Do We Actually Need Taxes? 

"do we actually need property" next?

Make a video on the effects of a credit bubble burst!!

@David Dupont Colonial India.

I do believe that we need taxes. The thing I believe that we don't need os public companies. In a market economy, the government should act as a referee and as a private investor, meaning that we were responsible for regulating and make sure that the purpose is being accomplished. But also as a lender/owner of part of the capital, instead of managing the company. This would allow for a company to still strive for profit but also had the "responsibility" to keep some kind of services in place. Otherwise, the government could sell their stock and invest in a company more aligned with social interests.

What is the best alternative to taxation? Donations. Taxation is coercive. Donation is voluntary. If the government is corrupt and inefficient, donate less to it? If the government is not corrupt and efficient, then donate more to it. Can people choose not to donate to the government? They can. However, they will not have a functioning government... and most of them cannot psychologically handle that because people have been conditioned for thousands of years to feel safe when they are being ruled by other people... most of them have been conditioned for thousands of years to fear "dangerous freedom"...

In Portugal we have a tax for owning a house that we pay twice a year and the more amenities you have nearby or a good view into the river or bunch of sunlight will increase this tax

@@WeirdDuck781 tax for owning a house, owning land that house stands on and your car that you use to get to said house. All is taxed, once per year. And that comes with 10,5% social tax + up to 24% income tax, based on salary (and not taking into consideration how much more is paid by employer). And 21% added value tax on any goods you buy. And extra fees on using free healthcare (i know how it sounds, that's Latvia) that you already support with your taxes. Taking all that into consideration, we somehow have national debt almost twice as national yearly budget. Greets from Latvia

@@TrickyTrickyFox Sounds a lot like here in New Zealand

@Dickgirl Nationalist Yeah I would rather have healthcare than be fueling the war machine that is our broken economy.

@@equinox2584 can't, imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism.

I see you. I thank you.

Thanks brotha

This is so wholesome 😊 thankyou for your contribution to society good sir.

@@WookieChef of course you see him, because there are street lights

Wow thanks everyone! Just doing my best over here 🙂

You nailed it!!!

He asked that question by asking his original question. Asking what do we spend taxes on doesn't ask do we need taxes...

Whatever. Your poor, your poor. Get lucky, well

Corrupt countries spend them on private villa's, where they live and make their life like heaven on earth.

And I think equally important following on "What are our taxes being spent on?" is "Who decides?". Should it be entirely democratic whenever the government wants to spend money on anything we all log into an app and vote (imagine trying to parse out a budget of hundreds of billions of dollars among 330+ million people) or do we delegate a few individuals to decide for us....

I'm sure the vast majority of people would love the government to be reformed into a much more caring and efficient organization. The problem is the people who can fix it are the problem. They don't. They refuse to. The only other people who can fix it is people like you and me. Only that usually comes from the barrel of a gun and no one seems to be willing to do that. So here we are. Watching an obvious problem we all know needs reworking but refusing to do anything about it.

@@fieldmarshalbaltimore1329 So your answer to government corruption is to kill some politicians? Asking for a friend....

I can understand this critique of people saying our taxes just go to bloated governments etc but the same thing happens in private industry too. The money just goes into a CEO or shareholder pocket instead of the government.

Tell that to German taxpayers lol. I would bet 90% of our taxes is spent on bloated bureaucracy and paper printing.

@@filippalexandrov1554 don't forget all the countries you have to bail out to prop up the EU!

aggressive taxes??

Tax evasion is punishable by death

No taxes

Agressive is the prefered option

I propose a passive-aggressive tax rate.

A brutal truth to that is most wouldn't understand it anyway. Not to mention you run into the issue of expenditures in remote areas being at the good will of urban areas. Your idea is great in theory, but chaos in practice.

that would be A LOT of data...

@@eggmeister6641 don't matter we should get to keep the receipts on all the sales the Government actually spend our money on.

That’s what we’re supposed to have. But crooks in congress passed some kind of confidentiality legislation. They think we’re stupid or something. Well, we arnt all stupid. Either way, they’ll find out the hard way ;)

Insert blockchain discussion here

How? Almost all taxes are spent on things that SOMEBODY wants. Unless you are just complaining about corruption in which case taxes are irrelevant - The government will steal your stuff whether through taxes or at gunpoint.

@@N.i.c.k.H audit trail will tell which hands the money goes to in the process. Yeah, we have money that goes to medicaid, but how many hands does it pass through until then? Can severely cut back on costs if we knew. Most of medicaid taxes are administration expenses

@@NINJAxBACON Who decides what is necessary expenditure except more beurocrats? The public has neither the will nor the information to decide this.

@@N.i.c.k.H that doesn't mean it would hurt to have access to information so we can actually elect the correct bureaucrats

@@NINJAxBACON While the flow of money is not 100% transparent, it is generally pretty transparent, and you can find evidence of how the money is actually spent. I think the problem is more that we as voters want our interests promoted over other people['s interests,and money spent on 'those' programs are corrupt and wasteful, while the money spent on 'these' programs are critical to the success of the Nation.

