Good day, fellow serfs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: May 8, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Doug Casey
------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com


Believe it or not, for most Americans (perhaps including many now reading this), April 15 was actually a pleasantly anticipated time of year. That's because they knew they'd get a check from the government, in the form of a tax refund. The fact the money is actually theirs – and has been held without interest for the last year – probably doesn't bother them much, since they figure it wouldn't be there at all if the IRS hadn't set it aside for them, like a stern, but benign, parent.

Sure, the average American is mildly annoyed by having to fill out his 1040 tax form, or paying H&R Block to do it for him. But he figures that if you've got to fill in paperwork to get money from a bank, why not the government? They never consider how the government gets money: Namely, by forcible extraction from its subjects. Every other person and entity creates goods and services which are exchanged voluntarily; only the State makes a purely one-sided demand. It's a sign of the continuing degradation of life in America that the subject is even worthy of discussion.

The average guy may hear about the IRS destroying someone's life from time to time, but he's been pretty well brainwashed into believing they somehow deserved it. In any event, it probably bothers him about as much as it does a bovine when a predator cuts another cow out of the herd – he figures if they're gutting someone else, they're distracted from him for the time being.

Americans have contracted the European disease known as schadenfreude – taking pleasure in another's misery. Even when there's a muffled complaint, it tends to center on the system's lack of "fairness" (as if the nebulous concept of fairness had any meaning in this context), or its lack of "efficiency" (thank God for small favors), or some other tangential issue. People may whine about taxes being "too high," but, unfortunately, they rarely talk about the legitimacy of taxation itself.

Nowhere, except perhaps in a few newsletters, which are preaching to the choir, do you ever hear an attack on the principle of taxation itself. Rather odd when, in point of fact, taxation is theft. My dictionary defines theft as "the act of depriving another of his property by force or fraud." It doesn't go on to say "unless you're the government, then it's not theft anymore." Or, perhaps, "unless the money is used for good purposes."

Being an optimist, I'd like to believe people pay their taxes mostly out of the fear of the consequences of not doing so. But a surprisingly high number of Americans pay them because they believe it's the right thing to do. As despicable as it is to do something out of fear, I can sympathize with the first group; I cannot with the second. Why not? Let me give a brief explanation.

Suppose a mugger approaches you on the street and demands your money. Would you say he has a right to it? Suppose, however, he explains he needs it for his hungry children. Does that make it any more right? Suppose he explains that he's doing so as the agent of a majority of the local residents. Does he now have a right to your money? How about if he says he represents the government?

The answer, as I see it, is that he has no right at all. The ideal response to a mugger is to shoot him on the spot – although that's usually impractical, and overly risky for the money involved. But I can respect someone who admits he handed over his wallet under those circumstances. I can't respect someone who allows himself to be robbed because he actually thinks the thief has a call on his money. I fear most Americans fall into the second group, paying their taxes meekly, dealing obsequiously with the IRS agent. It makes me wonder if, as a group, Americans are more like a flock of bleating sheep, or a herd of lowing cattle. As individuals, are we more like robots, or whipped dogs?

As a member of the first group of taxpayers, I shovel a huge amount of money into the belly of the beast each year. Regrettably, there's not much I, or anyone else, can do about it. In fact, my guess is that things are likely to get worse as the demands of the State grow, funding all manner of domestic regulation and welfare, and foreign wars. But there's cause for long-term optimism. The system will eventually collapse of its own weight.

Perhaps the catalyst will be the widespread dissemination of an encryption method like PGP, allowing people to transact business untraceably, in total privacy. Perhaps there will be a breakdown in the IRS' notoriously antiquated and poorly designed computer systems. Perhaps a virus or worm planted by a freedom-oriented programmer (or scores of them planted independently by scores of different programmers) will make tax collection impossible. Perhaps the arrival of The Greater Depression will itself collapse the net receipts of the State precipitously.

What? How would the country run if the federal government could command no resources? My answer is (after a relatively brief period of adjustment): extraordinarily, fantastically well. Far better than it does at even the best of times today. But an explanation of that will have to wait. To be continued.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Legendary speculator Doug Casey logs 150,000 miles a year, trekking through jungles, deserts and high mountain passes, while his readers sit home and collect returns of 400 percent, 4,170 percent, even 10,060 percent. He is the author of the best-selling "Crisis Investing" and "The International Man." He also edits the newsletter International Speculator.

...McCollough Vs. Maryland: "The power to tax is the power to destroy."

But I don't know if I would look for any support from the crowd around Indymedia. They all seem to think my money would be better spent on social justice for the downtrodden, held down by the iron boot of the Man. But I appreciated your views, anyway.

