Stealing is moral?

[mixand]

And anybody can go to Linux instead of windows but more people use windows.. it's the standard.

I was at a private school for half of my school life and the other half was at a public school. I know what is better.. but if private (or home) school was the only option then there would be more private schools which would mean more competition equaling lower costs and better quality. At the moment a lot of private schools are here for parents who want religion at school. If it was all private there would be a lot more different types and you wouldn't have to go to one school just because you live in that area.

[Guthorm]

I believe in voluntarism.. which is basically anarcho-capialism.

What have I said that makes me sound like I think stealing isn't wrong? The first thing I stated was that stealing is wrong..

Only I can say what is for my own good. And only you can say what is good for you.. "Public" services are just monopolies.

 

The form of government you purpose is extremely inefficient, but that is another point.

 

Are you seriously telling me that paying taxes is not good? You think all the services available to you are not paid by the taxes? Just how do you think roads and school are been built?

 

Also no, public service is not a monopoly.

 

I get these services by paying taxes. Which is like being forced by a company to shop their and only there.. or go to jail. If there was no government then I would be getting the services I want from competing businesses. If they fail they are shutdown so they have to actually succeed to stay in business, unlike the government..

 

I think I already demonstrated the fact that paying taxes is called obeying the law, there is a difference. Also no, you do not receive these services by paying taxes, you receive these services because EVERYONE pays taxes. There is only so much resources one person can utilize.

 

If everything was run by competing businesses, then we would have a country run by the rich. Monopolies would form because there is no government regulation, environment would be destroyed because there is no government regulation, interest rates on loans would be butt load high, because guess what? There is no government regulation. The services you use every day would be much more expensive because the monopolies charge ridiculous amount of money or guess what? There will be no police, no libraries, no courts, etc etc unless you freaking pay for them. Do you see now why having everything run by competing businesses even in a competitive market is a really bad thing?

 

Name one thing no private business can't do as good as the government.

Enforcing the law, otherwise known as police work/station.

[SeanyTheSailor]

You're probably right in that the private sector can do anything better than the government but some things they shouldn't, such as law.

[Sy_Accursed]

Private companies suck at giving healthcare to those who need it most

[Danqazmlp]

Mixland, the problem here is that you can't be reasoned with imo. Taxes and established governments with laws have separated us from the Middle ages, and have given the majority of people in developed countries much much better qualities of life.

 

Personally, I wouldn't mind paying a few % higher taxes, as I see daily where the Gov. has run short of money. You would be amazed how much this country (the UK) would advance if we all paid an extra 10% income tax. I get very hesitant when a political party says they want to lower taxes in the run-up to elections, as I know it just means spending cuts.

 

 

If you truly think paying taxes is stealing, leave. Nobody is forcing you to stay in the country with taxes, but you will see a higher difference in welfare when you enter a country that has much more relaxed taxation policies.

[Guthorm]

And anybody can go to Linux instead of windows but more people use windows.. it's the standard.

I was at a private school for half of my school life and the other half was at a public school. I know what is better.. but if private (or home) school was the only option then there would be more private schools which would mean more competition equaling lower costs and better quality. At the moment a lot of private schools are here for parents who want religion at school. If it was all private there would be a lot more different types and you wouldn't have to go to one school just because you live in that area.

 

The only reason private school is better is because they cost more, therefore they have the better teachers and more resources etc etc. There is also the fact there are much less private schools than public schools. If private school become the only option, then many more children would be kicked out of school because they cannot afford it. If private schools were forced to compete with lowered cost, then they lose the only advantage they have over public schools, money.

 

You're probably right in that the private sector can do anything better than the government but some things they shouldn't, such as law.

 

What? You really believe businesses can do EVERYTHING better than the government? You do realize the motive difference between the government and businesses right? The motive of businesses to do anything is to make a profit, and point of having a government is to ensure a growing country, businesses are not looking out for everyone, they are looking out for themselves.

[funnisam]

Because its not stealing?

 

Taxes are taken from all working citizens to pay for health care education etc etc.

 

In fact based on what a government has spent on you from when you were concieved to the time u start paying taxes you probably owe them a hell of alot more than u'll ever pay in taxes.

 

That couldn't be logically true for everyone though, otherwise the government would be very poor...

 

They owe hundreds of billions.

[SeanyTheSailor]

Private companies suck at giving healthcare to those who need it most

What makes you think the government would be better? Have you actually seen how Canada's system works?

[mixand]

I believe in voluntarism.. which is basically anarcho-capialism.

What have I said that makes me sound like I think stealing isn't wrong? The first thing I stated was that stealing is wrong..