About sales tax here in Florida. Florida Statute chapter 212 section 212.05 states that every person e exercises a taxable privilege when engaging in the business of selling tangible personal property at retail in the state. Nothing is said in this statute about purchasers of retail products ever exercising a taxable privilege. The Legislature corrupted itself by corrupting the statute by stating that retail dealers are not to absorb tax but are to collect tax from purchaser. Liability for any tax is precedent to any tax debt, and the general population of the state have no liability for tax within all of Chapter 212 FS. Hopefully one day this tax law will be challenged in court.

It's a French series not Belgian.

Just for future reference: Asterix (and Obelix) is a French creation. Makes sense since it's a story about Gauls living in present day France (close to Belgium).

I was just about to comment that...

Wow first time I see something French misidentified as Belgian :o Uualy goes the other way, e.g. Fries, every single french speaking belgian artist, Tintin,...

Thanks for the correction. I was thinking of Tintin, which is a Belgian comic. I spent some of my life in Belgium, so I am one of the few people who are likely to make the reverse mistake.

Probably invented imortality lol

Sorry, CGP Grey already covered that one.

Exactly, we have outgrown taxes. And if we keep our space endeavors going we won't need death anymore either.

That actually is a nice point to see

@@davihomem7342 I suppose the only reason someone would want to die in that era is to escape debt

Your comment asks some pretty deep questions. I'll try to take a crack at them. The feeling that we, whether on a global or national scale, are necessarily progressing towards better governance over the course of history I have always found nonsensical. The idea of societal entropy, that governance worsens over long periods of time, as well as human corruptibility, should be made obvious by the impermanence of any governing structure is strangely lost nowadays. Of course, the upside is that a society can change for the better; the constitutional American system is superior to both the previous unstable confederate or unaccountable British colonial systems. People are weirdly utopian to an increasing degree in the West. It is largely born out of the belief that people are inherently good, or at least a blank slate. In either view a perfect society could be achieved, considering people could be made used to it. I hold that humans are self interested to the point of selfishness. I think that better explains why things get worse before they get better, as society worsens to the points even the most selfish people are pushed to stop it. It also explains why things get worse to begin with, considering corruption always seeps into governing structures eventually. Maybe you wanted more economics, but the questions you have are really philosophical ones more than practical or scientific. The best thing is for government to be structures so that even grotesquely selfish people would be incentivised to do good, but people will eventually find ways around it. The best thing to do as an individual is to maintain a virtuous life and hold others accountable for their actions. Sorry if it came off as ranting, I've has these thoughts for a while and wanted to get them of my chest. I just despise the blank slate and positive views of human nature, when myself and all those around me are counterexamples to such ideas.

@@hammerheadd @hammerhead2090 d Thank you for your insight. I appreciate you taking the time to help answer my questions. I definitely agree that the view of basic human good and ideas like "all humans are born pure of evil, only learning those traits from society" is at best an overly simplistic view, or at worst completely detached from reality. In most difficult, and hotly debated topics, I find myself usually gravitating towards a center stance. Finding most answers comprised of "it's complicated and a little bit of both." I'm not sure if that's due to my own pre conceived notions and beliefs, or if it's because most hotly debated topics are "hot" because of their inherent complexity, meaning some degree of nuanced "shade of grey" answer. I think that, in regards to blank slate human utopianism, people not only see what they want to see, but also choose to see it that way to avoid the messy issue of breaking down and identifying several competing factors in an unknown blend of nature and nurture. It's easier, and more comforting, to see the world simple, black/white terms. I think the rise of views like this, the blank slate, "the noble savage", utopianism ect are born from defiance and rejection of our modern world. A byproduct of the cynicism and nihilism brought about at the end of the first world war. They condemn our current society and serve a utopian reorganization. I personally think humans are born with far less evil in their hearts than a resentful, world-weary person will have, or even that of the average person. I also think however, that certain traits are baked into our genetic code, some of them serving an evolutionary purpose, and no amount of socializing can fully get rid of them. Selfishness, fear, impulsivity and rage are all inherent to humans, and while socialization can minimize these impulses, I don't think they can ever be eliminated. Nor do I think total elimination would be a good thing, if possible. I'm sure these "negative" traits serve us and society, perhaps even in ways I don't see or understand. It's beyond my understanding, but I do feel the answer of both nature vs nurture and how much can (and should) be taught/unlearned is somewhere in the middle between the extremes of both positions. I definitely also agree with your position on governance. I think the best system (that I can think of anyway) is one where individual freedom, individual responsibility and incentivized understanding, that people can often act selfishly or irrationally, is our best bet. Something that blows my mind is when people who advocate for relinquishing power and freedoms don't see how that can become a huge issue for them and their loved one's in the near future. I understand (but don't agree with) the bit about wanting to radically shake up the current system. I can even see those advocates thinking that power over parts of their own lives is worth giving over, to the dream of a better future system. What I can't understand is the blindness to the fact that history has shown us again and again that shitty, tyrannical individuals thrive in that environment and that even if a revolutionary organisation doesn't start from the ground up being tyrannical in nature, a tyrant will eventually murder their way to the top of it. It's like they don't see that bad people don't play by the optimistic rules they lay down. I'm ranting off a bit, I apologize, it just baffles me. Humans have, for a very long time now, always been the biggest threat to other humans. It's the darker parts of our soul, if you like, that can't be stamped out or protected from. How do we build the shining walled city on a hill when the monsters are already lurking inside? I can't think of a way to eliminate the evil drives of man without crushing it through the state (a poor and short term solution, with it's own set of problems) or by genetically engineering it out (at which point can we even say we are still human?) Maybe it's best to be realistic about both our accomplishments and virtues, as well as about our limitations and bad tendencies. I appreciate your insight on this, I'm actively trying to develop my thoughts on this subject and you raise some good points that have me thinking about it. I don't know how "far" forward we can progress in total or even how far along that process we are now, but I can be really grateful to be living here and now. We have problems, but never before have people had things this good.

