Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

But Who Will Pick The Cotton?

jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 7:12:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
One can imagine a pro-slavery person in the South (pre-Civil War) defending slavery on these grounds: who will pick the cotton if there are no slaves to do it? What will become of the cotton industry?

Is this not precisely the same thing as responding to arguments against taxation by saying "But how will we build the roads?"

Fact: both cases involve forcing a person to contribute a certain amount of the fruits of their labor, whether or not they agree - a violent and coercive means of obtaining something (the only other option being a voluntary transaction). Fact: Defenders of the status quo in both cases ignore the moral implications of the state taking peoples' property against their will, by saying that the system could not exist in any way other than the current one.

It should be clear that even if cotton wouldn't have gotten picked without slaves doing it, or if roads wouldn't be built without the government first coercively extracting money from its citizens, the moral implications of slavery and theft trump these concerns.

Needless to say, too much freedom never destroyed the cotton industry in the South. The laws of supply and demand exist totally independent of any government. The same applies to the building of roads, or absolutely any good or service. Without a monopoly on the use of force, and with competition, any good/service will be sold at a lower price and a higher quality.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 7:18:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Difference: The taxpayer can leave anytime they want. The Slave is stuck there.

It's kinda like the difference between paying to stay on someones land, and paying to be stuck on someones land.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 7:21:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/10/2012 7:18:30 PM, OberHerr wrote:
Difference: The taxpayer can leave anytime they want. The Slave is stuck there.

It's kinda like the difference between paying to stay on someones land, and paying to be stuck on someones land.

It's kinda like you presupposing sovereignty of the State which is a separate point of it's own. Oh but hurr durr who can love it or leave it.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 7:39:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I love it when people ignore that government activity in various sectors is actually filling a niche and when the government withdraws, private companies will be able to fill that niche. I've seen many private roads throughout my travels and even though they may not be inherently superior (kinda hard to make a better road), they function just as well as State roads. Of course, it would be helpful to do some calculations of whether the private or public roads cost more to the consumer.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 8:11:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/10/2012 7:39:03 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
I love it when people ignore that government activity in various sectors is actually filling a niche and when the government withdraws, private companies will be able to fill that niche. I've seen many private roads throughout my travels and even though they may not be inherently superior (kinda hard to make a better road), they function just as well as State roads. Of course, it would be helpful to do some calculations of whether the private or public roads cost more to the consumer.

I've seen really stupid decision in both public and private roads.

We had a road in our country club(Yeah, I'm one of those people. Lived in a country club in the middle of the boondocks. Kind of like the Hamptons for people with salaries under 50k). When they extended the road to new development sections, they decided to use a cold mix(because it costs less up front). Every year, they have to repatch 20% of the road, because it is gone. Completely broken up and gone. The washboards of the previous dirt road have broken through. It's basically the worst paved road I've ever driven on.

The city where I now live just redid a main road. This road was flawless. No damage, no potholes, nothing. All of the side roads branching off of it are in bad shape. But, they decided to spend the money on the main road. They put down a layer, I'm not kidding, about 1/4 inch thick on top of the old road. It's exactly the same as it was, except now all the manholes are recessed, so it's bumpier.

The main thing is, when the government does something, there is no competition. No natural driving force to bring innovation and efficiency.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 8:38:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The taxpayer can leave anytime they want
False, there's nowhere to leave to.

It's kinda like the difference between paying to stay on someones land, and paying to be stuck on someones land.
A nation is not "someone's land." In order to have rightful claim to any piece of land you have to mix your labor with it in a manner that cannot coexist with the use you are claiming it against.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 8:58:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/10/2012 7:39:03 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
I love it when people ignore that government activity in various sectors is actually filling a niche and when the government withdraws, private companies will be able to fill that niche. I've seen many private roads throughout my travels and even though they may not be inherently superior (kinda hard to make a better road), they function just as well as State roads. Of course, it would be helpful to do some calculations of whether the private or public roads cost more to the consumer.

Kind of like when Washington state voted to privatize their liquor store, under the belief that the private market would get better service for a lower price... Then price never went down (pre-tax prices remained the same, while taxes caused prices to go up).

Oregon (and our evil, inefficient state run liquor stores) is seeing millions in profits from Washingtonians not wanting to pay the higher prices.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 9:22:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/10/2012 8:58:11 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/10/2012 7:39:03 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
I love it when people ignore that government activity in various sectors is actually filling a niche and when the government withdraws, private companies will be able to fill that niche. I've seen many private roads throughout my travels and even though they may not be inherently superior (kinda hard to make a better road), they function just as well as State roads. Of course, it would be helpful to do some calculations of whether the private or public roads cost more to the consumer.

Kind of like when Washington state voted to privatize their liquor store, under the belief that the private market would get better service for a lower price... Then price never went down (pre-tax prices remained the same, while taxes caused prices to go up).

Oregon (and our evil, inefficient state run liquor stores) is seeing millions in profits from Washingtonians not wanting to pay the higher prices.