Only I can say what is for my own good. And only you can say what is good for you.. "Public" services are just monopolies.

 

The form of government you purpose is extremely inefficient, but that is another point.

 

Are you seriously telling me that paying taxes is not good? You think all the services available to you are not paid by the taxes? Just how do you think roads and school are been built?

 

Also no, public service is not a monopoly.

 

I get these services by paying taxes. Which is like being forced by a company to shop their and only there.. or go to jail. If there was no government then I would be getting the services I want from competing businesses. If they fail they are shutdown so they have to actually succeed to stay in business, unlike the government..

 

I think I already demonstrated the fact that paying taxes is called obeying the law, there is a difference. Also no, you do not receive these services by paying taxes, you receive these services because EVERYONE pays taxes. There is only so much resources one person can utilize.

 

If everything was run by competing businesses, then we would have a country run by the rich. Monopolies would form because there is no government regulation, environment would be destroyed because there is no government regulation, interest rates on loans would be butt load high, because guess what? There is no government regulation. The services you use every day would be much more expensive because the monopolies charge ridiculous amount of money or guess what? There will be no police, no libraries, no courts, etc etc unless you freaking pay for them. Do you see now why having everything run by competing businesses even in a competitive market is a really bad thing?

 

Name one thing no private business can't do as good as the government.

Enforcing the law, otherwise known as police work/station.

The less of the resources the higher the price and the more willingness for them to conserve it.

 

Everything you said is a bunch of cliches.

Why exactly would there be monopilies? If you can't force competing businesses out of the market then the ones at the top got there by making the best product or having the best service for the lowest price.

 

Prices are based on supply and demand. If a company wanted to sell a hamburger for $30 then another company would come in and start selling it for $20.. and then so on until it is the lowest price that is still profitable. There would be police. You might pay to live in a neighborhood which has private security or defend yourself.

Why would there be no libraries or courts? Every single thing can be payed for.. nothing is free.

 

Oh because we have a perfect system right now..

[SeanyTheSailor]

And anybody can go to Linux instead of windows but more people use windows.. it's the standard.

I was at a private school for half of my school life and the other half was at a public school. I know what is better.. but if private (or home) school was the only option then there would be more private schools which would mean more competition equaling lower costs and better quality. At the moment a lot of private schools are here for parents who want religion at school. If it was all private there would be a lot more different types and you wouldn't have to go to one school just because you live in that area.

 

The only reason private school is better is because they cost more, therefore they have the better teachers and more resources etc etc. There is also the fact there are much less private schools than public schools. If private school become the only option, then many more children would be kicked out of school because they cannot afford it. If private schools were forced to compete with lowered cost, then they lose the only advantage they have over public schools, money.

 

You're probably right in that the private sector can do anything better than the government but some things they shouldn't, such as law.

 

What? You really believe businesses can do EVERYTHING better than the government? You do realize the motive difference between the government and businesses right? The motive of businesses to do anything is to make a profit, and point of having a government is to ensure a growing country, businesses are not looking out for everyone, they are looking out for themselves.

 

I don't need the government humping my shoulder to make sure I do well in this world. Also some examples of private being more efficient than public. Space Ship One, Blackwater security, and I'm sure there are other's I haven't heard about.

[Sy_Accursed]

Private companies suck at giving healthcare to those who need it most

What makes you think the government would be better? Have you actually seen how Canada's system works?

 

UK system works pretty well. Yes we have issues with waiting lists and such, but you can get any medical treatment you NEED (not want so no boob jobs etc) free.

 

None of this you need a new heart or youll die but ur insurance wont pay for it so nice to see ya bs

[dsavi]

And anybody can go to Linux instead of windows but more people use windows.. it's the standard.

Not only does Linux happen to be the standard for servers and supercomputers, but Linux is like public school in the way that everyone contributes for the benefit of everyone, and Windows' development is privately funded. That analogy doesn't really work.

I was at a private school for half of my school life and the other half was at a public school. I know what is better..

I'm not really sure which you think is better, but the quality of education in different types (Public or private) varies so much from country to country that you can't really say that; Finland's education is among the best in the world, and is almost exclusively public.

but if private (or home) school was the only option then there would be more private schools which would mean more competition equaling lower costs and better quality. At the moment a lot of private schools are here for parents who want religion at school. If it was all private there would be a lot more different types and you wouldn't have to go to one school just because you live in that area.

Cost is almost always proportional to quality, especially in schools. Less cost, less teachers, less material, less electives...

 

And in addition to that, Finland has high taxes, but free schooling up to University level and healthcare. Taxes would indeed be stealing if "taking your money" is where it ended.

[Sy_Accursed]

Mixland, the problem here is that you can't be reasoned with imo. Taxes and established governments with laws have separated us from the Middle ages, and have given the majority of people in developed countries much much better qualities of life.

 

Personally, I wouldn't mind paying a few % higher taxes, as I see daily where the Gov. has run short of money. You would be amazed how much this country (the UK) would advance if we all paid an extra 10% income tax. I get very hesitant when a political party says they want to lower taxes in the run-up to elections, as I know it just means spending cuts.

 

 

If you truly think paying taxes is stealing, leave. Nobody is forcing you to stay in the country with taxes, but you will see a higher difference in welfare when you enter a country that has much more relaxed taxation policies.

 

While its true that more taxes would improve things loads.

10% on everyone will make things worse not better, we need to tax the rich more. Yes they might whine they have to pay 25% tax or w/e but really 25% of 1mil a yr? would u even notice it?

 

If you taxed everyone 10% more you'd be screwed. As it stands in uk the dole gives better standard of living than fulltime minimum wage, 10% tax more and mimimum wage is unlivable.

Even on alot of mid-range earners 10% would ruin them. Eg my mother 10% more icnome tax and she can't pay the mortgage any more so she'd have to the claim support from the government.

Statistically speaking its proven taxing EVERYONE 10% more would put so many people in substantially worse places that the 10% tax increase wouldnt even cover the extra government support needed for people to carry on living.

[SeanyTheSailor]

Private companies suck at giving healthcare to those who need it most

What makes you think the government would be better? Have you actually seen how Canada's system works?

 

UK system works pretty well. Yes we have issues with waiting lists and such, but you can get any medical treatment you NEED (not want so no boob jobs etc) free.

 

None of this you need a new heart or youll die but ur insurance wont pay for it so nice to see ya bs

Ok so you get any medical treatment you need, from what I've seen your waiting lists are several years.... we pay the money and get it NOW. Also our hospitals CAN NOT turn down anyone because they can't pay, I'm not saying yours can but you seem to think we watch people die in our hospital lobbies.

 

Also perhaps we are both wrong because i have never lived in a place with free healthcare, and I don't think you have lived somewhere without it. I've seen videos and articles about the healthcare but never actually LIVED it, so who knows.

[Sy_Accursed]

Private companies suck at giving healthcare to those who need it most

What makes you think the government would be better? Have you actually seen how Canada's system works?

 

UK system works pretty well. Yes we have issues with waiting lists and such, but you can get any medical treatment you NEED (not want so no boob jobs etc) free.

 

None of this you need a new heart or youll die but ur insurance wont pay for it so nice to see ya bs

Ok so you get any medical treatment you need, from what I've seen your waiting lists are several years.... we pay the money and get it NOW. Also our hospitals CAN NOT turn down anyone because they can't pay, I'm not saying yours can but you seem to think we watch people die in our hospital lobbies.

 

Erm USA hospitals do turn people away. If medicare stuff won't cover it and they dont have insurance they get the boot, this applies to costy care options such as major surgery and ICU.

 

Yes UK has waiting lists that are extremely long but that's only for operations etc that aren't vital. Things such as hip replacements where u CAN live without the surgery, the surgery jsut raise standard of life.

Any life threatening case faces no waiting lists.

[mixand]

And anybody can go to Linux instead of windows but more people use windows.. it's the standard.

Not only does Linux happen to be the standard for servers and supercomputers, but Linux is like public school in the way that everyone contributes for the benefit of everyone, and Windows' development is privately funded. That analogy doesn't really work.

I was at a private school for half of my school life and the other half was at a public school. I know what is better..

I'm not really sure which you think is better, but the quality of education in different types (Public or private) varies so much from country to country that you can't really say that; Finland's education is among the best in the world, and is almost exclusively public.

but if private (or home) school was the only option then there would be more private schools which would mean more competition equaling lower costs and better quality. At the moment a lot of private schools are here for parents who want religion at school. If it was all private there would be a lot more different types and you wouldn't have to go to one school just because you live in that area.

Cost is almost always proportional to quality, especially in schools. Less cost, less teachers, less material, less electives...

 

Yes but if the school cost less.. but had less quality then most people wouldn't pick that school and it would go out of business.

Finland's education is very different to the public schools of the US and America. In America you go to a school they pick and the money isn't attached to the child unlike a lot of European countries.

[SeanyTheSailor]

Private companies suck at giving healthcare to those who need it most

What makes you think the government would be better? Have you actually seen how Canada's system works?

