5 ms·

If that's your jam why wait, book your flight to Somalia today and start living the dream.

komali2 4y ago
Arguably the various insurgencies and federal government of somalia all form a state. The communities over which they rule have little say in the governance. If the OP is arguing for anarchy or communism, Somalia isn't a good example.
IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
The country ran just fine with 0% income taxes until 1913. We were almost 150 old as a nation then. We had already become a superpower, as WW1 and WW2 would shortly confirm.
- culturestate 4y ago
  > The country ran just fine with 0% income taxes until 1913. Sure, apart from that whole Civil War fracas in the mid-1800s and the ensuing decades of reconstruction.
  - brigandish 4y ago
    The Civil War was a fight over the efficiency and ability of the country to run itself via taxes or not?
    - culturestate 4y ago
      My point is that regardless of the tax regime, America pretty clearly did not run "just fine" in that era.
      - brigandish 4y ago
        It seems that you could also say it didn't run fine if there were an invasion, for much the same reasons, but that wouldn't, in most cases, make it a valid critique of the way things were being run, especially with regard to the actual subject here, which regards the tax regime.
- checkyoursudo 4y ago
  There were income taxes before 1913. e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1861 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1861
  - somenameforme 4y ago
    He means permanent. In times of urgent need, such as in times of war, the government would raise money as necessary. The federal government assessing a permanent tax on people was a huge deal and required a constitutional amendment, the 16th, passed in 1913. The act you're referencing was in response to the Civil War (which started in 1861), and would be allowed to ultimately expire about a decade later.
HideousKojima 4y ago
Why do people always used a collapsed socialist state as their "gotcha" against libertarian type arguments? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_Revolutionary_Socialist_Party https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_Revolutionary_Sociali...
- forgetfreeman 4y ago
  because all of the libertarian ideals apply in any collapsed state (no governmental controls, unfettered free market, etc). What that state started as before it collapsed isn't relevant.
  - HideousKojima 4y ago
    Somalia doesn't lack a state though, it has competing warlords fighting for control of the remains of the socialist state.
    - Apocryphon 4y ago
      And you presume in the absence of a state, no force will attempt to fill the power vacuum?
conanbatt 4y ago
There's no need, you can do it today from within any country by living with cash.

Arguably the various insurgencies and federal government of somalia all form a state. The communities over which they rule have little say in the governance. If the OP is arguing for anarchy or communism, Somalia isn't a good example.

IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago

The country ran just fine with 0% income taxes until 1913. We were almost 150 old as a nation then. We had already become a superpower, as WW1 and WW2 would shortly confirm.

culturestate 4y ago
> The country ran just fine with 0% income taxes until 1913. Sure, apart from that whole Civil War fracas in the mid-1800s and the ensuing decades of reconstruction.
- brigandish 4y ago
  The Civil War was a fight over the efficiency and ability of the country to run itself via taxes or not?
  - culturestate 4y ago
    My point is that regardless of the tax regime, America pretty clearly did not run "just fine" in that era.
    - brigandish 4y ago
      It seems that you could also say it didn't run fine if there were an invasion, for much the same reasons, but that wouldn't, in most cases, make it a valid critique of the way things were being run, especially with regard to the actual subject here, which regards the tax regime.
checkyoursudo 4y ago
There were income taxes before 1913. e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1861 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1861
- somenameforme 4y ago
  He means permanent. In times of urgent need, such as in times of war, the government would raise money as necessary. The federal government assessing a permanent tax on people was a huge deal and required a constitutional amendment, the 16th, passed in 1913. The act you're referencing was in response to the Civil War (which started in 1861), and would be allowed to ultimately expire about a decade later.

HideousKojima 4y ago

Why do people always used a collapsed socialist state as their "gotcha" against libertarian type arguments? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_Revolutionary_Socialist_Party https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_Revolutionary_Sociali...

forgetfreeman 4y ago
because all of the libertarian ideals apply in any collapsed state (no governmental controls, unfettered free market, etc). What that state started as before it collapsed isn't relevant.
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  Somalia doesn't lack a state though, it has competing warlords fighting for control of the remains of the socialist state.
  - Apocryphon 4y ago
    And you presume in the absence of a state, no force will attempt to fill the power vacuum?

conanbatt 4y ago

There's no need, you can do it today from within any country by living with cash.