tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9066757945443134809.post5818342119277764096..comments2023-06-23T04:29:21.783-07:00Comments on Small Thoughts: tax heavenArare Litushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11847817123495550351noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9066757945443134809.post-27716319796354412612009-04-17T09:53:00.000-07:002009-04-17T09:53:00.000-07:00"I find your assertion that anarchy and nonco..."I find your assertion that anarchy and noncoercive methods are behind the crackdown to be puzzling."<br /><br />True, the "actors" here are not people - but states - so this is a limited form of anarchy, and a strong libertarian may simply discount international relationships of not being anarchic and say this form of anarchy is so severely limited to be useless: I make the case for two reasons:<br /><br />(1) this, while limited, can be studied as a type of anarchy where we pretend nations are "people", so we can actually get some understanding of strength & weakness of anarchy [note most states, such as the US, like this current system and do not want to be under world courts etc, which is a good argument *for* more anarchy within states: what is good for the goose...], and<br /><br />(2) I want to intentionally push strong libertarians a bit, since I think that a lot of economic (and general interesting philosophy) is behind this case, and one can tease some understanding out with argument here.<br /><br />[snipe] I had a bunch of babbling here, I'll turn it into a future post...<br /><br />Suffice to say, I believe this is an interesting case study that pulls many deep issues to the fore.Arare Litushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11847817123495550351noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9066757945443134809.post-48603459457481996382009-04-17T09:12:00.000-07:002009-04-17T09:12:00.000-07:00I hail the spread of acts of defiance against unju...I hail the spread of acts of defiance against unjust laws (tax evasion being a prime example) as steps in the right direction: widespread defiance delegitimizes state authority. In one respect I agree with you: crackdowns like this, which offend the currently rich and powerful, can lead to reform. However, crackdowns of this sort are typically supported by the mass population, and more than likely will lead to nothing.<br /><br />However, I find your assertion that anarchy and noncoercive methods are behind the crackdown to be puzzling. You say "international relationships is one of anarchy." Sure, the leaders of the G20 nation can 'anarchically' reach a deal by which they agree to suppress tax havens, but then they must use coercive methods to actually get the people who are governed to comply. They are not agreeing to not trade with the nonconforming haven, they are agreeing to force their subjects not to trade.<br /><br />A strong libertarian, therefore, would find it easy to argue against the crackdown. Just because a deal came about noncoercively doesn't mean that the result of the deal is noncoercive: if states reach a noncoercive agreement to tax, it does not change the moral status of taxation.Zachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02686620311007535958noreply@blogger.com