Quote from: billyjoeallen on March 14, 2014, 05:35:36 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on March 13, 2014, 11:49:17 PM

You have a clever way of pointing at technicalities such as you do NOT want to "run a society." Who gives a flying fuck whether a person uses the word run or that the society is running on its own...

Ultimately, the point that I am making is that in the real world apart from your fantasy land of generalities (that supposedly is shared by others with similar visions of grandeur), the societal objectives are NOT going to be met. ... and net happiness will be down.. even thou some people may feel free an empowered by such a vague societal outline.... b/c supposed individualized liberty will be embraced and respected... Your whole outline seems much to vague.

And face the reality... you cannot "meet the needs of the helpless" without having various plans that outline such rather than relying on some amorphous concepts of voluntary giving...... and I am quite confident that the helpless will be a much broader category than you are contemplating in your vague outline of principles.

Is this less vague?
System A: 60% of the people vote for a 10% tax to help the needy. Tax collection and funds distribution is 50% efficient so the poor get 5% of society's income.
System B: 60% of the people voluntarily donate 10% to help the needy directly and the poor get 6% of society's income.

The poor are better off under system B but I suspect this is unacceptable to you because helping the poor is less important to you than forcing everyone to conform to your values.

Your numbers are unacceptable b/c you seem to be pulling them out of your ass.

You seem to be assuming that voluntary is more efficient than non-voluntary and you seem to be assuming that voluntary results in a higher amounts of contributions through some kind of adequate participation rate.

Also, I have NO idea the tax methodology contained therein, and some of these dynamics to create a kind of flat tax, is usually NOT acceptable - even though you did not outline what kinds of taxes that you were suggesting.

Taxes are NOT such a big monster and enemy to the individual freedom that you are making them out to be - even though I will admit that it seems that in many regards, in modern application taxes are all screwed up... and a lot of the screw up has to do with the generous tax cuts to the rich for more than 30 years... which have been causing increasing burdens on regular people. and also in regards to the preferential treatment of the rich, in various regards, and death of unions and other democratic institutions, there has been considerable redistribution of wealth from regular and middle and lower classes to the undeserving spoiled ass rich.

I am NOT jealous.. b/c I have NOTHING against people being able to become rich.. the problem is that there has been such widespread corruption and failure to pay taxes by rich people and even subsidies, that this has been contagious and even decent rich people get lured into this trap of never ending desire for more.. even when they have plenty.