomous business entity, I get to enjoy all of the tax write offs just like any other business.

Most of the American workforce cannot simply declare themselves independent contractors or entrepreneurs. The IRS has repeatedly made this clear:

You are not an independent contractor if you perform services that can be controlled by an employer (what will be done and how it will be done). This applies even if you are given freedom of action. What matters is that the employer has the legal right to control the details of how the services are performed.

If an employer-employee relationship exists (regardless of what the relationship is called), you are not an independent contractor and your earnings are generally not subject to Self-Employment Tax.

The idea that 117,000,000 Americans can simply quit their jobs and overnight become entrepreneurs is no better than saying that the average Jew in Nazi Germany could hop on an airplane to New York. A government that forces a citizen to flee his home or job and rebuild his life is not a free one.

And the taxes I do pay to the government are just another item factored into the cost of doing business and are simply rolled into the cost of products and services I provide to others in the American Capitalist free market.

It makes as much sense as saying that getting raped on campus is simply rolled into the cost of going to college.

Robbery, violence, or the threat of violence is not the free market.

So by being an American Capitalist producer, I enjoy my God given liberty regardless of the government because the government is NOT the source of that liberty.

True, government is not the source of liberty. It is the source of aggression, loss of property, and enslavement.

As long as the way you live denies the truth of God given liberty right here and now in America... you will always remain a slave of the government just as you deserve.

Greg

Since I never denied that there are some liberties still enjoyed by Americans, your premise is in error and your conclusion is false.

Because that is your "reward" for blaming (unjustly accusing) the government for your own FAILURE to learn how to become an American Capitalist producer.

I got absolutely NO sympathy for ya, Fred... because you only f**ked yourself.

Whereas taxes are payments under threat of force and whereas you have already acknowledged that even "American Capitalists" pay some taxes, then the the accusation I have accused the government "unjustly" is false. The only way a tax can be just (i.e. consistent with the natural rights of man) is when it is completely voluntary, at which point it ceases to be a tax.

Furthermore, taxes are only one weapon in the government's arsenal of coercion. There is inflated currency, kidnapping of people for possessing forbidden chemicals or forbidden weapons, forced indoctrination in propaganda factories, monopolization of key industries such as transportation and banking, and thousands upon thousands of unnecessary and often ruinous regulations,

This is not the day after ratification of the Constitution. This is the Founding Fathers' worst nightmare.

Really? Tell us [liberal collective speak ]

If you think it's collectivist for more than one person to read your posts, please take advantage of the private message service and write only to me.

[moralist]

Most of the American workforce cannot simply declare themselves independent contractors or entrepreneurs.

Is that supposed to be an excuse? It's no wonder you don't have what it takes to be free. Being inordinately concerned over what others do is what kills off creative innovation. Anyways, it's not a matter of artificially declaring yourself anything. It's a matter of setting off in your own direction by creating a new business from nothing. Then you already are what you say you are and not the other way around. It's becoming more and more clear that you understand very little about how American Capitalism actually works in the real world. So don't ever give up being an employee. You'd fail if you were on your own.

You are not an independent contractor if you perform services that can be controlled by an employer (what will be done and how it will be done).

That's true. I'm given carte blanche because most people have no idea how to do what I do. Michael had referred to three words:

Autonomy

Mastery

Purpose

Anyone who lacks even just one of those is a slave who is not free.

This applies even if you are given freedom of action. What matters is that the employer has the legal right to control the details of how the services are performed.

So what? All you are affirming is that you have the slave mentality. When you innovate new processes and create new products, there is no one controlling you simply because they do not know what you know by your own personal experience.

If an employer-employee relationship exists (regardless of what the relationship is called), you are not an independent contractor and your earnings are generally not subject to Self-Employment Tax.

You're addressing your comments to someone else and not to me, since I'm a sole proprietor and have paid self employment tax for decades. But I don't pay it. Everyone who buys my products and services pays my taxes for me. It's called "making money". You might do well to read D'Anconia's Money Speech. He makes the case for Capitalistm far better than I ever could.

True, government is not the source of liberty. It is the source of aggression, loss of property, and enslavement.

Yikes. Considering where and when you are living, that comment alone qualifies you to be a slave of the government for the rest of your life.

If you think it's collectivist for more than one person to read your posts, please take advantage of the private message service and write only to me.

This has nothing to do with what others do. It's collectivist groupspeak to use the "Royal We" as if you're the self appointed representative of a group when you aren't. Use of the queenly we reveals a certain weakness in yourself. And it's that very same lack of character which keeps you a slave.

Greg

[Francisco Ferrer]

Most of the American workforce cannot simply declare themselves independent contractors or entrepreneurs.

Is that supposed to be an excuse? It's no wonder you don't have what it takes to be free. Being inordinately concerned over what others do is what kills off creative innovation. Anyways, it's not a matter of artificially declaring yourself anything. It's a matter of setting off in your own direction by creating a new business from nothing. Then you already are what you say you are and not the other way around. It's becoming more and more clear that you understand very little about how American Capitalism actually works in the real world. So don't ever give up being an employee. You'd fail if you were on your own.

The fact some people may be able to reduce their tax burden by independent contracting and entrepreneurship doesn't change the fact that there is still mass theft performed on the workforce through the withholding tax and FICA. By comparison, avoiding a street mugger by buying a car to drive to and from work does not change the fact that it is the mugger who is initiating force, who is limiting freedom. And to tell a victim of the mugger that she is morally at fault because she didn't buy a car is to perform an act of propaganda for the legitimacy of mugging.

Furthermore, the remaining taxes one still has to pay are still a violation of property rights, even if they are reduced. As long as taxes per se are legitimate in the public mind, when one source of revenue dries up, the government will merely increase theft on other sources. This is not difficult to figure out if one spends a little time with "dead history."

And if "capitalism actually works in the real world," we should try it in this country sometime by abolishing government's authority to initiate force.

You are not an independent contractor if you perform services that can be controlled by an employer (what will be done and how it will be done).

That's true. I'm given carte blanche because most people have no idea how to do what I do. Michael had referred to three words:

Autonomy

Mastery

Purpose

Anyone who lacks even just one of those is a slave who is not free.

This applies even if you are given freedom of action. What matters is that the employer has the legal right to control the details of how the services are performed.

So what? All you are affirming is that you have the slave mentality. When you innovate new processes and create new products, there is no one controlling you simply because they do not know what you know by your own personal experience.

If you don't like the slave mentality, let's put the slave masters in jail. No masters, no slaves. Those in government who issue threats, enforce those threats with kidnapping, and take money that they did not earn and that is not rightfully theirs belong in the same institution that houses other violent criminals.

Why should the very act that is forbidden to a private citizen be permitted to a public official?

If an employer-employee relationship exists (regardless of what the relationship is called), you are not an independent contractor and your earnings are generally not subject to Self-Employment Tax.

You're addressing your comments to someone else and not to me, since I'm a sole proprietor and have paid self employment tax for decades. But I don't pay it. Everyone who buys my products and services pays my taxes for me. It's called "making money". You might do well to read D'Anconia's Money Speech. He makes the case for Capitalistm far better than I ever could.

True, government is not the source of liberty. It is the source of aggression, loss of property, and enslavement.

Yikes. Considering where and when you are living, that comment alone qualifies you to be a slave of the government for the rest of your life.

There is no question that government, by forcing the population regularly to surrender a large portion of its wages and income to it, engages in a form of slavery.

Now the fundamental question is by what moral authority would the government forbid this activity to others (Amendment 13), but perform it itself?

Your last sentence above makes it clear that you believe that slavery is legitimate or "qualified" in some cases. So what is the moral foundation? "Might makes right"?

If you think it's collectivist for more than one person to read your posts, please take advantage of the private message service and write only to me.

This has nothing to do with what others do. It's collectivist groupspeak to use the "Royal We" as if you're the self appointed representative of a group when you aren't. Use of the queenly we reveals a certain weakness in yourself. And it's that very same lack of character which keeps you a slave.

Greg

Where is the rule in grammar or in any other subject that elections or appointments have to take place before using the first person plural?

[moralist]

The fact some people may be able to reduce their tax burden by independent contracting and entrepreneurship doesn't change the fact that there is still mass theft performed on the workforce through the withholding tax...

That's for employees.

Businesses don't pay taxes. The end users of the products they make and the services they provide pay all of their taxes including both halves of FICA. Whenever a product is sold or a service is provided for others the taxes are already built into the purchase price. This is the reason I went into business for myself. So even with basically no education and a limited skill set, by my own creative innovation and useful productivity I could create the wealth to buy my economic freedom from slavery to the government. So no matter what the taxes are, they simply get passed on through the business just like any other cost.

This is the beauty of American Capitalism... you can literally make the money to buy your economic freedom. Is suprizes me how you could remain so ignorant of how Capitalism works. You're a product of the government subsidized education system which grooms people to become indentured slaves... not independent American Capitalist entrepreneurs.

Furthermore, the remaining taxes one still has to pay are still a violation of property rights, even if they are reduced.

That's your own fault for not being creatively productive enough to enjoy a good life regardless of taxes. Your government education only prepared you to be a cog in someone else's machine... but not to build your own machine. And you are paying dearly for your own lack of personal creative productivity.

As long as taxes per se are legitimate in the public mind, when one source of revenue dries up, the government will merely increase theft on other sources. This is not difficult to figure out if one spends a little time with "dead history."

But what "dead history" doesn't tell you is how to free yourself.

And if "capitalism actually works in the real world," we should try it in this country sometime by abolishing government's authority to initiate force.

It's completely up to you to make American Capitalism work in your own life. It's your own responsibility to assume the risks and rewards of competing in the American Capitalist free market, to stand or fall completely on your own merit. And if you don't, you pay the price for choosing to be a slave of the government.

And do you know what makes people slaves of the government? The need to feel secure. They need "job security". They need "benefits". They need "insurance". They need "paid vacations". They need "healthcare". They need "disability". They need "retirement".

ALL of these needs created the government you deserve in your own image.

Whenever people need others to pay their bills... they end up paying others bills!

It's perfect moral justice that everyone who seeks the "feeling" of security of being indemnified against every calamity known to man, should be forced to pay for the indemnification of others who seek the same thing they do. It's a big circle jerk of fools all getting exactly what they deserve for enslaving themselves to the need for others to pay their bills.

This applies even if you are given freedom of action. What matters is that the employer has the legal right to control the details of how the services are performed.

You think like a slave and so you are a slave.

In American Capitalism, businessmen deal with each other as peers when they voluntarily choose to enter into mutually beneficial value for value transactions.

If you don't like the slave mentality, let's put the slave masters in jail.

What a silly adolescent utopian fantasy. You are utterly powerless to do that. Decent men learn how to grow in character and are able to prosper even in an indecent world just as it is by learning how to free themselves from it.

No masters, no slaves. Those in government who issue threats, enforce those threats with kidnapping, and take money that they did not earn and that is not rightfully theirs belong in the same institution that houses other violent criminals.

(cue John Lennon singing Imagine...)

There is no question that government, by forcing the population regularly to surrender a large portion of its wages and income to it, engages in a form of slavery.

That is the government people created in their own image, and it is the government they deserve.

Your last sentence above makes it clear that you believe that slavery is legitimate or "qualified" in some cases

No. I believe that in America today, slavery is deserved in all cases. You deserve your slavery to the government by how you chose to live.

Where is the rule in grammar or in any other subject that elections or appointments have to take place before using the first person plural?

There's no "rule". It just reveals a weakness in your character.

Greg

[Francisco Ferrer]

The fact some people may be able to reduce their tax burden by independent contracting and entrepreneurship doesn't change the fact that there is still mass theft performed on the workforce through the withholding tax...

That's for employees.

Businesses don't pay taxes. The end users of the products they make and the services they provide pay all of their taxes including both halves of FICA. Whenever a product is sold or a service is provided for others the taxes are already built into the purchase price. This is the reason I went into business for myself. So even with basically no education and a limited skill set, by my own creative innovation and useful productivity I could create the wealth to buy my economic freedom from slavery to the government. So no matter what the taxes are, they simply get passed on through the business just like any other cost.

This is the beauty of American Capitalism... you can literally make the money to buy your economic freedom. Is suprizes me how you could remain so ignorant of how Capitalism works. You're a product of the government subsidized education system which grooms people to become indentured slaves... not independent American Capitalist entrepreneurs.

Businesses do not operate in a bubble free from the effects of government policy. The idea that businesses can simply shift all of their taxes forward is a myth exploded by Murry Rothbard in Power and Market. At certain levels taxes destroy the market and the civilization that depends on it. Read Bruce Bartlett's "How Excessive Government Killed Ancient Rome."

As for the moral foundations of capitalism, read Ayn Rand's Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, which is not taught in any public school I know of. In that volume you find the essay "Man's Rights," wherein she explains that "A civilized society is one in which physical force is banned from human relationships—in which the government, acting as a policeman, may use force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use."

Now, if under true capitalism, physical forced is banned from human relationships, then the government may not use or threaten force in order to fund itself. Taxes, including the income tax would be abolished.

The economic system we live under is a mixed economy: a combination of property that is under government control and property that is under limited private control. Such a system allows men and women with government titles to seize private wealth and use it as they see fit. This activity has no moral distinction from highway robbery.

Since you have already acknowledged that taxation is a feature of the the status quo, there can be do dispute that productive class is forced to surrender a portion of its wealth at the point of a gun. This is morally indefensible.

Quote

Furthermore, the remaining taxes one still has to pay are still a violation of property rights, even if they are reduced.

That's your own fault for not being creatively productive enough to enjoy a good life regardless of taxes. Your government education only prepared you to be a cog in someone else's machine... but not to build your own machine. And you are paying dearly for your own lack of personal creative productivity.

The moral responsibility for the initiation of force lies entirely with the perpetrator. If a woman forgets to latch her door and her purse is stolen, she may fault herself for not being more careful. But the point remains that by any measure of justice the purse belongs to her, not the thief. The thief did not earn it. The thief does not deserve it. Any society that is concerned with rights would require that he return it.

Now the same principle holds with regard to taxation. We can fault ourselves for not finding enough loopholes and deductions. But the underlying principle is that the rulers have no moral title to anyone's wealth taken through force.

Quote

But what "dead history" doesn't tell you is how to free yourself.

Quote

It's completely up to you to make American Capitalism work in your own life. It's your own responsibility to assume the risks and rewards of competing in the American Capitalist free market, to stand or fall completely on your own merit. And if you don't, you pay the price for choosing to be a slave of the government.

