Does the fact that we do not have a debtors prison mean that not all laws are the use of force?
Trianglechoke7:Does the fact that we do not have a debtors prison mean that not all laws are the use of force?
Nope the former does not imply the latter, since force doesn't necessarily mean prison.
Schools are labour camps.
Trianglechoke7: Does the fact that we do not have a debtors prison mean that not all laws are the use of force?
What are you driving at? Seems like something is missing here or maybe I'm not thinking hard enough and if so I apologize. Maybe you could rephrase the question. If you're thinking Law=State, then that's false.
"I used to see a mountain as a mountain.. Thereafter.. when I saw a mountain; lo! it was not a mountain.. yet now of final tranquillity: I see a mountain just as a mountain as I used to.." - Master Yuan; molon labe
Trianglechoke7:Does the fact that we do not have a debtors prison...
We do have debtor's prison, for non-payment of taxes.
Well, let's say that I owe $1000 from a civil suit. Will, at some point, the state use force against me if I continue to resist, or is the worst I face bad credit - which is not force, I don't think?
Trianglechoke7: Well, let's say that I owe $1000 from a civil suit. Will, at some point, the state use force against me if I continue to resist, or is the worst I face bad credit - which is not force, I don't think?
They can use force through mechanic's leans and garnishment of wages along with other means. Look at how they collected from O.J. Simpson after he was found liable for Nicole Brown's death in the civil suit. Not taking sides in that whole affair. Just using it as an example of what can be done.
How did they collect from OJ?
The judgment creditor gets the sheriff to confiscate assets: Heisman trophies, autographed footballs, etc. The sheriff will auction them off and the proceeds go towards the judgment.
If the sheriff gets to OJ's house and he tells him he can't take his Heisman, then the sheriff arrests him. If OJ says from my cold dead fingers and starts shooting, then the sheriff will shoot back. Thus, enforcement of debts = force.
Of course even with the state, as in a non-state society, force is rarely required. People will work out a payment plan just to maintain their credit rating rather than standing on the front porch with a shotgun and telling their creditors come and get it.
What about the garnishment of wages?
As I understand it, your employer is requested to withhold earnings and then somehow pay the person you owe. What happens if you're employer refuses to pay?
If the state ultimately will not put someone in jail, and someone just ends up having bad credit then I don't see this as te use of force.
Trianglechoke7:If the state ultimately will not put someone in jail, and someone just ends up having bad credit then I don't see this as te use of force.
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
Yeah, but if a particular offense will never lead to jail, even if it's not an error, then that particular law is not the use of force.
its not clear what offence you have in mind?
Trianglechoke7: As I understand it, your employer is requested to withhold earnings and then somehow pay the person you owe. What happens if you're employer refuses to pay?
Then the employer is held in contempt and will be fined and, if the fine is not paid, have his assets seized, etc.
It occurs to me that we may not just need an FAQ for econ/libertarian issues. We may also need one for basic life questions. Things like: How do internal combustion engines operate? What is a bank statement? How are babies made?
Byzantine,
What is your profession? Are you a lawyer?
The reason I am asking is because a lawyer told me that the employer will not be able to deduct things from his taxes.
I'm soooooooo sorry that I don't know all the intricacies and avenues that will take place as someone resists non-payment from a civil suit.
Since when was jail/jail time considered the only use of force?
If a police officer decides to pull me over he does so with force, regardless if I have done anything wrong or broken any laws. If he issues me a ticket, regardless of if I am found guilty of a crime, I am required to pay a "processing fee," which I find to be extortion. Also, just to clarify, you can be put in jail for not paying any fine, including civil.
This isn't what I was told. I was told that no one will ever go to jail for non-payment of a civil suit. Is this BS, or correct?
It is essentially correct. However, if you physically impede the sheriff from evicting you from your house so it can be sold to satisfy the judgment, then yes you will go to jail. An ultimate threat of force is what backs all collection efforts. This would be no different in anarchy, btw.
Couldn't non-payment result in bancrupcy, and aren't there provisions of bancrupcy in which no property will be taken? All you will have is 7 years bad credit?
Wouldn't that be a way in which there is no chance of force being used against you for resistance?
Look, you just need to pay the debt. If you can't pay it all at once or the entire amount, you should be able to work out a payment plan.
Debts are a private matter.
State laws banning debtor prisons depend on force.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap