Subject: »NEWS AROUND THE WORLD

So once again, you're not reading. So I'll end this discussion here.

OMG, everytime you have nothing to respond you have to do like that?

I'm an economist.

ROFLOL!

That's ridiculous. People can't just move if they disagree with a law. They are bounded by family, work, ...

That's like saying Americans who opposed Iraq voluntarily sent troops to Iraq. "Hey, if you disagree with it, move."

OMG, everytime you have nothing to respond you have to do like that?

That is because you really don't read. I was talking about healthy banks. You kept insisting on "they were saved by the state". No. Healthy banks were not saved by the state. Period.

ROFLOL!

Oh, the unbearable argumentation! Kill me now.

Instead of asking these ridiculous questions, answer mine. If there are no taxes, is there no state?

I did answer. Hypothetical questions are best answered with another hypothetical question. If a company has no cash inflow, would it last? Why is mine question ridiculous when compared to yours?

I meant just kill someone at random. I walk on the street and I just kill some random dude. Would he get killed 'voluntarily' in that case? (If those laws were democratically accepted.)

You really like this meaningless hypothetical stuff. We have a saying in Croatia "Da je baba muško, zvala bi se Duško." meaning "If grandma was male, her name would be Duško (a male name)." The saying means that hypothetical * questions are not very useful.

The term 'joke' is subject to quite some inflation apparently.

Well, I didn't say that they were good jokes. But replying to them seriously is certainly a joke. ;)

*edit: the unrealistic hypothetical questions
(edited)

If a company has no cash inflow, would it last?

If they fire everyone and do not do anything, yes. They would still be a company. Now answer my question.

The saying means that hypothetical questions are not very useful.

If your logic is not applicable to such cases, your logic is not ... well, not very logical at least.

Oh, the unbearable argumentation! Kill me now.

Watch it! Euthanasia is legal in Belgium and apparently they don't get jokes either. ;)

The whole idea is ridiculous.

This can't be democratic, because the constitution of a democratic nation guarantees human life, so noone can kill random people. A democratically elected majority can change this in the constitution, but that just means, they make a dictatorship via the parliament, like nazis did in Germany. That was not a democracy anymore.
(edited)

If they fire everyone and do not do anything, yes. They would still be a company. Now answer my question.

Such company is irrelevant. You want the state to be irrelevant as well. Then be at least honest enough to say it like that. Don't use "Catch that thief!" tactic.

This can't be democratic, because the constitution of a democratic nation, guarantees human life so noone can kill random people.

Exactly. There are fundamental human rights that must be respected at all time if a nation wants to be democratic. We agree on that.

Now, we disagree on what those fundamental human rights are. For me, they are the right to live, the right to equal treatment by the state, the right on property and the right on free speech.

Because of the third one, taxes are - for me - a violation of the basic human rights. I was born in this country. I never signed a contract saying I'm voluntarily giving a part of my income (ergo property) to the state. And yet, if I don't, I'll be put in jail. For me, that's a serious violation to the human rights.

You want the state to be irrelevant as well.

It should be only a minor force in life, yes. I never denied that, I was always very clear on that. Government, get out of my life. "Leave me alone, I know what I'm doing" to quote mighty Kimi.

I was born in this country. I never signed a contract saying I'm voluntarily giving a part of my income (ergo property) to the state.

You were born there, and you still live there. You don't have to sign a contract, implied conduct exist too.

Alternatively, you can always go to Sub-Saharan Africa. There are many countries which are very close to your dream-society:
- Theoretically there are taxes, but practically state doesn't collect them.
- State lives mostly from humanitarian / developement aids + revenues from the mining sector.
- Public servants aren't really paid by the gov, so if you want to settle something, you yourself can pay them via corruption.

No. Healthy banks were not saved by the state. Period.

The question is what would have happened if all those saved banks had fallen? I think it's fair to say the whole financial system is saved by the intervention of governements, also 'healty' banks. For example, if a lot of people and businesses would have lost all their money with unhealthy large banks and because of that not be able to pay the mortgage of their houses or loans anymore to healthy banks, these healthy banks would also have lost a lot of money and would have become the next with financial problems. All would have fallen as a house of cards.

Ofcourse this system is wrong and sick as banks have become way to important and powerful, but that's how it is at the moment and not likely that will change soon.

It should be only a minor force in life, yes. I never denied that, I was always very clear on that. Government, get out of my life. "Leave me alone, I know what I'm doing" to quote mighty Kimi.

That's your opinion and you have the right to have it. However, it's dishonest to base it on false argument that taxing is theft. Crime investigators first look for a motive and in your case, there is none. You can speak of corruption but that's only abuse.

That is because you really don't read. I was talking about healthy banks. You kept insisting on "they were saved by the state". No. Healthy banks were not saved by the state. Period.

I answered that is partially FALSE.
Healty banks are healty until the bond they own doesn't become trash.
And there are really few banks that doesn't own any bond of nobody outside their country.
So if some gov saves banks of its country, indirectly it saves the banks that owns that bonds, that indireclty means to save tha bank that owns bonds of this banks, and on and on..


Anyway, returnig to Cyprus, the failure of the project of tax on deposits, make increase the risk for the whole euro area.
If Euro falls with enormous disasters because of the banks of Cyprus, we really must burn those ignorant eurocrats at Bruxells..

You don't have to sign a contract, implied conduct exist too.

Okay. I'll deliver you a bread tomorrow, whether you like it or not. You're going to pay for it. Implied conduct you know.

Alternatively, you can always go to Sub-Saharan Africa.

Yes, because that is the example of a libertarian society.

The question is what would have happened if all those saved banks had fallen?

There are banks who wouldn't get hit by this. You must know Triodos Bank (it's a so called ethical bank) in Belgium and the Netherlands.

Ofcourse this system is wrong and sick as banks have become way to important and powerful, but that's how it is at the moment and not likely that will change soon.

I think everyone agrees that the current system is sick. And it must change. By getting the government out of the financial system.