I've been having a fantastic debate about private property rights on another message board. It started as a discussion of the recent law pass in Florida where the state legislature made it "legal" for individuals to bring guns to work, provided the gun is left in the car. Disney dismissed one of their employees because he brought a gun to work, even though it was in his car. My argument is that while the gun is in the mans own personal property (the car) the car is parked on Disney's property (the parking lot) and thus he is violating their property right by bringing the gun to work (because they do not allow them) even though it is locked away in his car. These fellows on this other message board can't grasp the idea of private property. They keep appealing to their "2nd amendment right" to bear arms. I'm trying to explain to them that the 2nd amendment is a restriction on government, not on individuals, especially when we are talking about their property.
Anyway, after three days of discussion I finally won. How? You know you've won when they say this:
"The difference between the point of view you hold and my point of view is simple, kingmonkey....I'm recognizing reality while you are espousing theoretical principles. If you really lived your theories, you'd be dispossessed or jailed by now, so I guess you recognize reality as well."
Which brings me to another point. This statement makes it patently obvious that I was totally and completely wrong about my view concerning illegal immigration and such in this discussion we had here recently (On Voting).
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds. " -- Samuel Adams.
Very nice. There is a point you can take conventional thinkers to, and then you have to walk away. Either you have piqued their interest, or they are stubbornly going to eat up much of your time and energy in defiance.
I would make a great bureaucrat. Wanna see? Click here. It's fun.
kingmonkey: "The difference between the point of view you hold and my point of view is simple, kingmonkey....I'm recognizing reality while you are espousing theoretical principles. If you really lived your theories, you'd be dispossessed or jailed by now, so I guess you recognize reality as well."
That is an interesting question. How risky is it for a freedom seeker to actually live by their theories? I'm referring to avoiding income taxes, using sound money, and ignoring stupid regulations that restrict trade. Are there any hard statistics? Citing high-profile tax evasion cases is irrelevant, because that doesn't count the people who got away with it.
For example, if there was a 1% chance of being busted for tax evasion and going to jail for 5 years, it's totally worth it. If you avoid income taxes, you get paid twice as much. When you're in jail, you earn no income for 5 years. Therefore, tax evasion has positive expectation, if there's only a 1% chance of getting caught.
I have my own blog at FSK's Guide to Reality. Let me know if you like it.
My mother was an IRS agent for 25 years and once told me, and I've seen this number elsewhere, that upwards of 30-40 million people every year fail to file their income taxes. Most of the people who get away with it operate on a cash basis, are self-employed and keep a low profile. I figure if you can own your own business and accept nothing but cash as payment it is quite possible to spend many years off the radar.
I, however, choose to pay my taxes. I pick my battles and fight the ones I know I will win. Right now it's not worth the trouble you can get into if you don't pay your income tax. As more and more people are shown the inherrient evil of the State I imagine we'll find it much easier to resist paying taxes. I'll continue with my guerrilla education tactics to combat the State right now.
kingmonkey:I figure if you can own your own business and accept nothing but cash as payment it is quite possible to spend many years off the radar.
Around here, coffee shop owners are particularly notorious for declaring their revenues much smaller than they in fact are -- since customers don't ask for receipts they have a lot to work with -- and then collecting welfare. Contractors and stuff generally offer a smaller price if you don't want receipt as well, and since municipes require authorization for some of house jobs, which can take a few months, you already want to operate in the shadow anyway.
Equality before the law and material equality are not only different but are in conflict with each other; and we can achieve either one or the other, but not both at the same time. -- F. A. Hayek in The Constitution of Liberty
Here's one of my favorite tricks, which I should start using.
When you go to a restaurant, you may pay by credit card or cash. Suppose that 50% of customers pay by credit card and leave an average tip of 15%. Then, the IRS assumes that cash-paying customers leave an average tip of 15%. To frustrate this, you should leave a tip of $1 on your credit card, and leave the rest of the tip in cash!
kingmonkey, this is a huge point and it's usually difficult to hammer into someone's head the difference. The analogy that always sticks in my minds is private roads. For public roads, it seems that the state cannot lawfully regulate behavior upon them. How can you be fined for speeding or any other individual behavior that does not infringe upon others' rights, when you never explicitly agreed to such? It seems on public roads, the only legal basis for forcing you to turn over wealth is when it is awarded to someone whose life or property you damaged. On private roads, however, drivers must respect the rules of the owners AND must explicity agree to them to be able to use those roads. Public law in this case is simply around to ensure that we have the life and liberty to own cars and roads and have the ability to allow others to use them on our terms.
...the disrespect for property rights usually comes from "left libertarians" or "authoritarian libertarians" who believe that there should not be such things as property rights or believe that the state should force property owners to accept certain forms of behavior on their property.
Check my blog, if you're a loser
Anyone know of good strategies to evade taxes?
"The plans differ; the planners are all alike"
-Bastiat
I don't know of any left-libertarians who take that position, nor does the connection between authoritarianism or statism and left-libertarian make much sense, since the bulk of people who identify as left-libertarians are anarchists (while right-libertarians are dominantly minarchist). The left-libertarian criticism of the right-libertarians would actually tend to be that they engage in the error of treating the state as if it were a legitimate private property owner, hence legitimizing restrictive government policies which actually amount to real individual property rights violations.
ChaseCola: Anyone know of good strategies to evade taxes?
The best one I've seen is to work off the books at a bar.
Probably just because I frequent the bar quite often though, I'm sure there are better stratigies.
I did it a few times when I was hanging out and someone called in sick or something and did alright if you consider that I got paid and my tab was also taken care of in the process. Made over $60 one night not counting the 12 hours worth of beer that I drank and that was just working the door checking ID and collecting the cover charge. Hell, I would've done it for the free beer, especially since I got to drink while working, but I never let them know that.
Good money to be made in bartending and doubly good if you get to keep 100% of it.
I feel your pain kingmonkey. In fact, I think that every libertarian that has argued with idiotic leftists and whatnot understands. Like currently, I'm in a debate with a moron on Ron Paul Forums who thinks monopolies are bound to happen in the free market. I explained to him theoretically how it's impossible and then I asked him for empirical proof of monopolies forming in free market or close-to free market systems. He has failed to do so and now is resorting to practically every logical fallacy in the book.
"There is only one innate right, freedom (independence from being constrained by another's choice), insofar as it can coexist with the freedom of every other in accordance with a universal law." - Immanuel Kant
I had this argument yesterday.
Do Gooder Socialist: That's a natural monopoly
Me: There are no natural monopolies
Do Gooder Socialist: Sure there are, they use predatory pricing
Me: There is no such thing as predatory pricing
Do Gooder Socialist: Yes there is
Me: No there isn't
Me: Give me one example of predatory pricing or natural monopoly
Do Gooder Socialist: There are millions of examples
Me: Then it should be easy to give one
Do Gooder Socialist: Microsoft
Me: *KABOOM*!
I would never suggest evading taxes but...
if you're not making much, try to deal in cash exclusively. that means working a bar or any mainly cash tips-based job.
if you're making more money, start your own business. Pick something that is not regulated, probably something tech-related, like a website. There are plenty of books that will teach you good ways to lessen your tax burden through this model. You'll funnel your money into your fledgling business and it magically becomes tax deductible.
if you're making killer money, hire a financial advisor - this is one of the main aspects of their job. The reason you won't find a clear guide to cheating on your taxes is because (a) it's probably illegal to do so (b) it would spoil the party and (c) there is most likely no one-size-fits-all method to do it. The tax code is so complex, there are likely a myriad of ways to structure offshore accounts, stocks, real estate, gifts, etc. with each person benefitting most from a different arrangement.
Also, hire your children and family to move your income into lower brackets. For the lower brackets, there are no short-term capital gains taxes. This is probably a good money maker.
meambobbo: if you're making more money, start your own business. Pick something that is not regulated, probably something tech-related, like a website.
if you're making more money, start your own business. Pick something that is not regulated, probably something tech-related, like a website.
Actually, if you're starting an agorist off-the-books business, then picking something regulated to the hilt is best! That maximizes your profit. Of course, that also is risky, if you get caught.
I did window washing for a long time which is a great job if you can make it work. There is a lot of competition out there. The great thing about it was that most of my customers paid in cash and never really wanted a receipt. In fact, I often refused to accept checks unless the bill was several hundred dollars.