You would have ensure the AI isn’t using biased models that benefit one group over another. Eventually the AI could design itself, but it does need to be coded by humans to begin with

@@hammerheadd Believing selfishness to be human nature is nothing more than a self fulfilling prophecy. Not to mention, it's scientifically wrong. As scientific as psychology can get, at least. Humans have lived in vastly different social conditions during time and culture. Certain ancient societies had things we would now believe impossible, like public housing. A lot of the things we observe would just not make sense if self interest was the only thing, or even the majority of human thought. Altruism isn't human nature either, not any more or less than selfishness. Human nature is dynamic and complex, and is heavily dependent on the environment, and perhaps genetics play a role too, but environment is certainly the biggest factor.

Gotta understand we work off incentive more than anything most days. Also gotta knock everyone down a peg or two, like we're all POS's and need to strive not to be. Everyone thinks their opinion is dang near fact and theyre always right, no self doubt. Everybody thinks those with everything should do great things with all their power but have never considered sending $100 to a poor remote village once a month to change the lives of 50 people. I like people, too, also ignore the blanket everybodies in there you know what i mean! Also gotta force the hank hill, batman, saint type people into positions of power. For the greater good, like save us from us because if you put me in charge I'll just do blow and bang secretaries. "Well Steve, we dont care that your a plumber, we ran the most extensive background check ever, nobody you met in your 45 years had a bad thing to say about you, so here the keys youre driving now" That's my take

You do realize the politicians have possession of our currency printing press. That is way there is billionaires. Because trillionaires would be just showing off.

look at america. the tax money just goes to bomb iran

LOL do You pay TAX except for VAT in the Philippines. If you work in the company yes you do pay TAX if you make more money like 60K per month but if you are in the minimum wage until 40K per month you pay 0%TAX and you pay PhilHealth, pagibig and SSS not TAX. If you have a business and you make 100K per month most of the people get away from it because it’s a cash earning as long your register to BIR is all legal and they can’t track it because is cash earnings. Look at the mami vendor or some of shomai vendor they make 8K-10K per day and they pay nothing except VAT.

Pay my taxes then.

I got bad news for you buddy.

unless you have huge loans

@@iamagi And an asset

@@iamagi *unless the loans are in your denomination/currency And even then it's basically: "i'll make my debt disappear, and along with all my peeps savings"

@@iamagi or if you're shorting that currency.

-Pinochet, 1973

Same thing in advertising. If the advertised prices for things already included all taxes and fees, I think people would be less resentful. Of course, it would still be important to break down what the taxes and fees are for transparency.

You don't need an existential crisis to read up about taxes. What constitutes a normal economics video to you if this topic is so absurd to you?

@@otten5666 Take a chill pill bro. He's just joking about how these videos are named. They're like "Who am I?" or "What is love?" (baby don't hurt me~)

Sounds like you are taking too many pills making you read too much into things. What you said explains nothing to me, bro.

@Checkmate Chess Channel When Anarcho Capitalists are considered logical, we're all screwed.

@@fearedjames they already are

Everybody knows we don' need Texas, not too much to discuss there.

@@EconomicsExplained we dont need Australia either

@@NA.NA.. XD

@@EconomicsExplained "Texans are an unfortunate reality for most people living and working in the modern world, we pay them every year, we complain about them, and then we forget them until next year. "

@@EconomicsExplained *angry cowboy noises

@@dj-ph8mw the majority of national debt was by trump

@@universenerdd You do realize that congress sets taxes and spending right? And for half of Trumps presidency the house was controlled by dems. Not that I like Trump but politically illiterate people like you force me to defend him at every turn because if you are going to criticize him, criticize something he actually did.

Yes i am greek and i felt that...

@@universenerdd i dont even like trump and have to tell you youre wrong. get to know some facts in your life, everything makes way more sense once you get a little truth also, mainstream media, facebook/twitter are NOT the place to get any kind of news or information

2007 08 09 criminal capitalist world financial crash perpetrators still profiting haha put the world on its knees ....where we still lay

Anarcho-capitalism or even anarcho-communism always seem to find their way back to government. "What if the people decided to organize themselves, ohhhhhhhhhh....."

same lol

Yup. I find it surprising how often people criticize some aspect of the modern world, but then they're suggested "better alternative" just ends up essentially a rebranding of what we already have. Just goes to show that a lot of bitching is just that, and doesn't necessarily have any substance backing it up.

