Anti-Capitalist Sentiment (with some morality)

[Renton]

Although, I think history has shown every day for 150,000 years that nothing needs to be perfect in order for societies to run. It just needs to be good enough.

Do I wish taxes were used more efficiently? Yes. Am I bothered by the fact that there are inefficiencies? No.

I present to you a situation where the state is taking 37% of the stuff by force, owning about as much of the land, and almost certainly not returning to the people a value anywhere remotely comparable to that, and your response is a flip dismissal of "inefficiencies." Obviously one need not be bothered by inefficiencies if they are small, which is your implication. They're not small, they're mammoth.

I'm not aware of the specific laws to which you refer.

My gut says:
Stifle a little growth vs. provide access to a slightly more robust infrastructure.
Surely there must be a balance.

Again with the diminutive language. How has the state earned the benefit of the doubt from you? Stilfling a lot of growth vs provide access to shitty, obsolescent infrastructure would be more accurate.

I agree there should be a balance. But taxing corporations and capital gains is extremely misguided. There are better ways for the state to make it's nut. Taxing employers is just an attempt at subterfuge, putting degrees of separation between a citizen and the tax burden. It's a very popular tax because people by and large do not understand how business works. They believe that a corporation will hire the same number of people at the same wage whether there's a 25% corporate tax or no tax at all.

Inflation is a tax?

I thought inflation was... idk... a weird consequence of the free market and burgeoning wealth.

Are you sure it's a tax? Which state's representatives proposed inflation? What year?
Did wufwugy take over your account, too?

Free market inflation 1) doesn't exist / never has existed and 2) wouldn't be a tax because it would be related to the amount of economic growth there is. In fact, it is quite likely the case that in an actual free monetary market that saving money in a shoebox would have a annual return.

The inflation we experience is a tax because the state controls if it happens and how much it happens. It also controls how much banks lend by arbitrarily setting interest rates to a level that is usually below what market would be. Then the state insures banks against runs or even bails them out completely with tax dollars when they fail. This creates a generally fucked up system where banks can take crazy risks that they would never dream of taking in a free market. A side effect is excessive inflation, which we all experience like a sales tax as we watch prices of goods in the economy continually increase.

I don't really see how taxes tie in to making sense of an economic system with complicated non-capital trade mixed in with capital trade. Taxes provide capital for non-capital goods. This is a part of the economy. To say that business or people do not receive benefit from taxes is not swaying me.

I really don't understand what you mean by this. Taxes provide capital for non-capital goods? Please elaborate.

I accept that some things for which we are taxed could be run better by private organizations, but I don't see why you feel that it's such a big deal.
(And I completely disagree on roads. Terrible idea. I'll pay taxes for roads, zoos, public parks, schools, libraries, police, fire, medical services, wildlife reservations, clean food, clean drinking water, clean air if it comes to it, etc.)

You tell me the system is broken, but at worst, I see a system that is sub-optimal.

I won't spend much time on what you put between the parentheses because that could take days. I will say that its interesting that things like zoos and libraries made it into the illustrious 13. Private sector can't cage wildlife and charge a buck for its view? The internet has already supplanted libraries. You seem to have a pretty large bias for what you believe only the state is capable of providing.

I feel it is a big deal because monopolies suck. Every time the state decrees that it and only it can provide a good or service to people, that sucks and should be avoided at all costs. We should be extremely particular with which services we subject to that restriction.

That is your choice. Attend your community council meetings. Attend City Council meetings. Run for local office. Write your state legislators a letter. Schedule an appointment to meet with their staff, etc.

Pros and cons. Two party hurts a third party, but what the parties stand for has swung 180 degrees over the years, so it's kind of a moot point to suggest that any particular ideology is excluded.

So since I'm not completely upending my life in an attempt to move one of the gigantic boulders of party lines a few millimeters, I have no right to complain?