And do you know what makes people slaves of the government? The need to feel secure. They need "job security". They need "benefits". They need "insurance". They need "paid vacations". They need "healthcare". They need "disability". They need "retirement".

They are not entitled to any of those things if they are funded through taxation.

ALL of these needs created the government you deserve in your own image.

Whenever people need others to pay their bills... they end up paying others bills!

Since my image is one who does not steal and pays his own bills, the government I deserve is one that doesn't steal and pays its own bills.

It's perfect moral justice that everyone who seeks the "feeling" of security of being indemnified against every calamity known to man, should be forced to pay for the indemnification of others who seek the same thing they do. It's a big circle jerk of fools all getting exactly what they deserve for enslaving themselves to the need for others to pay their bills.

Since I do not break the Commandment "Thou Shall Not Steal," perfect moral justice is that I not be stolen from.

Quote

This applies even if you are given freedom of action. What matters is that the employer has the legal right to control the details of how the services are performed.

You think like a slave and so you are a slave.

In American Capitalism, businessmen deal with each other as peers when they voluntarily choose to enter into mutually beneficial value for value transactions.

Pretending that something is true won't make it true. Pretending that the government does not take a portion of earners' incomes won't make the IRS vanish.

Quote

If you don't like the slave mentality, let's put the slave masters in jail.

What a silly adolescent utopian fantasy. You are utterly powerless to do that. Decent men learn how to grow in character and are able to prosper even in an indecent world just as it is by learning how to free themselves from it.

Decent men spread the philosophy of individual rights and limited government. Decent men then become men in large numbers, powerful enough to control their political destiny. This is no utopian fantasy, but the historical record of how this country was founded. But perhaps this is something you'll never know because of your aversion to the "dead past."

Quote

There is no question that government, by forcing the population regularly to surrender a large portion of its wages and income to it, engages in a form of slavery.

That is the government people created in their own image, and it is the government they deserve.

Then let those who created and continue the income tax be the ones to pay it.

Quote

Your last sentence above makes it clear that you believe that slavery is legitimate or "qualified" in some cases

No. I believe that in America today, slavery is deserved in all cases. You deserve your slavery to the government by how you chose to live.

If slavery is deserved in all cases, then perhaps torture is deserved in all cases. And murder. And rape. And child abuse.

Quote

Where is the rule in grammar or in any other subject that elections or appointments have to take place before using the first person plural?

There's no "rule". It just reveals a weakness in your character.

Greg

Then the author of "We the People . . ." must also have had a weak character.

[moralist]

Businesses do not operate in a bubble free from the effects of government policy. The idea that businesses can simply shift all of their taxes forward is a myth...

I'm totally different from you in my approach to life, Fred. I don't just passivly read about business. I'm actively in business... and all of my taxes get passed on to the clients just like every other cost of doing business. I'm productive enough to make a decent profit after all expenses are paid.

You know... the more you post, the more you're making it clear that you don't have the slightest idea of what it means to make money.

Since you have already acknowledged that taxation is a feature of the the status quo, there can be do dispute that productive class is forced to surrender a portion of its wealth at the point of a gun. This is morally indefensible.

I run highly productive and efficient businesses so what you can only complain about doesn't even matter to me, because all of my taxes get passed on to the end users. And if you chose to break free from your own self imposed slavery and also became an American Capitalist producer, you could do exactly the same...

...but it's already obvious from the nature of your comments that you choose to remain a victim, because inherent in all of your complaining and blaming is the intellectual justification for your slavery to the government.

The moral responsibility for the initiation of force lies entirely with the perpetrator.

Your moral responsibility is to withhold your sanction to become the victim of the government. So it's your own fault for making yourself fair game to the government you deserve.

Now the same principle holds with regard to taxation. We can fault ourselves for not finding enough loopholes and deductions.

You can only fault yourself for failing to become an American Capitalist producer. You chose the path your walking on. So those rocks you're complaining about are on the path that you chose.

Actions have consequences. And unless you connect what happens to you to what you are doing to make it happen, you'll remain a slave just as you are right now... and there is no one who can save you from yourself.

Since my image is one who does not steal and pays his own bills, the government I deserve is one that doesn't steal and pays its own bills.

Your image is of an unproductive slave who deserves the government you are getting right now.

Since I do not break the Commandment "Thou Shall Not Steal," perfect moral justice is that I not be stolen from.

You stole liberty from yourself by how you are living right now,

and you don't have liberty because you don't deserve it.

quote]

Decent men spread the philosophy of individual rights and limited government.

Decent men live it by securing those individual rights for themselves. You can only talk... you can't do. And that's why you're a slave waiting in vain for other men to come and save you from what you yourself have created.

If slavery is deserved in all cases, then perhaps torture is deserved in all cases. And murder. And rape. And child abuse.

You're being silly now.

Then the author of "We the People . . ." must also have had a weak character.

No.

They were duly elected by Americans as spokespersons for Americans... while you are not. You can't even rightly speak on behalf of American Capitalism because you aren't one.

If you ever want your words to have any persuasive force, you need to first become them. Only then will what you are have a beneficial effect upon the world around you.

You fail to speak convincingly of freedom, because you're so weak you can't even free yourself.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

Taxes on earnings or profits are not passed on to your customers.

--Brant

[moralist]

Taxes on earnings or profits are not passed on to your customers.

--Brant

Sure they are, Brant.

You just make more profit to cover the taxes on it. I also understand that as an end user, I'm paying all of the taxes and business costs of the businesses for every product and service that I buy. And I'm totally ok with that, because producing far more than consuming is what makes it possible to operate in the business world from the sound economic foundation of 100% solvency.

The practical real world answer to every concern about enjoying economic freedom from the government can be answered by the act of creating wealth through productivity and creative innovation as an independent American Capitalist entrepreneur.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

Sure they are, Brant.

You just make more profit to cover the taxes on it. I also understand that as an end user, I'm paying all of the taxes and business costs of the businesses for every product and service that I buy. And I'm totally ok with that, because producing far more than consuming is what makes it possible to operate in the business world from the sound economic foundation of 100% solvency.

The practical real world answer to every concern about enjoying economic freedom from the government can be answered by the act of creating wealth through productivity and creative innovation as an independent American Capitalist entrepreneur.

Greg

You start out with some good stuff, but a little contrariness and you resort to rationalization.

You only imagine you can increase your prices to cover taxes. Increasing prices sends your customers to other vendors. If you have pricing power, which is possible, taxes on your earnings are taxes on your pricing power, the value of your labor. This makes you a self-deluded slave to the state running around telling one and all (who might inquire and a few who might not), "I'm free! I'm free!" (and you're not for you are paying my taxes if you pay me for anything).

--Brant

why bother with the Tea Party?

this parallels the circularity--insularity--of all your arguments for your social comportment (I'm free; you're not; it's your fault you aren't [but you aren't, Jack (I mean, Greg)]).

[Francisco Ferrer]

Businesses do not operate in a bubble free from the effects of government policy. The idea that businesses can simply shift all of their taxes forward is a myth...

I'm totally different from you in my approach to life, Fred. I don't just passivly read about business. I'm actively in business... and all of my taxes get passed on to the clients just like every other cost of doing business. I'm productive enough to make a decent profit after all expenses are paid.

You know... the more you post, the more you're making it clear that you don't have the slightest idea of what it means to make money.

If every capitalist could simply pass his taxes forward, then this would be the answer to the question of how to solve the government's crisis of debt. The government could calculate what it would cost to pay off the debt in five years and then raise corporate income taxes accordingly. An automobile that cost $50,000 might now cost $100,000 or $200,000 or $500,000. Too high? Not a problem. Everybody else will be passing on the costs of his higher taxes to someone else who will pass it on to someone else ad infinitum and thus everything will work out just fine. Right?

The supply of wealth available to the government would be limitless.

Since you have already acknowledged that taxation is a feature of the the status quo, there can be do dispute that productive class is forced to surrender a portion of its wealth at the point of a gun. This is morally indefensible.

I run highly productive and efficient businesses so what you can only complain about doesn't even matter to me, because all of my taxes get passed on to the end users. And if you chose to break free from your own self imposed slavery and also became an American Capitalist producer, you could do exactly the same...

...but it's already obvious from the nature of your comments that you choose to remain a victim, because inherent in all of your complaining and blaming is the intellectual justification for your slavery to the government.

If tax slavery is truly self-imposed why is it necessary to send armed federal marshals to apprehend non-payers? Perhaps you're confusing taxation with the community chest.

The moral responsibility for the initiation of force lies entirely with the perpetrator.

Your moral responsibility is to withhold your sanction to become the victim of the government. So it's your own fault for making yourself fair game to the government you deserve.

My moral responsibility is to build a movement of freedom-loving men and women who will put hard limits on the government and prevent it from engaging in the same activities that it prohibits others from doing.

Since you have not told us how to remove 100% of taxes, we still need to address ending the practice of legalized theft in this country.

Now the same principle holds with regard to taxation. We can fault ourselves for not finding enough loopholes and deductions.

You can only fault yourself for failing to become an American Capitalist producer. You chose the path your walking on. So those rocks you're complaining about are on the path that you chose.

Actions have consequences. And unless you connect what happens to you to what you are doing to make it happen, you'll remain a slave just as you are right now... and there is no one who can save you from yourself.

You speak sympathetically of capitalism, but also of slavery. You have written previously: "I believe that in America today, slavery is deserved in all cases."

Understand that capitalism and slavery are completely incompatible. One requires free labor, the other forced labor. One is based on persuasion, the other on violence. To the extent that you support capitalism, you oppose slavery. To the extent that you support slavery, you oppose capitalism.

Since my image is one who does not steal and pays his own bills, the government I deserve is one that doesn't steal and pays its own bills.

Your image is of an unproductive slave who deserves the government you are getting right now.

If my image is of someone who is unproductive, why do I fill out an amount greater than zero for "tips wages, and earnings" on my 1040 form?

And if some people deserve slavery, why should slavery be outlawed by the government? Perhaps you think America was better off when it was common in the American South for one man to own another? Didn't those slaves "deserve" what they got? Perhaps you favor the repeal of the 13th Amendment so that more people can get what they "deserve."

Since I do not break the Commandment "Thou Shall Not Steal," perfect moral justice is that I not be stolen from.

You stole liberty from yourself by how you are living right now,

and you don't have liberty because you don't deserve it.

If people who have had money taken from them by force deserve the loss of that money, then surely you favor the release or robbers and burglars and fraudsters from prison. Those who take money from others, according to your view, would be performing an act of justice. If people who lose their property do not deserve it, then it follows that those who took it deserve it and should not be punished.

Decent men live it by securing those individual rights for themselves. You can only talk... you can't do. And that's why you're a slave waiting in vain for other men to come and save you from what you yourself have created.

If I "can't do," then why were the movements that I contributed to and worked for, ending the draft and legalizing gold, successful? I did not wait in vain. I helped make freedom happen.

Similarly, I am working now to promote the philosophy of capitalism (the non-slavery kind) and individual rights because, as Ayn Rand has pointed out, philosophical change must come before political change.

If slavery is deserved in all cases, then perhaps torture is deserved in all cases. And murder. And rape. And child abuse.

You're being silly now.

You have already made it clear that you endorse slavery: "I believe that in America today, slavery is deserved in all cases."

So now it is only a question of what other rights violations you also endorse. If it is permissible for one person to rob and enslave another, if the victims of robbery and slavery "deserve" it, then it would logically follow that other rights violations such as rape would also be just and deserved.

They were duly elected by Americans as spokespersons for Americans... while you are not. You can't even rightly speak on behalf of American Capitalism because you aren't one.

Then nobody took the trouble to explain to you the connection between the stock and bond market and capitalism.

If you ever want your words to have any persuasive force, you need to first become them. Only then will what you are have a beneficial effect upon the world around you.

You fail to speak convincingly of freedom, because you're so weak you can't even free yourself.

Greg

I am not opposed to loopholes and deductions; I take full advantage of them. What I am interested in promoting is the non-initiation of force. Yes, it is appropriate to avoid others who would attack and rob you. It is not appropriate to treat attacks and robbery as just and deserved--especially in what is thought to be a capitalist society.

[moralist]

You start out with some good stuff, but a little contrariness and you resort to rationalization.

You only imagine you can increase your prices to cover taxes. Increasing prices sends your customers to other vendors.

Not when other businesses do exactly the same thing I do... and they do. And my businesses enjoy an advantage that most others don't have. My businesses have no debt burden to service, so it's very easy for me to be extremely competitive without needing to sacrifice my profits.

Prices are almost always going up for everything we buy today, so the only way to prosper regardless of the economic environment is to produce more than you consume. In this way your boat is always floating on the surface of the economic sea no matter what level the tide happens to be... because you retain PARITY between the cost of what you buy and the cost of what you sell. The value of the dollars you need to buy always remains the same as the amount of dollars you get from selling, so the absolute value of those dollars in any given moment becomes irrelevant as long as you produce more than you consume.

If you have pricing power, which is possible, taxes on your earnings are taxes on your pricing power, the value of your labor.

So what? (see "parity" above...)

This makes you a self-deluded slave to the state...

When you're a slave... it's perfectly natural to assume that everyone else is also. But that is not the case. For the last 34 years, this "self-deluded slave to the state" created businesses from nothing, bought land, and built homes... and all without incurring one penny of debt. The American Capitalist free market is my school and I'm an autodidact. The practical real world experience I acquired over the decades has set me free.

It could also set you free if you chose to walk the same path.

So now who is the slave?

running around telling one and all (who might inquire and a few who might not), "I'm free! I'm free!" (and you're not for you are paying my taxes if you pay me for anything).

You avoided mentioning the other side of the moral equation, so I will. I also pay all of the taxes of everyone who produces what I buy, so it's a fair deal all around.

Freedom is living a good life even surrounded by an evil world. All that matters is that it is good within my personal sphere of influence, because that is my responsibility as it is completely under my control. Everything else is the responsibility of others and is under their control. So I don't need to wait around for the world to change to live a good life when I can already do that just as it is right now. This is the most important aspect of freedom...

...freedom from circumstances.

Ever hear the people on the Dave Ramsey radio show shout "I'm debt free"!? I'm a big fan of Dave and the economic principles he expresses, because he also shares my moral values and is also a Christian. He is also a highly successful businessman, and I really respect that, because his financial success is an expression of his moral values which he values higher than money.