Yes you dont need a military if people have guns. Why do you think the nazi's invaded whole europe except for switserland? Not worth it.

@@babycat5001 Because Switzerland wasnt strategically worth it.

That's fair, but in my opinion people/corporations not paying their share or outright avoiding taxes is the bigger problem.

Mate look at the protests in America

RedAnarchist223 what???

@RedAnarchist223 if that statement is not a sarcasm, i truly question your intelligence

Same here

www.institutoliberal.org.br/blog/m-friedman-e-as-quatro-formas-de-se-gastar-dinheiro/ Os impostos são basicamente a terceira e a quarta forma de gastar dinheiro descrita por Friedman. Por isso é ineficiente. Pode ser mais cmo no Brasil, ou menos como em Singapura...

@@dorivaldojunior2254 cuidado em basear todo seu entendimento economico num autor só

Esto

F brasil bro. What ever happened to that olympics stadium they built in rio?

The real democracy is the free market, in which you are voting with every decission you make and each time you decide whether to pay for something or go on to other product/service that better fullfil your needs

Economics Explained what a boomer

you are a silly sausage!!!!!!

lose a colony or let some tea drown? Britain 🤔 #priorities

Last time comments were this late they got sent to a penal colony and ended up with a better GDP per capita ;)

Haha love it

One from each nostril?

Ame Masire Rick and Morty

I'm not sure if it is a worldwide context.

Me too!!

Do we though?

@@Randan444 but Barbecue ribs

Same

@Daniel von Strangle Give it 8 years and it won't be red no more

It's in many cases very possible to simply outgrow debt if you invest it well, which is much easier for goverments than individuals. If your debt becomes a much smaller percentage of your income, it's no longer as big an issue even though you still haven't paid it all off and you're ultimately better off than if you hadn't borrowed to invest into your future income. That is, of course, not what the US is doing.

@@Hust91 Most countries weren't doing that, even before the COVID crisis. Paying off debt is harder than it looks and sounds, especially when it gets to a significant amount. It may be best to avoid debt and build/grow organically.

@@Hust91 well, you have a very good understanding of how macroeconomics work now days, now you just need to learn why this is wrong

@@joecurran2811 you are totally correct, but organically built growth takes too long and isn't profitable for politicians, so "no can do" x'D

@@joecurran2811 Except countries don't need to pay off debt. The US never paid off its WW2 debt for example. but at $241.86 billion in 1946, that amount today is completely insignificant. inflation and economic growth have rendered it basically irrelevant.

Did you watch this video?

@@nz3134of course i did

so if they're not killing people, is it even a war?

@@arielsproul8811 Who says they aren't killing people, they are just very subtle and patient about it

@@arielsproul8811 Cold war exist

ah yes, like the catholics did to... everyone...

Interesting indeed but it's still a bit sensitive topic for indians.

They already made one! ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hjVFwqM7xuo.html

@@castlazary8706 that's on the Dutch East India Company (VOC), both influential economic forces in their times, but very different beasts

I wouldn't mind seeing his take on the South Sea Bubble (which happens to be my favourite series of Extra History).

@@Roxor128 mine also!

I would argue that feudalism is the closest thing to anarcho capitalism we have had. Everything was privately owned exept maybe church assets.

@@Notmyname1593 agreed

Actually it's called the oil, military and banking lobbies.

@@secondavenger9775 that's the goal, not the things in their way

It's closer to the 20th-21st century global situation than the video suggests

Well it suggests at least one: Job Guarantee. But also: abolition of bond sales; not tinkering with interest rates to try and achieve outcomes unrelated to the problems it supposedly addresses, plus dumping the failed idea of central bank independence; abolition of NAIRU.

Franchise are small business owners aswell dumb fk

But even then there is an inherent problem in the capitalistic world-view. An economy, which relys on eternal ever increasing growth, on a planet which is finite, implicates that the resources will be burnt out eventually. Even with regenerative technologies, you just cannot grow forever. And a free market will always look for the most profit while searching the lowest expanse. And this means someone will always be greedier than another. Capitalism is a competition of the greediest. Without state set regulations someone always will be exploited, humans, animals, the earth. It is the nature of capitalism to exploit with no other thought than profit.

Imagine everyone is a leader with -Well built wisdom -Knows when a good fruit starts to rot -Doesn't ignore problems; it cares by taking actions -Learn to seek Improvements & Adapt to changes & mistakes -Determined,Persistent,Consistent *-Treat others at human level, not a living tool*

Humans are the thing I most love and most hate about this world. They are the source of most of life joys . . . and most of its sorrows.

@@galacticplastic1741 Yeah that sounds like the frictionless vacuum environment we read about in highschool physics textbooks. That will never be real.

haha yeah, you have a point xD

@@littlelad406 Humans wouldn't have that. To the first step. Try again.

I disagree with that. The video established an Overton window. The debate within the Overton window was between anarcho-capitalism (far right) and neo-liberalism (centre right). There was no mention of social democracy - the welfare state. There was no mention of state capitalism, planned socialism, market socialism or syndicalism. While I don't necessarily advocate for any of the above systems, I can't agree that the video was impartial because it offered such a narrow range of options - centre right and far right.

@@cristianvelixar1385 It's not really narrow since all the options you mentioned lead to authoritarianism. That's like arguing why dont we consider segregraton? Hate to say it, but every version of socialism is a system of oppression because they all have one thing in common. They give unholy power to the state over the economy. You can really divide economics into two main categories and everything else is a subcategory. It's simple as less government intervention vs more. The reasons and beliefs behind those are just incentives not a function of the system or a result. People tend to over look that social democracy doesn't do much of anything different than other versions because people confuse ideological beliefs that act as motivators with the system itself. It is really not all that much different from Hitler's national socialism from an economic perspective minus the white supremacy .

@@cristianvelixar1385 Also nazi Germany had a welfare state. Good luck with that. Look up, "national socialist people's welfare." All horrible ideas that we've seen play out through history.

@@loki-of-asgard7877 i don't want to correct all the misconceptions you have in regard to different ideologies. I'll just provide an example - left libertarianism is the opposite of authoritarian, while many over ideologies are not intrinsically authoritarian. The nazis made highways, therefore highways are bad - is a shitty arguement. You need to come up with a better criticism for the welfare system. And last, but not least, the underclasses don't have that much freedom in neoliberal or right libertarian systems, because they lack the resources required to access said freedoms. Less intervention by the state in the economy mostly means more freedom for the capital owners, which are a tiny % of the population.

@@loki-of-asgard7877 btw, the traditional company, where the capital owners make all the important decisions, is authoritarian. A minority makes decisions for everybody involved, while the majority has no say in the decision making process. If you really advocate against authoritarianism, you should oppose the traditional capitalist company, which is the core unit of xcapitalism. But you don't, do you?

Unfair

and on top of everything you have listed - there is the inflation tax and when i say on top - i mean that literally - ie on top of everything you have listed. Same goes for government/BoE debt and interest their on

You can't really do anything about it considering the lack of resources in your country

I have done Rome, but eventually I plan to look at many more :)

@@EconomicsExplained you also did ancient china. What about the inca empire or ancient egypt? they were pretty unique too! nice work btw

@@cfv7461 I'd love to see the Inca up there.

@@cfv7461 +1 for ancient Egypt

agreed. we humans are psychologically pre-disposed to forming institutions to regulate interactions with eachother. I'm personally an anarchist, but I'm an anarchist that understands that most people simply feel uncomfortable with the idea of everyone for themselves; even though people will always work together because that's the best way to get things done.

You'd find "night watchmen libertarianism" interesting.

thats IDIOTIC & as perverse & myopic as this Koolaid fruitcakes video... some form of system??... wow thats a deep intellectual donation... THAT IS THE POINT... the USA DID NOT HAVE this UNIVERSAL INCOME TAX until the NWO Cabal created its LARCENIC Non Fed Non Reserve Non Bank in 1913... Think ant HOW DID THE US SURVIVE for OVER A HUNDRED YEARS WITHOUT these TAXES ??? The CRITIQUE is that the current Military Industrial Psycho system is NOT GOOD & Changes are necessary ... Look up Mancur Olsen ... GOVT MUS HAVE EXPLICIT LIMITS or It ALWAYS becomes an EVIL CANCER by Its very Nature...but the MIC LOSING 4 TRILLION UISD on the day that the inside 9/11 occurred is probably just not a problem for you & this vids creator...

@@theprophylacticprotectagai2069 You talk like a schizophrenic

@@theprophylacticprotectagai2069 You are right that government must have limits. If anyone needs confirmation just look at what has happend in so many countries where central governments have ridden over the rights of any other local governemnt and every person's rights.

We have a tax called the GST in Australia that tacks on 10 percent to all goods and services transactions in the country. While reducing consumption sounds like an ideal solution, the issue is that there are many people who cannot reduce their consumption any further. For those living hand to mouth their ability to eat and survive within society is 10% harder with no alternatives. On the flip side those with high disposable income easily absorb the costs and have the option to reduce consumption to save if needed. That doesn't do the economy any favours. The scalability, flexibility and tunability of income tax is superior in this respect

Except that super rich and to a lesser extent, the poor, get to enjoy the subscription without paying for it. The super rich also get to have all the extra perks of the premier subscription.

@@twoeightythreez the top 10% pay 70% of income taxes. The super rich in which case I believe you are referring to the top 1% are also paying their taxes. They just find loopholes to pay less on most cases. They still pay them just a smaller amount than what they are originally required to pay by their companies progressive tax laws. In addition in the case of owners of corporations a lot of them will only make $1 a year and get the rest for being a shareholder. In that case they are still taxes for that but they don't get the double tax that corporate owners usually get

last time i checked, no montly subscription service bullyied me into subscribing...

@@hanarielgodlike9283 idk where that came from but tbf by living in the states you are actively using it already so it's kinda like forcing you to pay them back

@@hanarielgodlike9283 you can always move into the woods and live off the grid. Then you don't get to pay taxes and won't use any of the amenities either.

Do you support the claim that a man has a right to use an unregistered car on the roads without a license?

@@Will_JC as long as the at fault party pays in the event of an accident, yes

@@animn7386 Are you okay with emailing me? I want to talk about something privately, but if you’re uncomfortable with emailing, I have one BON-email option you can consider.

If you think that taxes are needed then who do you think is creating the money is it the goverment if so then why doesn't the goverment just make the money to fund itself and essential services instead of taxing the ppl there supposed to be serving

Who do you think these that's are going to. There going to the private Banksters who loan lend this fake money the goverment asks them for

@@BLAZINGINGPHOENIX you're not really bright, are you?

Where we're going, we don't need eyes to see...

Well, roads aren't necessary, but they do help people get from point A to point B! Things like roads do NOT have to be monopolized by the government!

this meme was made by immortal gang *proceeds to show photo of queen elizabeth

@Iu Iulitza Really?

@Iu Iulitza It was just a joke dude

@Iu Iulitza On one hand he employed hundreds of thousands maybe millions of people saving them from potential hardships, on the other hand he legally* sacked Billions of dollars that could have gone to welfare of people already suffering hardships. Pick you're poison.

@Iu Iulitza its simple then, we eat the Bezos

Not an Ancap, but no. This is not what would happen. An Ancaps response to this would likely be to point out that slavery is a violation of your inherent rights that ancaps believe in. All interactions must be voluntary. Indentured servitude could happen however, if someone agrees to it.

@@Tehz1359 What right would that be if there is no singular governing body to enforce the law of basic human rights?

They make up their income revenue loss with super high property taxes. In California, homeowners are protected by prop 13. So, they have higher income taxes to make up for that shortfall. You will always be paying taxes in one form or another. Don’t be fooled by state governments who proclaim no income taxes.

A bit misquoted, but pretty close. Chicolini in 1933's "Duck Soup": ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-lgRbxHttZSM.html

75

Ok Marx brothers. : )

He actually doesn't pay them anyway. And then taxes are helping him against competition.

@@borislife4477 Excellent point! You are educated and smart!

While you are sitting here complaining the rich are taking investments and working hard for their money. Stfu

@@LoomiYT stfu.

@@LoomiYT stfu.

I'm not going to lie, that sounds like a hellhole.

He can afford a lot of McMuffins.

@@memebro8703 It's still the most unrealistic thing ever. The businessman would be way to concerned the hobo could get his suit smelly.

The McMuffin lord is KING

@@lonestarr1490 I don't see you giving out any McMuffins, Mr. High & Mighty?

What time stamp?

I'm lovin it

Subscription is tax

Did you get to see the Mac Marines?

Reductio ad absurdum you are using a debate fallacy and you clearly don't understand the NAP.

@@kolamoose8717 Subscriptions are a choice taxation is a gun to your head.

It's voi-la m8

Did you just... spell voilà as vwala?

@@mgel7311 Maybe it's the Wakanda version of "voila"

Maybe it's some kind of French creole from the colonies

Statists have no principals as they are willing by proxy to commit extortion assault and murder.

You know, when you lure a rabbit with a carrot in your left hand, the rabbit gets closer and closer, meanwhile you’re holding a baton with your right hand behind your back... when the libertarian clicks..... I mean, the rabbit gets close enough, bam! “Total free market (anarcho-capitalism) is just taxation with extra steps”. EE was heinous this time.

I hate all of you. The Q and A meme was once good. Then you started leaving gaps. Some people even write: " Everyone: RU-vid: " And that shyt gets upvoted to oblivion. Is this a choose your own adventure game?

@@googleuser9383 Op: makes a joke You:

@@googleuser9383 cry some more.

I have to say yes, it worked. However the video is unconvincing, not least because enforced monopolies by nature lead to uneconomic results. Voluntary societies lead to more efficient allocation.

@angelo 30000 no actually. It’s called the NAP (non-aggression principle) and there are no authority but one governing rule. It would be a quick Google search for you. There is no monopoly court run government. You would have to prove that the person violated your life or liberty and a judge and jury would decide if they did or not. No government needed

@angelo 30000 if they were doing business in a region that followed the NAP they would. It would be enforced through insurance companies of those effected. Insurance companies can take up arms against a person infringing on others life/liberty. The person has paid a premium to said company to protect them and do other services in there contract. Otherswise the person who’s infringed life/liberty could do it themselves. The purpose of a court is to give individuals a method to mediate conflict. If you lose in the courts you comply , leave or lose your life/liberty. Just because there is no government or ruler doesn’t mean it’s absolute chaos. There can still be order. Again these questions can easily be answered on any ancap group. There are plenty of RU-vid videos describing these situations. It might seem like insurance companies are now government but there are many companies trying to get your business with different coverage that you want instead of the monopoly government your forced to pay into a system that is corrupted or flawed that doesn’t cover all the things you want it to

@angelo 30000 and through said system you’d still have corruption and abuse of power. They would still send people to war and kill people on the other side of the world. Poor people would either need to find a job or hope they have family or donations to help them. Instead of forcing people to support people with threat of prison it would make more sent to have consent. It’s morally wrong to take money from a person who doesn’t consent to it. It doesn’t matter what the reasoning behind it is. You don’t get to act immorally just because you plan to later be moral.

Remove texas.

Texas is theft! Abolish Texas! I hate Texas!

Texas, thanks to their general dislike of taxation, actually receives more money from the federal government than they pay in federal taxes. So... no.

@@vylbird8014 If we're talking about budget deficit CA is the worst of them all, eventhough they're boasting pretty high taxes this year they announced 55 Billion deficit in their budget and their total debt to the federal goverment is around 1 Trillion

Bye cowboys and girls

there is no market good that has utility to people that can't also be a market good. there is literally no justification for public goods.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pENUV9DLa2g.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HdlVw5KFCqEh.htmlttps://ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HTN64g9lA2g.html I want uou to watch these 😂

You are talking about (good) Monarchy?

@@mikexhotmail No. Not monarchy at all.

In the mall there are lights and air conditioning. The mall makes no money from these things yet they provide them for free. Why would street lamps not be the same?

Well we all contribute in our own way I suppose xD

Don't you pay sales tax on everything that has a barcode on it?

@@kingspammernerd I guess he's a thief then.

How do you not pay taxes? :o

@@jakob6960 Even the gulf states implemted taxes

It's either her, Clive or Rio Tinto

There's a good clip in the Simpsons movie I need to dig up for how Alaskans get paid to ignore the destruction of their environment

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-PBxzvFHwl0I.html got it

But it beg another question. Why would you do that if people have to go through your road regardless? Road is not the same as other assets like cars. You can easily choose any cars you want. But if the place you want to go only have 1 road. You really can't choose another road for that

Competition cant really work with roads though. If you wanna visit an address on a certain street, you don't have the option to use another street with lights. (Sure, sometimes there are multiple routes to a given location, but not necessarily)

The lamps would have blue tooth so would the chip in your phone or body. You'd automatically get charged as you get closer. Probably what track and trace will end up being used for. Road use charge etc.

Places that not many people visit will not be profitable, and therefore not have roads, or bad roads in a system like that.

@@coolmenscool4436 Yes, quality would go where society deemed it important and not wasted an areas where it's not.

Well they are a lot of questions that arise. This "group" which built or played for the building of the roads would not freely allow any other person from using the roads unless they pay some sort of fees (taxes). Also, the idea of a property right or rights for any matter becomes obsolete because only the super rich determine what rights to uphold and who it applies to (even breaking some of their preconceived rules to increase profit and lifestyle [Animal Farm]). Also the idea of pollution being squeezed into a land space is VERY ILLOGICAL. The effect of air pollution cannot be contained in one nation not to talk of an individual property. Essentially, it is impossible to pollute without harming another and most industries require some sort of pollution to manufacture goods and services.

That means you are working half the year for free

@@bigz5262 not really, cus you Get services for those taxes that you normally could not afford

@@adamkinsten9231 so you can opt out of those services and not pay the taxes for them?

I’m guessing UK

@@bigz5262 Sure can. Nobody is forcing you to remain a citizen. It's a package deal tho. Take it or leave it.

Can you provide sources to this? I moved to Sweden and have no idea there are that many taxes!

@@southoceann sv.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lista_över_svenska_skatter

List of Swedish taxes (2006) Municipal income tax, municipal tax State property tax State wealth tax state income tax Employer contributions (Part fee, part tax. See General payroll tax. For high incomes, in practice a pure tax.) Income tax on individual pension savings Petrol tax (See energy tax and carbon dioxide tax) Taxation of foreign exchange reserves Taxation of certain private imports of tobacco products and alcoholic beverages Corporation tax Diesel tax (See energy tax and carbon dioxide tax, under excise taxes below) Vehicle tax (part of road traffic tax, see below) Benefit tax Cassette tax Coupon tax Value Added Tax (VAT) SINK tax, special income tax for residents living abroad Seaman's tax Gaming tax Tax on interest on forest account funds, etc. Stamp duty at registration authorities Special payroll tax on pension costs Special payroll tax on certain earned income TV charge Road traffic tax (SFS 2006:227) Vehicle tax (part of road traffic tax) Sales cart tax (part of road traffic tax) Congestion tax Excise duties Alcohol tax Waste tax Pesticide tax Energy tax Flight tax Fertilizer tax Carbon dioxide tax Nuclear tax Lottery tax Natural gravel tax Advertising tax Tax on profit savings, etc. Gambling tax Sulfur tax Special premium tax for group life insurance Tobacco tax

Wemen all time

Too*

Too*

*Too

"too" is the proper spelling. One goes 'to' prison or is 'too' cute for prison. Hope this helps.

as soon as he said "income tax" it was clear as water.

Texas incoming

And someone who doesn’t know the difference between a libertarian and liberal has an existential crisis

@Secret Sauce Thanks for the insight nerd.

Yes.

Secret Sauce tru

@Secret Sauce and so are some republicans. Maybe try to see that a lot of liberals are like a lot of republicans, and that there are a stupid minority of people on both side. Don't just assume all liberals are insufferable, because saying that makes liberals think you are insufferable.

@Rory McDonald Translation of your comment = ignorant leeches have joined the chat.

