3 ms·

I'm not suggesting it's necessary to pay any person you associate with. It just seems a really intrusive restriction to legally report on anyone you pay. To me

by Canada 4y ago

I'm not suggesting it's necessary to pay any person you associate with. It just seems a really intrusive restriction to legally report on anyone you pay. To me, it seems as absurd as having to file a report with the government on anyone you meet. I can see justification in narrow cases, but requiring it universally seems ridiculous to me.

vel0city 4y ago
> you really have a right to free association if you have to file a report if you pay someone $600 to do something for you? > I'm not suggesting it's necessary to pay any person you associate with. So you agree the right to free association is orthogonal to the idea of hiring people to do a paid job then, right? In which case, how is having labor hiring laws a violation of free association, when you agree you can still freely associate with people? In which case, arguing "free association" in terms of arguing that labor hiring laws being unjust isn't really a valid argument then, huh? Like, I can go down to a park with a group of friends and not have to tell the government about it. I can attend a church and practice and not have to tell the government about it. I can have a dinner party at my home with my friends and not have to tell the government about it. I can freely associate with whoever I want, that's not a crime. I can't hire a bunch of people who are not legally allowed to work in this country, as currently the government wants to disincentive unrestricted immigration and have made this action of paying people for labor they deem improper illegal. This is an immigration policy, not a free association policy. FWIW, I'm one to argue we should relax some hiring practices and reduce barriers to immigration in many ways, but this really isn't a "free association" kind of issue.
- bombcar 4y ago
  You can even give hundreds or thousands of dollars to people as gifts without reporting requirements. The requirements kick in when people are trying to avoid paying social security tax, basically, or paying for work under the table.

by Canada 4y ago

vel0city 4y ago

> you really have a right to free association if you have to file a report if you pay someone $600 to do something for you? > I'm not suggesting it's necessary to pay any person you associate with. So you agree the right to free association is orthogonal to the idea of hiring people to do a paid job then, right? In which case, how is having labor hiring laws a violation of free association, when you agree you can still freely associate with people? In which case, arguing "free association" in terms of arguing that labor hiring laws being unjust isn't really a valid argument then, huh? Like, I can go down to a park with a group of friends and not have to tell the government about it. I can attend a church and practice and not have to tell the government about it. I can have a dinner party at my home with my friends and not have to tell the government about it. I can freely associate with whoever I want, that's not a crime. I can't hire a bunch of people who are not legally allowed to work in this country, as currently the government wants to disincentive unrestricted immigration and have made this action of paying people for labor they deem improper illegal. This is an immigration policy, not a free association policy. FWIW, I'm one to argue we should relax some hiring practices and reduce barriers to immigration in many ways, but this really isn't a "free association" kind of issue.

bombcar 4y ago
You can even give hundreds or thousands of dollars to people as gifts without reporting requirements. The requirements kick in when people are trying to avoid paying social security tax, basically, or paying for work under the table.