What most people do not realize is that there is a bond of moral values to wealth creation. Capitalism does not work when people are not decent honest reliable trustworthy responsible competent productive solvent and frugal.

There is an inviolable link between your freedom and your economic freedom. It is impossible for you to enjoy one without the other, because it is impossible for you to you to enjoy freedom without securing your economic freedom.

--Brant

why bother with the Tea Party?

The Tea Party is the public political expression of my values, and I would like others to also learn how to be Americans so that they could enjoy the same freedoms I enjoy...

...and we'll be out in force on the streets on Tax Day 2014!

this parallels the circularity--insularity--of all your arguments for your social comportment (I'm free; you're not; it's your fault you aren't [but you aren't, Jack (I mean, Greg)]).

Inherent to your own freedom is growing to realize the connection between what you do and what happens to you because of what you do.

In America today... no one who fails to live a life deserving of liberty will ever enjoy it. This is because it is God who grants that right to liberty, and God is not fooled by fakers.

So exactly whose fault is it if you're not free?

Greg

[Peter]

From The Times of Israel, March 22, 2014:

. . . . Specifically, the report said, Abbas rejected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s demand that he recognize Israel as a Jewish state. He also refused to abandon the Palestinian demand for a “right of return” for millions of Palestinians and their descendants — a demand that, if implemented, would drastically alter Israel’s demographic balance and which no conceivable Israeli government would accept. And finally, he refused to commit to an “end of conflict,” under which a peace deal would represent the termination of any further Palestinian demands of Israel.

end quote

So it appears there will be no peace in Obama’s second term. And Israel found another large “terrorist” tunnel that stretches hundreds of meters into Israel. When Iran gets a nuclear bomb they have promised to immediately set it off over (or under) Israel. Palestinian hated of Israel probably means they are willing to accept their own casualties if a bomb goes off as long as it kills Jews.

[Brant Gaede]

Greg has figured out how to zero cost government--all governments and governing it'd seem.

--Brant

genius is where you find it

[moralist]

Greg has figured out how to zero cost government--all governments and governing it'd seem.

--Brant

genius is where you find it

The government doesn't need to govern Americans who govern themselves, because both the government and Americans answer to the same moral law...

...and so they get the government they deserve. One that leaves them alone.

However, those who don't govern themselves have already granted the government their sanction to become its victims...

...and they also get the government they deserve. One that won't leave them alone.

Greg

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

What's wrong with a business passing the tax cost of its products on to the customers?

Aren't they the ones who voted in the dudes and dudesses who came up with those taxes in the first place?

Dayaamm!

I'm starting to sound like Greg.

The next thing you know, I'll be saying the customers get exactly what they deserve.

Michael

[moralist]

What's wrong with a business passing the tax cost of its products on to the customers?

Aren't they the ones who voted in the dudes and dudesses who came up with those taxes in the first place?

Big business is definitely in bed with big government. But since I have absolutely no power to affect that relationship because it is totally outside of my personal sphere of influence, my response is to create small independent productive businesses so as to also be able to pass my tax costs on to my clients. In this way I also get to enjoy some of the same tax advantages the big businesses enjoy even though I have zero clout with the government.

The best way to support American Capitalism is to BECOME one.

Dayaamm!

I'm starting to sound like Greg.

The next thing you know, I'll be saying the customers get exactly what they deserve.

Michael

Customers do get what they pay for. But a good business always gives the customer more than they pay for.

Greg

[Peter]

Comedian Dennis Miller on Israel

A brief overview of the situation is always valuable, so as a service to all Americans who still don't get it, I now offer you the story of the Middle East in just a few paragraphs, which is all you really need. Don't thank me.

I'm a giver. Here we go:

The Palestinians want their own country. There's just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It's a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like "Wiccan," "Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, and there were no "Palestinians" then, and the West Bank was owned by Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians" then. As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the Palestinians," weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation."

So for the sake of honesty, let's not use the word "Palestinian" any more to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our deaths until someone points out they're being taped. Instead, let's call them what they are: "Other Arabs Who Can't Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death."

I know that's a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN. How about this, then: Adjacent Jew-Haters." Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David. But if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. That's no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel.

They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course -- that's where the real fun is -- but mostly they want Israel. Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel - or "The Zionist Entity" as their textbooks call it -- for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they're the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been around God's Earth, you know that's really saying something.

It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Mideast. Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one.

Chew this around and spit it out: Five hundred million Arabs; five million Jews.

Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it. And now these same folks swear that if Israel gives them half of that pack of matches, everyone will be pals.

Really? Wow, what neat news. Hey, but what about the string of wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea? Oh, that? We were just kidding.

My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab State into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

Mr. Bush, God bless him, is walking a tightrope. I understand that with vital operations coming up against Iraq and others, it's in our interest, as Americans, to try to stabilize our Arab allies as much as possible, and, after all, that can't be much harder than stabilizing a roomful of supermodels who've just had their drugs taken away.

However, in any big-picture strategy, there's always a danger of losing moral weight.