My opinion is that the government should not have VAT. sales tax or income tax. I think we should just have property taxes, revenue taxes and capital gains taxes. The US government needs to severely reduce spending. Get rid of the welfare state, social security and government backed student loans. We should also defund the FDA, FDE and FCC, on top of that, get rid of much of the spending on the US military.

@@legoboy-ox2kx IMO free market social security is better.

@@MarinelliBrosPodcast Fair enough, I personally don't feel the need for it, but I definitely think that it would be pretty popular

Libertarians are worse than vegans with their virtue signaling

Having taxes obvious to everyone is by design. When taxes are out of sight they lose visibility. It makes it much harder for citizens to actually know whether the government they have elected is actually being successful or not. Having a lower barrier to information about the economics of your country is a good thing, as it allows people to make more informed decisions about the course their country will chart in the future.

Here in the UK, it's all handled for us before the paycheck even hits our bank accounts :)

Income taxes and payroll taxes, social security, Medicare, are taken out of pay checks. Most of us Americans don’t file for enough “dependents” tho so the gov takes too much money therefore taking a interest free loan from the taxpayer. Hence, tax returns. But taxes do get more complicated when you’re running a business.

True--and another problem with America's tax system is the gigantic hassle involved. The government should simply present its calculation of what you owe or what they owe you and allow you to appeal if you disagree.

I know. It's essentially aristocratic feudalism. Company X owns some land. Person Y also owns some land nearby. Company Z owns land and has a large private military and offers, or forcefully arranges, to give their protection to X and Y. X and Y have to pay for that service, i.e. taxes since they don't want to pay it. They would use the itinerant workers to work the land, produce goods, then sell them for cash which then would be partially turned over to person Z and partially kept for themselves as payment for letting the works inhabit the land. It would circle back to governments and feudalistic ones at that

Because those people think that life will be just like now but they will avoid paying for things they dont use... While the truth would be that they would have to pay 1000 different things and it would be much more expensive

Irek Cz. Why would it be more expensive? Also, as explained in the video, there is always the option of insurance to provide security.

Joseph Henry At least Company Z’s jurisdiction would be relatively small (hypothetically) and company Z wouldn’t limit the gallons per minute of my shower, wattage of my vacuum cleaner or fine businesses for not being ‘diverse’ enough

My friend is a hardcore 'taxation is theft' libertarian type, and concedes that you can't get rid of all the government optimally. His compromise was to...just keep the police and military. That aged like fine milk in regards to current times. Just try imagine a national police force with no government oversight.

saying the truth ....... to the guillotine... sorry wrong country.

Farmers are not taxed but workers are. What wrong people

@@jaiparwani4279 I am talking about Black Money here

Oooohhhh killem

Also India: Nice shiny new paper currency you have there, shame if we made it worthless by decree :)

1/3 owned by private investors 🤢

Interesting idea. Two thoughts. First, who represents the government? Are they elected, appointed, or hired? How or by who? In other words, what mechanism of accountability are there for the government side of the triad? The investors staked their money, the workers staked their livelihood, and yes technically the institution of the 'government' staked its credibility but what about the representative of the government? The status of the government's credibility would act like a tragedy of the commons here. One bad representative wouldn't tarnish the status completely so its hard not to free-ride and for many bad apples to take the gamble as representatives of the 'government'. Corruption controls would need to be critical. Which gets into the second issue. the non-rivalrous nature of the 'government'. What I mean is that the government would have 1/3 ownership in ALL private companies simultaneously. This actually gives the government considerable leverage as it could coordinate its decisions across companies. Technically investors can be member to multiple companies but they would not be ubiquitous like the government in this case. I could see a worst case scenario in which the entire economy is held hostage by all government parties in all corporations coordinating some kind of fillibuster, corrupt dealings, price fixing, and so on.

@@nicolasargon1436 The elected government would appoint people to be make decisions on behalf of them. These people would have to make decisions based on achieving goals chosen by top level government or by just following their exact orders. Depending on the importance of a decision and what the vote regards, it would have to be approved by various government body's. If the government officials are failing to meet up to goals and the problems can be traced back to the way they voted they would be fired. The government wouldn't have too much power as if they faced opposition from both workers and private investors they could always be outvoted.

@@nicolasargon1436 The government's stake would be that if things go wrong they end up having to bail out the companies. Perhaps, the government could have 1/3 of the voting rights without actually owning stocks and receiving dividends. Perhaps that would come only if the government invested money in to these companies. The government wouldn't have to get involved with companies bellow a certain size, things like family resteraunts would make all the decions by themselves, ofcource while following government regulations.

this seems entirely arbitrary. how did you arrive at this conclusion? why is each stake what it is? how would this be arrived at? this is rather like starting with the topmost part of a building and trying to build downwards.

Wouldn't that just be exactly like what natural resource rich governments such as Alaska or Arabian Oil Monarchies use as an alternative to taxation. The only difference being that the "government" would have near monopolistic control over multiple different sectors of the economy to pay for it's activities, instead of just natural resources.

that just sounds like paid citizenship

what do you mean "move in"? and you can already buy shares of public companies and they pay you dividends or just provide growth