I seriously doubt that there were no improvements under a privatized system for something as consumeristic as liquor. Sources, please.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
JamesMadison
Posts: 381
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 9:25:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/10/2012 7:18:30 PM, OberHerr wrote:
Difference: The taxpayer can leave anytime they want. The Slave is stuck there.

It's kinda like the difference between paying to stay on someones land, and paying to be stuck on someones land.

Where would they go?

Another state?
As a general rule, you'll find that, when a conservative is talking about policy, history, economics, or something serious, liberals are nowhere to be found. But, as soon as a conservative mentions Obama's birthplace or personal life, liberals are everywhere, only to dissappear again when evidence enters the discussion.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 9:27:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/10/2012 9:22:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/10/2012 8:58:11 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/10/2012 7:39:03 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
I love it when people ignore that government activity in various sectors is actually filling a niche and when the government withdraws, private companies will be able to fill that niche. I've seen many private roads throughout my travels and even though they may not be inherently superior (kinda hard to make a better road), they function just as well as State roads. Of course, it would be helpful to do some calculations of whether the private or public roads cost more to the consumer.

Kind of like when Washington state voted to privatize their liquor store, under the belief that the private market would get better service for a lower price... Then price never went down (pre-tax prices remained the same, while taxes caused prices to go up).

Oregon (and our evil, inefficient state run liquor stores) is seeing millions in profits from Washingtonians not wanting to pay the higher prices.

I seriously doubt that there were no improvements under a privatized system for something as consumeristic as liquor. Sources, please.

http://www.heraldnet.com...

"Christie Scott, a spokeswoman for the Oregon Liquor Control Commission, said most stores submit sales figures at the end of the month, so it's too soon to say if the anecdotal reports accurately reflect a surge in sales. Scott said the agency analyzed the possibility of higher Washington prices before the initiative took effect. The study showed that Oregon's 17 border stores could see a $3.6 million to $7 million boost in revenue over a two-year period."

"Traci Brumbles, owner-agent of the Rainier Liquor Store, just across the Columbia River from Longview, Wash., said she has run the numbers and her business was up 15 percent in the past few days compared with the same time last month."

Maybe it is too soon to tell.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 9:30:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
"However, the initiative also imposed an additional 10 percent distributor fee and 17 percent retail fee on spirits to reimburse the state for millions of dollars in lost revenue. The result was higher prices for consumers at many retail outlets."

There's your problem.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 9:33:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/10/2012 9:27:34 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/10/2012 9:22:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/10/2012 8:58:11 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/10/2012 7:39:03 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
I love it when people ignore that government activity in various sectors is actually filling a niche and when the government withdraws, private companies will be able to fill that niche. I've seen many private roads throughout my travels and even though they may not be inherently superior (kinda hard to make a better road), they function just as well as State roads. Of course, it would be helpful to do some calculations of whether the private or public roads cost more to the consumer.

Kind of like when Washington state voted to privatize their liquor store, under the belief that the private market would get better service for a lower price... Then price never went down (pre-tax prices remained the same, while taxes caused prices to go up).

Oregon (and our evil, inefficient state run liquor stores) is seeing millions in profits from Washingtonians not wanting to pay the higher prices.

I seriously doubt that there were no improvements under a privatized system for something as consumeristic as liquor. Sources, please.

http://www.heraldnet.com...

"Christie Scott, a spokeswoman for the Oregon Liquor Control Commission, said most stores submit sales figures at the end of the month, so it's too soon to say if the anecdotal reports accurately reflect a surge in sales. Scott said the agency analyzed the possibility of higher Washington prices before the initiative took effect. The study showed that Oregon's 17 border stores could see a $3.6 million to $7 million boost in revenue over a two-year period."

"Traci Brumbles, owner-agent of the Rainier Liquor Store, just across the Columbia River from Longview, Wash., said she has run the numbers and her business was up 15 percent in the past few days compared with the same time last month."

Maybe it is too soon to tell.

But they went from 330 places to 1,500 places to buy liquor in 1 month. If they can move supply that quickly, why should the price be so slow to follow?

Why, because in privatizing the liquor, the state imposed a 27% tax (or fee or whatever words they used, it's 27% whatever it is), to make up for lost revenue. The pre-tax price stayed the same, so prices went up because of the tax. And, of course, conservatives are blaming evil government taxes, when the government is just being revenue neutral and the private companies are taking in the profits. But oh well. It reminds me of some local convenience stores that are charged $0.40 per debit card transaction, but they put a sign out saying "all debit/credit adds a $.75 fee because of charges from the card companies."

They are finding an excuse to raise the price and shift the blame.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2012 9:37:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Right, so the State imposed an effective 27% tax and somehow it's the free market's fault that liquor is more expensive. Sound logic is sound.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2012 12:01:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
New Hampshire is famous in the Northeast for state liquor stores that undercut the prices of neighboring states. http://online.wsj.com... The neighboring states are small, so it's easier to drive to a neighboring state to shop. They compete by lowering taxes.

I read that Brits are buying beer in France to avoid taxes.

States with high taxes in general are losing population. California has had about 2 million move out, with Texas the top destination. California weather is close to ideal, so it has to be pretty bad to scare people away.