We've already lost some. After September 11 our president told us and the world he was going to root out all terrorists and the countries that supported them. Beautiful. Then the Israelis, after months and months of having the equivalent of an Oklahoma City every week (and then every day) start to do the same thing we did, and we tell them to show restraint.

If America were being attacked with an Oklahoma City every day, we would all very shortly be screaming for the administration to just be done with it and kill everything south of the Mediterranean and east of the Jordan. (Hey, wait a minute, that's actually not such a bad id . . . ooh, that is, what a horrible thought, yeah, horrible.)

[Brant Gaede]

The continuous idea is to expell the "Jewish entity" and the Muslim nations in the Middle East will never publicly let go of that locus-focus regardless of what they might do short and intermediate term behind the scenes. They may at best from time to time not mention it. Thus Israel is on perpetual war footing perpetually fighting, too hard a nut to crack. That's okay, because if the "entity" is rid of then those countries and sects will only have each other to beat up on as is going on right now in Syria. Everybody needs the lightning rod of Israel, even the United Staes, for the more crap that gets thrown at Israel means the less thrown at others. 9/11 was a brilliant, inexpensive sucker play to broaden out this to a Muslim-Christian war with the U.S. bleeding its moral, political, economic and military wealth all over the world with its stupid, unwinnable, "war on terror."

--Brant

now let's do the Ukraine (old dance, new name)

[Peter]

This is a brief history that might be of interest to those reading this thread on Israel. I had this somewhere else but I think I deleted it. There are several questions that need clarification. Who has a right to live in Israel? Was Israel’s creation in 1948, just? Which single Constitution or multiple principles of governance should be used? Can two governments exist within the same territory, like a state within a nation? Who owns the private property? What would occur if a million Palestinians some who were not born in that region, immigrate to the territory called Israel?

Here is some background. From Wikipedia:

Although coming under the sway of various empires and home to a variety of ethnicities, the area of ancient Israel was predominantly Jewish until the Jewish-Roman wars after which Jews became a minority in most regions, except Galilee. The area became increasingly Christian after the 3rd century and then largely Muslim from the 7th century conquest until well past the middle of the 20th century. It was a focal point of conflict between Christianity and Islam between 1096 and 1291, and from the end of the Crusades until the British conquest in 1917 was part of the Syrian province of first the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt and then (from 1517) the Ottoman Empire.

In the late-19th century, persecution of Jews, particularly in Europe, led to the creation of the Zionist movement. Following the British conquest of Syria, the Balfour Declaration in World War I and the formation of the Mandate of Palestine, Aliyah Jewish immigration to the Land of Israel) increased and gave rise to Arab-Jewish tensions, and a collision of the Arab and Jewish nationalist movements. Israeli independence in 1948 was marked by massive migration of Jews from both Europe and the Muslim countries to Israel, and of Arabs from Israel leading to the extensive Arab-Israeli conflict. About 42% of the world’s Jews live in Israel today . . . .

The Palestinian right of return is a political position or principle asserting that Palestinian refugees, both first-generation refugees and their descendants, have a right to return, and a right to the property they or their forebears left or which they were forced to leave in what is now Israel and the Palestinian territories (formerly part of the British Manddate of Palestine), as part of the 1948 Palestinian exodus, a result of the 1948 Palestine war and due to the 1957 Six-Day War. Proponents of the right of return hold that it is a "sacred" right, as well as an inalienable and basic human right, whose applicability both generally and specifically to the Palestinians is protected under international law. This view holds that those who opt not to return or for whom return is not feasible, should receive compensation in lieu. Opponents of the right of return hold that there is no basis for it in international law, and that it is an unrealistic demand.

The government of Israel regards the claim as a Palestinian ambit claim, and does not view the admission of Palestinian refugees to their former homes in Israel as a right, but rather as a political claim to be resolved as part of a final peace settlement. Other disputed aspects include the issue of the territorial unit to which Palestinian self-determination would attach, the context (whether primarily humanitarian or political) by which the right is being advanced, and the universality of the principles advocated or established to other (current and former) refugee situations.

end quote

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab State into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

Peter,

That's very perceptive.

That argument needs wider exposure.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab State into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

Peter,

That's very perceptive.

That argument needs wider exposure.

Michael

Sorry I didn't read that a little closer. Quite the observation. Everybody, however, should think this through a lot more thoroughly and not just acknowledge the seemingly obvious. I mean, what would Hitler or Europe have done with a billion Jews 80 years ago and what would Europe have been like then. Etc. Hint: no Hitler, etc.

--Brant

[moralist]

My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab State into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

That most excellent point strikes at the heart of the lie of moral equivalence between Jews and Moslems. There's just no comparison.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab State into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death.

That most excellent point strikes at the heart of the lie of moral equivalence between Jews and Moslems. There's just no comparison.

Greg

But might not that shift if there were 500 million Jows vs 5 million Muslims?

--Brant