I think your money should be spent lynching niggers.

no man, that's not what we want. what we want is for our tax dollars to go to more military spending to protect our corporate interests. we need more bombs! more planes! more troops stationed around the world! we need more weapons of mass destruction! more biological and chemical weapons! we demand that the government stop wasting our tax money on the people of this country and spend it all instead on the military so the executives and share holders of Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, General Electric, et al, can make lots of money while protecting the interests of other mega-corporations! we demand that our government give big tax breaks to these corporations! we demand that our government negotiate trade treaties that favor corporations who lobby them with the most cash! to hell with a free market! and if other countries refuse to go along with our treaties, then we demand that our government enforce those corporate interests with military power! $300 billion + is just not enough of our tax money to be spending on death and violence! we demand more more more more more!!!! let's take it to the streets and make sure our tax money is spent well, on more weapons, more violence, more corporate welfare!

god bless america. freedom. liberty. justice. etc.

Vote for Bush in 2004 and get those tax cuts!

Sounds great! Are you single? Your political philosophy really turns me on.

Your hypothetical mugger, you say he might have hungry children waiting at home? And you also say your ideal reaction would be to blast the mugger away. Then, I suppose the children would have to learn to survive on the streets I suppose, without any tax-supported programs meant to help them and all. Nice.

What is needed is greater (much greater) input (and legitimate power) from the citizenry concerning the rates and uses of taxes, not to abolish a useful if inefficient instrument of wealth allocation.

This slavish lust toward property is dangerous, as is this delusion of individualism. To you the mugger's sad condition does not justify theft. But then are you not more willing to give, to help. Is sacrifice for the sake of society, humanity, and potential progress truly that despicable?

...to the greater good of the Hive. After we are insignificant little ants and deserve no freedom. Just bare subsistance and a grim Gray Cube to live in.

Excuse me while I vomit.

I am constantly amazed by people who seem to think that it is fair to steal the sweat of anothers work to support someone who will not work. "We must allocate (steal from working people) resources to the needy (with the exception of those truly unable to) to give to those who want to live off the Fatheads of the land.

Excuuuuuuse me! No one has a right to the produce of another's labors. I don't care how much or how little they make. If they earned it honestly it is theirs to do with as they see fit. Taxes should be directed only to those things which are the rightful province of government - Courts, Currency, and Defense. All other services are better handled by private individuals working together voluntarily. And they can be done that way. You don't need an Agent with a Gun holding up honest citizens to support your causes. If you want them supported get off your ass and do something about it.

If the government steals it is still theft.

"Taxes should be directed only to those things which are the rightful province of government - Courts, Currency, and Defense. All other services are better handled by private individuals working together voluntarily."

There's a bunch of potholes in the streets around here. You can pick up your shovel Monday morning.

Now we get to the heart of the matter -- Diogenes believes that no man has a right to the products of his labor -- that he should not have to pay taxes nor contribute to the well-being of any other person Earth but himself.

So let me ask you - do you build the roads, operate the power plants, run the firehouse, police the streets, collect the trash, school the children, staff the hospitals, or man the military?

No, you don't do all of those things?

Well then you are not entitled to the products of social labor, nor anyone else who believes in a "self-sufficient" survivalist-militia fantasy lifestyle.

If you want to know what real self-sufficiency and autonomy is like, find yourself a deserted island and set-up camp. There you will be free of all the terrible and oppressive vestiges of society, able to live life to the fullest expression of your "personal liberties."

But instead you choose the path of the moral cowards -- demanding rights without responsibilities, extractiong profit without expense, living rent-free by the fruits of civilization.

In short, you are a miserly scrooge.

It is a well known fact that dogs have a slavish nature.

Roll over.

Go fetch.

Play dead.

I don't think so.
Try getting your cat to protect your house.

Let me extend and revise my comments:

To davie: Where in the Constitution of the United States are Roads and Streets mentioned? When I made the comment you reference I had in mind the Federal Government as that was the subject of the header article - Federal Taxation primarily. My fault for not being clearer. However, I’ll chip in a few bucks for repairs if you think they are needed (out of the pittance left by the Tax Man.)

Everybody has their hobby horse that they would like to see the Government take care of. My objection is that government alone has a monopoly upon the power to coerce compliance with it’s wishes. Unless something is of vital need and not something likely to be done by the action of private individuals the government has no business taking those “enforced exactions” known as taxes. It has no legal or moral authority to exceed it’s limited mandate. That it does so is another debate.

To the Dog: You really should go back to chasing your tail and scratching Flea Bites. You are much better equipped for that.

“...that he should not have to pay taxes nor contribute to the well-being of any other person Earth but himself.”

This really is two elements that the writer assumes are one.

I will grudgingly pay taxes for those things which are within the rightful province of government in a Free Society. I object strenuously to taking my earnings to support someone else without my consent. I know enough about the so-called “Welfare System” to also know that most of the people on Welfare are capable of working and earning enough to support themselves. They just don’t want to undergo the inconvenience of actually having to work. For those who are not able to work and have run aground upon the Shoals of sad events there are a myriad of Charities more than willing to help. There are also families ignoring their responsibility to take care of their own because “the government will do it” - with somebody else’s money. Why should I pay for old Aunt Hattie’s Groceries. (Because she is your family and your responsibility you dog.)
Private Charities have the reputation of actually helping people unlike many government programs which are just sinkholes for money. The average government program consumes 70 to 80 Percent of it’s funds in overhead - money which never goes to the people they are supposed to help. The average private Charity spends about 20 Percent on overhead with the rest actually going to help people. If taxes were lower there would be more money available for Private Charities. It is a fact that following the Reagan Tax Cuts Charitable Giving went way up. When George Herbert Hoover Bush Raised taxes it went down. The money was siphoned off for the Federal Government. A bare pittance of which was turned back into new Social Spending - which the Federal Government has no business doing in the first place. If tax money is going to be spent on these types of programs it should be done at the local and state level where people are closer to the problems of their area and are able to accurately determine what is actually needed. You don’t need to send it to the Feds so they can take their “juice” before they send some of it back to underfund a one size fits all program.

Not wanting to pay usurious tax rates for inefficient, and ineffective, Government Programs does not mean that I do not care about my fellow travelers through this veil of tears. However, I believe that government is wrong tool for the job. Private Charities are much more frugal and get a lot more for the resources invested. The research has been done over and over again - the average government agency is a black hole for money and very damn little of it actually goes toward helping people. Do your God Damned Homework.

“So let me ask you - do you build the roads, operate the power plants, run the firehouse, police the streets, collect the trash, school the children, staff the hospitals, or man the military?”

With the exception of the Military these, where needed, are all local government functions.

Trash Collection does not need to be done by the Government. Where I live it is handled by a private company and they do a fine job of hauling off my garbage.

Power Plants are mostly Privately owned Publicly Granted Monopolies and operate at a profit. Publicly owned ones charge for their services in an amount comparable to Private Utilities - with some exceptions. There is no reason for government to be involved.

Most Hospitals are privately run. Many are nonprofit run by Churches or nonsectarian Charities. The Government exiting this field would not even be noticed. If Public Hospitals are needed in an area that should be up to the Voters in that area - and their responsibility to fund. And don’t even get me started on American Medicine. The number 3 cause of preventable death in this Country is Doctors. Most Hospitals are death traps and should be used only in the direst of emergencies. Review the CDC numbers.

“Well then you are not entitled to the products of social labor, nor anyone else who believes in a "self-sufficient" survivalist-militia fantasy lifestyle.”

Again you assume, because my viewpoint on taxation is different from yours, too much. You need to lose the stereotypes and actually learn about what you are talking about.

Define “Social Labor”. You are, like many on the scatterbrained Left, using vague terms to impute some lofty meaning to government confiscation and waste of resources.

“But instead you choose the path of the moral cowards -- demanding rights without responsibilities, extractiong profit without expense, living rent-free by the fruits of civilization. “

And you seek to avoid your responsibility to do something about it by pretending that confiscating other peoples earnings and spending it to salve your guilty conscience is somehow moral and just. My priorities might be different than yours - if I paid less in taxes I would spend more on the Charities of MY CHOICE. Ones that actually get the job done. Get off your ass and do something about it. And I don’t mean go to work for the Government. Roll up your sleeves and go to work for some worthy Charitable Group working on the front lines. Being a literacy tutor would be a good one - fact - virtually all adult literacy programs, repairing the failures of the Government Schools, are privately run groups simply trying to make things a little better.

I have carried my share of the burden. Two Plus hitches in Uniform, 5 Years working for slave wages at a nonprofit charity (loving nearly every minute of it) and taking care of a dying parent for 5 Years. I have spent most of my life in service to others so don’t lecture me about caring you insolent little puppy. I put my money where my mouth is. I do not owe you or anyone else an apology. And I do not owe you a living.

And I am quite content with where I live and have no intention of moving.

Explain: How does one extract profit without expense. That ought to be a doozy.

Living Rent Free. Again you bespeak a vast ignorance.

As for your closing comment: Kiss my Ass.