Gene Wolfe Fans Talk Politics (Again)

Adam Thornton · 19 May 2009, 20:06 · from 2009-May.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: adam at io.com (Adam Thornton)
Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 15:06:11 -0500
Subject: (urth) Gene Wolfe Fans Talk Politics (Again)
In-Reply-To: <D67BBCB673F4491BB8DC3A37289BD563@eMachinePC>
References: <mailman.68838.1242757770.12296.urth-urth.net at lists.urth.net><4A1304A1.1000901 at verizon.net><13409.67.142.130.18.1242761222.squirrel at brunians.org>
	<2BCC6FAA-905B-4A04-BFAE-817E0EDE9BD8 at io.com>
	<D67BBCB673F4491BB8DC3A37289BD563@eMachinePC>
Message-ID: <002BF131-691F-4247-B56E-19C9D86BDA6D at io.com>


On May 19, 2009, at 3:01 PM, James Wynn wrote:

>>> Josh said:
>>> Please do explain how consensual taxation works: I am all ears.
>>
>> Adam responded: This one's easy.
>> The government provides services I find beneficial, such as police  
>> and fire protection, maintained roads, public education, and so  
>> forth.
>> Therefore, taxation is, at least for me, consensual.
>
> Well, okay, Adam but if you change your mind about the cost-benefit  
> of the services provided, they will take it from you anyway. The  
> obvious conclusion is that your personal consent is irrelevant.   
> That you have decided you like it right now is just a happy  
> coincidence for you.

Let us say, rather, that my personal consent is only relevant as part  
of the input to the process by which taxes are levied.  In other  
words, I get one vote, and my personal preferences don't trump that.

I'm reasonably happy with that as emblematic of how a democratic  
society is supposed to work.  And, as you say, if I don't like it, I  
am free to leave.

[...]

> You can say that "Well, we live in a society, and that's just the  
> burden that rich people will have to bear to live in it with us.  
> Fine. The Wall Street Journal has an article yesterday by Art Laffer  
> on what the response of rich people is to that ultimatum.
>
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124260067214828295.html
>
> They leave.
> Just as the pilgrims left when Wat set up shop in the forest.

And yet, I see very few millionaires moving to Mogadishu.

Why do you suppose that is?

Adam

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net