Thanks for visiting! If you like what you see here, subscribe to my RSS feed to receive updates.

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Are Taxes Really Voluntary?

The Government Has a Rather Odd Definition of Voluntary.

Taxes are voluntary, so long as you volunteer to pay them.

Bookmark and Share


Noarch said...

-"can the tax payers decide NOT to pay?"
-"Yes but they will be pursued criminaly"

Kelly W. Patterson said...

It's one of those things you have to actually see to believe.

Monkey Wrench said...

Tax is theft, pure and simple. Some people say that moneys should be completely abolished in an Anarchal Society, but I think that having a stable global note would be more feasible. Having money abolished completely would be nicer, but if we truly want to present Anarchy to the people in a way that they would understand, we would have to keep money around--AT FIRST. I think that we could eventually move away from this. The main point of Anarchy (or what I view as the main point) is to give everyone an increased standard of living, and to let everyone be truly free in the purest sense. Money doesn't necessarily have to be out of the equation for this to happen, though I think that would be ideal. More important than getting rid of cash would be giving people something other than a meager wage for the sale of their labor.

Just my thoughts--

Wrench (and thanks for the comedy today!! The video was hilarious)


Just my thoughts--


Kelly W. Patterson said...

Glad I could provide some humor. Actually, Harry Reid did all the heavy lifting, but I appreciate the comments.

I think there are alot of good and bad associated with a non-monetary economy. Probably the most beneficial is that for basic commodities it allows for a much more localized market. Which means that individuals are more free to set their own prices, rather than having some global market set prices for the goods they create, possibly without any bearing on their local market. A localized marketplace would also eliminate much of the associated cost with shipping and processing of goods. Farmers' Markets would be a good example of this.

Of course the other side of the coin (or whatever would be used) would be that, if I wanted something from you but you didn't want anything I had, we might have a problem with shortages of needed products without some sort of intermediary commodity to facilitate trade, which is essentially what cash is. The other larger problem would be that, in a localized economy, certain areas that didn't have the materials needed to made certain products would be excluded from alot of things. This would be most applicable to technology based products. Some people might argue that we'd be better off without a big screen TV in every living room, but I prefer to let people make their own choices.

Based on that, I don't know if it would be possible to completely eliminate money from the economy. I do believe that co-ops where people pool their resources as a group would address alot of the issues involved and that the more direct a market is the less tendency and need their would be for hording materials and artificially inflating prices. In essence, it's hard to put a chicken in the bank and leave it their for the next forty years and I do think that has some advantages all its own. Ultimately, like everything else it would comedown to a matter of whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

Feel free to add to or explain why you disagree with me.

The Acolyte Tao said...

If you watch the movie, 'America, freedom to fascism,' by Aron Russo? Sorry I'm not getting all of that information right, haven't seen it in a while. But anyways, point being, it is mostly about taxes and how you can not pay them and how they are illegal and look at several court cases from people not paying taxes and the Gov. can't do anything about it for the most part.

Monkey Wrench said...

Kelly--Your writing is exceptional on this topic. We should further discuss monetary/non-monetary economics, because I don't know the answer either. Thanks for all of the great thought provocations my friends.


Kelly W. Patterson said...

Thanks Wrench, I welcome any and all discussion, it's a great opportunity to learn from others.

Acolyte, I do have some familiarity with Aaron Russo since he ran for governor here in Nevada. I wouldn't consider myself a follower of his, but I do agree with alot of his positions. However, telling the government that you aren't going to pay taxes because you aren't legally required to is a very good way to go to prison. I've seen quite a few different reasons given for why they are illegal, but I've yet to see one hold up in court. The Wesley Snipes situation would be a very prominent example. In order to win, you have to convince employees of the government that they have no right to collect the money that is used to pay their salaries. Ultimately, I think the only way to not pay taxes and avoid the risk of prison is to lower you cost of living as much as possible, so that you can live on a low income, and maximize any deductions you can qualify for. Sometimes you can't avoid their laws, but many times you can use those same laws against them.

Post a Comment

Leave Your Two Cents: