tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2364362406345742956.post7289931723664311848..comments2023-10-23T09:23:05.584-05:00Comments on Live Oaks: My Virtual Platform: TaxesBrian Phillipshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06604845862020723068noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2364362406345742956.post-49523639158290675002009-02-26T07:58:00.000-06:002009-02-26T07:58:00.000-06:00Thank you for participating in the Objectivist Rou...Thank you for participating in the Objectivist Round Up! Keep 'em coming!Jenn Caseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07849654785544313839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2364362406345742956.post-9517744437407004212009-02-25T18:09:00.000-06:002009-02-25T18:09:00.000-06:00"Examples: Roads - with private companies controll...<I>"Examples: Roads - with private companies controlling them, would we have an even worse comprehnsive system? Would private companies actually work together to produce a cohesive system?</I>"<BR/><BR/>It happens all the time. The consumer electronics sector (among the *least* regulated) is a great example of this. Take <A HREF="http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/adopters_founders.aspx" REL="nofollow">HDMI</A> for example; many different companies collaborated to make it. It's a product/service just like a road.<BR/><BR/><I>"I would not say taxes/government are not completely immoral. Although, it's a direct effect of the fall of man. Because sin entered the world, people became immoral. Also, we can assume that people are in their natural state, "not good"(see the mortgage crisis); we're selfish"</I><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/morality.html" REL="nofollow">Morality</A> is based on the fact that as a biological organism, man faces an alternative between life and death. If he is to live, he must determine (by reason, we have very little in the way of instinct) what things are of value to him. That is, what will support his life. I'm not sure where this "sin" you're referring to came from.<BR/><BR/><I>"Finally, it is not the responsibility of government to protect us from the immorality of others. Many immoral actions, such as advocating socialism or cheating on one's spouse should be legal. Actions that initiate force against others should be prohibited, and those who use force should be punished severely."</I><BR/><BR/>That's right, and of course fraud is included in there as well. But you knew that ;-O<BR/><BR/>Another good post.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10897769844874861468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2364362406345742956.post-26948066279317068332009-02-25T15:02:00.000-06:002009-02-25T15:02:00.000-06:00There are many examples of private companies worki...There are many examples of private companies working together--the downtown tunnel system for example, which approximates how private roads might operate. But privatizing the roads would not be an immediate goal of my administration.<BR/><BR/>Taxation is not an example of selfishness, but the exact opposite. By selfish, I mean concern with one's own interests. Taxes are justified on the opposite moral principle--that we must place the "general welfare" or the "public good" before our own personal interests. Therefore, we must each pay our "fair share", and government will tell us what that is. <BR/><BR/>Government is actually an arbitor, not a mediator. Government is an agent of force, and its purpose is to protect individual rights. When an individual's rights are violated, it is government's purpose to identify the culprit and assess punishment. <BR/><BR/>Finally, it is not the responsibility of government to protect us from the immorality of others. Many immoral actions, such as advocating socialism or cheating on one's spouse should be legal. Actions that initiate force against others should be prohibited, and those who use force should be punished severely.Brian Phillipshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06604845862020723068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2364362406345742956.post-56625061440279243872009-02-25T12:08:00.000-06:002009-02-25T12:08:00.000-06:00How would eliminating taxes completely (but since ...How would eliminating taxes completely (but since this is real life, cutting them enormously) actually affect the way things are accomplished? Waste Management is one example, but I'd like to hear of others (at least in general).<BR/><BR/>Examples: Roads - with private companies controlling them, would we have an even worse comprehnsive system? Would private companies actually work together to produce a cohesive system?<BR/><BR/>I would not say taxes/government are not completely immoral. Although, it's a direct effect of the fall of man. Because sin entered the world, people became immoral. Also, we can assume that people are in their natural state, "not good"(see the mortgage crisis); we're selfish. <BR/><BR/>Government is therefore a natural mediator which helps control the people from complete chaos. This is not to say government should control all things, but they should protect people from immorality of others (or eachother). You might say that market forces would force out or limit these immoral business/people, but I'm not so sure about that as immorality would be running rampant.<BR/><BR/>In conclusion, I would say small government is needed, but I agree with you that they have their hand is in baskets they shouldn't.<BR/><BR/><I>...render to Caesar what is Caesar's...</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com