No healthcare cost in my country lol and its worse here.

I'm guessing CA and I'm considering moving my business/self there as I spent a lot of time in CA when I was a kid.

Nah australia

You can start with forcing people to fund wars of aggression that have caused countless deaths, rampant police brutality and incarceration of non-criminals, foreign aid to murderous dictators/governments, the hundreds of millions killed via democide in the 20th century, etc.



And?

I would prefer to factually point out that taxation is theft try to change and limit it.





"laws" aren't whats stopping you from running a business with no costs and no wages for employees.
There is a demand for labor and people would likely not choose to work for you for free.
People also demand fees for rent / materials etc.

There is nothing anti-capitalistic about voluntary contributions and exchanges or opposing government forcibly extracting trillions of dollars a year that in turn pay for more government intrusions into capitalist endeavors.

The idea that no one would voluntarily give anyone to anything is an obviously false claim evidenced by trillions of voluntary transactions a year.
I'm not talking about only giving people things for free. i have no problem with the concept of people selling things.

But again, I see that you believe that there's no benefit to any one of that...

So because some of the money that goes to things that you don't agree with, the money that is used to maintain world order and keep the country safe from invading countries is somehow "theft."



Tip: If you didn't start with, what is unarguably a complete lie, and is completely false from a purely objective stand point, you might have a chance at convincing somebody.

It won't work on me since I'm already aware that the concept that you are parroting came from a libertarian think tank that gets paid to promote ideas that help make their donors more money and who's policies would do people like you absolutely no good what so ever.

You don't make enough money to truly benefit from a tax free environment, since your financial status in society would not change (you would still be working class), but it does dramatically alter the power of the rich who have the financial mobility to be involved in international markets.

The more the US reduces taxes, the more benefits you lose, and the more business opportunities go to people who have the money to invest into them.



Laws are exactly what stops me from doing that, people sign contracts for unpaid internships all the time, I am not legally allowed to do that in my specific situation.



First of all, I'm talking about a business, not people.

It's B2B, it's all contracts, and it isn't a crime to not pay them. I could just declare bankruptcy and let the courts sort it out.



What intrusions into capitalist endeavors are you talking about?



You are conflating sale of goods with voluntary contributions to the systems in society that are maintained by government.

If every road in the country forced you to pay a toll and you opt out of paying because it was voluntary, you wouldn't pay. Nobody would.

I definitely wouldn't voluntary give my money to the police, would you?

If this system is perfectly functional, then it makes perfect sense that our medical research, journals, articles, publications paid for by tax funded grants and subsidizes (you reference this in #2) are not publicly accessible or available to the population. I think both political camps can find huge overlaps where they agree on waste spending. Wasteful to the degree its theft IMO.

Also, you can say the same about internet infrastructure and 'net neutrality' fight. Internet came about via government development funded by tax payer dollars, now FCC and private entities price gouging it. And the internet is a lot more than a 'nice to have' these days, good luck finding the paper job applications.

This post was edited by RedFromWinter on Dec 6 2019 04:39pm

->"#2) are not publicly accessible or available to the population."

They almost exclusively are, do you have an example of where research conducted by the government using public funds is not accessible to the public, outside of the military?

I'm not completely sure what you are suggesting here.

Are you suggesting that the information shouldn't be available to the public, as in, it's property of the government and is private to it?

I don't think anybody from any political party feels that way.

Edit: If you're talking about the situation with Gilead, I'm confident that it will get sorted out in court, as they are headed there now.

This post was edited by mki on Dec 6 2019 04:43pm

Yes, google Aaron Swartz please, plenty of content and controversy there. I'm suggesting if research was paid for by tax payer dollars and published through a public institution such as a University, it should be made easy to access and free.

i thought this thread would fizzle out after a few pages
gg

You, as an individual, still can gain access to the documents free of charge, as long as you are at a library that pays for access.

I would argue that the access is limited and I take issue with that.

Obviously Aaron Swartz did as well.