 

UK system works pretty well. Yes we have issues with waiting lists and such, but you can get any medical treatment you NEED (not want so no boob jobs etc) free.

 

None of this you need a new heart or youll die but ur insurance wont pay for it so nice to see ya bs

Ok so you get any medical treatment you need, from what I've seen your waiting lists are several years.... we pay the money and get it NOW. Also our hospitals CAN NOT turn down anyone because they can't pay, I'm not saying yours can but you seem to think we watch people die in our hospital lobbies.

 

Erm USA hospitals do turn people away. If medicare stuff won't cover it and they dont have insurance they get the boot, this applies to costy care options such as major surgery and ICU.

 

Yes UK has waiting lists that are extremely long but that's only for operations etc that aren't vital. Things such as hip replacements where u CAN live without the surgery, the surgery jsut raise standard of life.

Any life threatening case faces no waiting lists.

 

If someone comes in having a heart attack, even an illegal immigrant we CAN NOT turn them away. If that is what you are talking about.

[Sy_Accursed]

Private companies suck at giving healthcare to those who need it most

What makes you think the government would be better? Have you actually seen how Canada's system works?

 

UK system works pretty well. Yes we have issues with waiting lists and such, but you can get any medical treatment you NEED (not want so no boob jobs etc) free.

 

None of this you need a new heart or youll die but ur insurance wont pay for it so nice to see ya bs

Ok so you get any medical treatment you need, from what I've seen your waiting lists are several years.... we pay the money and get it NOW. Also our hospitals CAN NOT turn down anyone because they can't pay, I'm not saying yours can but you seem to think we watch people die in our hospital lobbies.

 

Erm USA hospitals do turn people away. If medicare stuff won't cover it and they dont have insurance they get the boot, this applies to costy care options such as major surgery and ICU.

 

Yes UK has waiting lists that are extremely long but that's only for operations etc that aren't vital. Things such as hip replacements where u CAN live without the surgery, the surgery jsut raise standard of life.

Any life threatening case faces no waiting lists.

 

If someone comes in having a heart attack, even an illegal immigrant we CAN NOT turn them away. If that is what you are talking about.

 

No I'm talking about the people who need things like organ transplants or persistent medication but can't get it due to no insurance.

[mixand]

It's 6:15AM now. I'm going to finally sleep. All I want to say is that you should be able to do whatever you want if it isn't hurting somebody else or damaging/taking away their property. And that you shouldn't have to do things or give things unless you want too or you owe them/it's in the contract etc..

[SeanyTheSailor]

Private companies suck at giving healthcare to those who need it most

What makes you think the government would be better? Have you actually seen how Canada's system works?

 

UK system works pretty well. Yes we have issues with waiting lists and such, but you can get any medical treatment you NEED (not want so no boob jobs etc) free.

 

None of this you need a new heart or youll die but ur insurance wont pay for it so nice to see ya bs

Ok so you get any medical treatment you need, from what I've seen your waiting lists are several years.... we pay the money and get it NOW. Also our hospitals CAN NOT turn down anyone because they can't pay, I'm not saying yours can but you seem to think we watch people die in our hospital lobbies.

 

Erm USA hospitals do turn people away. If medicare stuff won't cover it and they dont have insurance they get the boot, this applies to costy care options such as major surgery and ICU.

 

Yes UK has waiting lists that are extremely long but that's only for operations etc that aren't vital. Things such as hip replacements where u CAN live without the surgery, the surgery jsut raise standard of life.

Any life threatening case faces no waiting lists.

 

If someone comes in having a heart attack, even an illegal immigrant we CAN NOT turn them away. If that is what you are talking about.

 

No I'm talking about the people who need things like organ transplants or persistent medication but can't get it due to no insurance.

 

On the subject of organ transplants I'm pretty sure that we also have waiting list troubles and I'm also pretty sure you are wrong. As for the medication I don't know how often they actually get turned down, though perhaps you are right. I'm willing to admit the possibility that I'm wrong but I just don't think I am.

[Sy_Accursed]

It's 6:15AM now. I'm going to finally sleep. All I want to say is that you should be able to do whatever you want if it isn't hurting somebody else or damaging/taking away their property. And that you shouldn't have to do things or give things unless you want too or you owe them/it's in the contract etc..

 

Good for u it still doesn't make squat of difference though to the fact we live in society governed by laws and you have to adhear to thoose laws.

 

Also it doesnt change the fact that as tax is legally sanctioned it is not stealing.

 

EDit:

 

On the medical debate thing:

 

Its universally acknowledge fact.

 

US private system is flawed because there is a huge issue of poor people being unable to get basic care due to high costs and no insurance. Including things like potentially life saving surgery and medications.

