Top income brackets should be taxed at 99%.

1) Please explain exactly how (by what method, by who's military/police/laws etc) citizens of First World democracies are forced to RENT, rather than buy. While you're at it, explain how a business operator subject to your terrible analogy of protection rackets, is forced to remain in that business. What law and law enforcement is compelling him/her to remain?

2) Someone making money out of those willing to pay it. Parasitical opportunists, just like every other enterprise. Don't like standover men asking you for 'protection fees' once a month? Sell your store and go raise rabbits. Stay, and it means you're okay with it.

3) If Joe Blow didn't like giving his money to the landlord, he wouldn't be giving his money to the landlord. Until you can demonstrate which law (and its enforcement agents) is preventing him from buying property, this is a terrible argument.

4) Yes, evil ... always evil. And filthy!

5) The small businessman clearly prefers his symbiotic relationship to anything else, since he's remaining in it. Again, show us the laws preventing him from selling his store, or simply closing it down and moving out.

 

They have to pay landowners so much of their wages in rent just for permission to work that they can't save enough to buy.

Nothing forces him to remain in that business, just as nothing forces the landless to work for a living. Quite the contrary: the protection racketeer's effect is to force him OUT of business, just as the landowner's effect is force the landless OUT of the workforce. That is very much the point. The fact that the landowner and the protection racketeer are the ones doing the forcing completely eludes you speaks volumes.

That is an astonishingly absurd and disingenuous evasion -- quite worthy of you, I must say.

So you even refuse to know the difference between production and predation. Despicable.

Nothing I could say could possibly make that statement seem more grotesquely immoral than it already is on its face, so, yeah, let's just leave it there as a silent reproach that your grandchildren can be ashamed of.

The law that says he has to pay a landowner full market value just for permission to work, shop, and live.

Yep. You literally just rationalized and justified extortion.

No; like the landless, he would prefer not to be victimized by an evil parasite. That's just not one of the options on offer.

Grotesque -- but so remarkably consistent with every sickeningly immoral and disingenuous rationalization for greed, privilege and injustice you have offered to date. Kudos!

 

So... what are you doing still here?

End the theft!!!

 

Can you name a workers paradise where socialism is 100% voluntary?

 

Since you continue with your delusion of superiority, have at it.

 

You have been comprehensively and conclusively demolished, you know it, and you have no answers. Simple.

 

Yes, we should evolve beyond taking money from people by force. That would be truly civilized.

 

Your delusions of grandeur are most entertaining. Get back to me when you gather a valid argument.

 

Another one bites the dust.

 

Again, civilisation ain't free.

Somalia...

 

We have different ideas of civilized behavior. I don't think stealing people's money is civilized.

 

Reads like a view a sociopath would have.

 

Yes, one hardly expected such disarming candor.

 

I have taken the trouble to give you many, and you know it. You have just -- prudently, in my view -- declined to expose yourself to further humiliation by attempting to offer a rejoinder to any of them.

 

No, I'm merely observing that it is necessary to a modern economy -- as you know, but are disingenuously pretending not to.

Without making just compensation. That's where we differ. You think no compensation is owed for what the privileged forcibly take from everyone else, either from the perpetrators or to the victims. I say just compensation is owed in both directions.

 

So everyone in the world who owns property is going to send me a check to compensate me for them violating my right to liberty? That's like billions of checks.

 

That's because it's not stealing.

Btw, you are asking for something for free; that everyone else will still have to fund...

You don't have to pay, and you shouldn't pay. Not ever again. Tolerating theft by force is intolerable.

Since taxes have been around for thousands of years, you're gonna have trouble finding somewhere that doesn't have them. Antartica doesn't...and you don't have to worry about warlords like you would in Somalia.

Will you need a gofundme page to get your plane ticket?

 

What am I asking for for free?

 

No.

Yes, well, it is just some absurd and disingenuous $#!+ you made up, after all.

 

I've just gone through our entire exchange. Not one link or viable fact. It's all your opinion, with a couple of quotes from people who think the same way you do.

No facts, no links, no honest basis. That is not a valid argument, no matter how many times you post that you 'demolished and/or humiliated me', you still haven't figured out the intrinsic value of land, the entire contradiction to your idea that exists that when YOU use the land for something (growing cotton for your clothes) not only are you preventing someone else from using the land, you are removing intrinsic value by depleting the natural resource that is intrinsic to the land.

intrinsic
[inˈtrinzik, inˈtrinsik]
ADJECTIVE

1. belonging naturally; essential.
   "access to the arts is intrinsic to a high quality of life"
   synonyms:
   inherent · innate · inborn · inbred · congenital · natural · native · constitutional · built-in · ingrained · deep-rooted · inseparable · permanent · indelible · ineradicable ·

Read. Learn. And someday, you may figure it out. Now go rub out the redness on the back of your neck.

 

But everyone who steals my right to liberty needs to compensate me.

 

Really? What am I asking for?

 

Oh yeah. Because caring about equality of opportunity, democracy, and justice is so sociopathic.

 

No, because anything at the state level is NOT socialism. It can't be, because it would be monopoly, hierarchy, and authoritarianism .. very different animal.

 

Sunshine, you live in a ****ing democracy. NO ONE is prevented from buying property. You can bleat all you like about 'can't', but you know as well as I do that unless some law is involved, it's really 'won't'. That's where the buck stops.

Your personal distress over people acting like people (and choosing things you don't approve of) is something you need to deal with. It's clear that you have serious issues with the idea of autonomy and agency.