 

UK public system is flawed in the fact that we have huge waiting lists for things other than organ transplant*, but atleast everyone gets any treatment that can prolong their life regardless of insuracne etc.

 

Neither is perfect or ideal, but no-ones come up with a working model tht takes the best from each.

 

*Everywhere has waiting lists for these as ,well, you have to wait for someone to die hu matches you as organs only last for like 5 hours or so in the body psot death and then a few more hours outside the body. So they aren't exactly stored up.

[Romy]

Because its not stealing?

 

Taxes are taken from all working citizens to pay for health care education etc etc.

 

In fact based on what a government has spent on you from when you were concieved to the time u start paying taxes you probably owe them a hell of alot more than u'll ever pay in taxes.

 

That couldn't be logically true for everyone though, otherwise the government would be very poor...

 

It can logically be true. If you take that statement to be true of the standard John Smith type of guy.

 

Then factor in the waster type who drop out of education cant afford the bus etc. Which means they cost government less.

And factor in the rich people who end up paying loads of tax as they can easily afford it.

 

It'll all balance out nicely.

 

Having said that though every country has a national debt and msot countries national debt grows by 1million+ a year. Effectively all countries are bankrupt, but as they print their own money they jsut owe themselves more and more.

 

Your argument makes no sense. You said he probably took from the government more than he ever paid. I said that it can't be logically true for everyone because then the government couldn't sustain itself.

 

You even contradicted yourself in the bolded part... According to that, someone DOES pay more than they cost.

[Zaaps1]

Because you, believe it or not, agree to pay taxes, at least in a democratic society. You vote for representatives who support taxing, therefore you support and agree to pay a tax. If you do not like to pay a tax, then vote for a candidate who does not support taxing.

[Guthorm]

The less of the resources the higher the price and the more willingness for them to conserve it.

 

Everything you said is a bunch of cliches.

Why exactly would there be monopilies? If you can't force competing businesses out of the market then the ones at the top got there by making the best product or having the best service for the lowest price.

 

Prices are based on supply and demand. If a company wanted to sell a hamburger for $30 then another company would come in and start selling it for $20.. and then so on until it is the lowest price that is still profitable. There would be police. You might pay to live in a neighborhood which has private security or defend yourself.

Why would there be no libraries or courts? Every single thing can be payed for.. nothing is free.

 

Oh because we have a perfect system right now..

 

Yes, prices for products is determined by supply and demand and the prices will reach an equilibrium if there is a shift in either two variables. But what you described is exactly what is happening right now, businesses compete in competitive markets trying to maximize revenue without having too much marginal cost. I don’t see your point in that one.

 

The police is something different, if you have to directly pay for the police, then it becomes “Hey, I will protect you because you paid me, forget the others because you are the one who is paying me.” In other words, the cost is actually higher for the average citizens and justice cannot be served because money rules everything. If a crook committed a crime, a company send police force to arrest him, crook pays the police’s wage to hire them and stop the arrest, then where is justice served?

 

There will be less of the public service projects such as roads and libraries because the construction of such projects is much more expensive. Before everybody pays for these things indirectly with tax money, now people pays for it as an investment.

 

I don't need the government humping my shoulder to make sure I do well in this world. Also some examples of private being more efficient than public. Space Ship One, Blackwater security, and I'm sure there are other's I haven't heard about.

 

The reason they are more efficient is because they cost more, more bang for your buck, this has nothing to do with private sector run businesses.

 

Yes but if the school cost less.. but had less quality then most people wouldn't pick that school and it would go out of business.

Finland's education is very different to the public schools of the US and America. In America you go to a school they pick and the money isn't attached to the child unlike a lot of European countries.

 

I am sure even if the quality is not top notch but it cost less, more people will pick that school. The reason you go to the school you pick is because of the location you live in, and locations with better schools generally cost more, so ultimately you are paying for the quality of your school, you are not been forced.

 

It's 6:15AM now. I'm going to finally sleep. All I want to say is that you should be able to do whatever you want if it isn't hurting somebody else or damaging/taking away their property. And that you shouldn't have to do things or give things unless you want too or you owe them/it's in the contract etc..

 

Guess what? If everybody can do whatever they want without thinking about others, this world would suck much harder than it is now. A selfish attitude is not something that is good for an entire country.

[obfuscator]

It's called contribution to the greater good of society. If it works out correctly you get the money back in some form or another.

 

But please, don't pay taxes. I'm sure you'de rather pay your own insurance, pay for your own roads, pay for your healthcare, education, pay for your libraries, community centeres etc. That would make much more sense than just paying tax.