The positive, economic effect of lowering the minimum wage to $0

[Rob Roy]

You first.

Were you forced to sign the W4?

In the sense that duress was part of the situation, yes.

Any person attempting to work for wages, salary etc. that is mandated to give a portion of the fruit of their labor is under duress.

Logic has my back. Diversion and false dichotomy has yours.

Now, back to the alley. I flipped your manly body over, stole your wallet, and you've pissed your pants in fear. Me, being a kind Sasquatch gave you back half the money from your wallet....were you robbed?

 

[Rob Roy]

All consentual

Can you show me a copy of this "social contract"? I don't believe I've ever seen one.

 

[UncleBuck]

An agreement made under duress is not a valid agreement.

no one has ever had a gun to their head and been forced to sign a withholding agreement. it's all voluntary. nothing will happen to you if you don't sign it, no duress.

you lose again, pedo.

 

[Padawanbater2]

No, you do not.

Yes you do. If you didn't you wouldn't consent to buying the product. Consent is assumed with the choice of purchase

You have taken two separate and distinct things, home ownership ( a natural right) and combined it with something else arising from coercion, taxation.

Home ownership is not a 'natural right'

If 100% taxation off your labor is slavery, which percent is "not slavery" ? 43.55% ? 21.7 % ? 76.2 % ? Which percent?

Very inconsistent.. A percent of your labor (surplus labor) is directly withheld actually without consent in a capitalist economic system (if it wasn't, the employer wouldn't turn a profit), so which percent of that is "not slavery"?

 

[UncleBuck]

How did ya like that cute little comment about the nigger chasers?

 

[bu$hleaguer]

If you don't sign it, they just enter you in as single with no allowances. Therefore withholding your hard earned cash anyway. Does it even matter if they forced you to fill it out or not when they'll withhold anyway? I'm confused as to the argument here. Your w-4 is your opportunity to change amount withheld due to personal life situations not everyone may have.

 

[UncleBuck]

It's really not about FOX news, it's about facing the cold hard facts, the truth.

exactly.

you won't see any facts or truth on fox "news".

 

[Padawanbater2]

Can you show me a copy of this "social contract"? I don't believe I've ever seen one.

So if you buy a car, you're not consenting to paying the tax on the car? Do you think a car salesman would sell you a car if you told him you want it for the sticker price but don't consent to paying the tax on it?

No, he wouldn't

He sells you the car because you do consent to pay the tax on it

 

[UncleBuck]

Aren't you?

For starts, this subsidized stuff is bullshit with most farmers. I'd like to see wimps like you try farming for 3 years. After mother nature kicks your ass every which way but Sunday, you've experienced nothing but losses and real mental anguish because you can not control acts of God, you'd be back in some public housing unit living off welfare subsidies that hard working taxpayers like me are funding.

nah, you entitled welfare rats have crop insurance courtesy of the federal government for that.

dumbass mooch.

 

[UncleBuck]

Okay, tell me which percent of theft (taxation) makes a person not enslaved?

whatever amount they agree to voluntarily when they sign the withholding agreement, dipshit.

 

[see4]

In the sense that duress was part of the situation, yes.

Any person attempting to work for wages, salary etc. that is mandated to give a portion of the fruit of their labor is under duress.

Logic has my back. Diversion and false dichotomy has yours.

Now, back to the alley. I flipped your manly body over, stole your wallet, and you've pissed your pants in fear. Me, being a kind Sasquatch gave you back half the money from your wallet....were you robbed?

Bullshit. Who forced you to sign that W4? Was it at gun point?

re: back alley, only problem with your premise is that I carry, and you would be dead.

 

[see4]

If you don't sign it, they just enter you in as single with no allowances. Therefore withholding your hard earned cash anyway. Does it even matter if they forced you to fill it out or not when they'll withhold anyway? I'm confused as to the argument here. Your w-4 is your opportunity to change amount withheld due to personal life situations not everyone may have.

Who forced you to go work there?

 

[bu$hleaguer]

Who forced you to go work there?

Huh?

 

[Rob Roy]

Yes you do. If you didn't you wouldn't consent to buying the product. Consent is assumed with the choice of purchase

Home ownership is not a 'natural right'

Very inconsistent.. A percent of your labor (surplus labor) is directly withheld actually without consent in a capitalist economic system (if it wasn't, the employer wouldn't turn a profit), so which percent of that is "not slavery"?

No, I DO NOT consent. The fact that a tax is levied and a person buys a particular product they either cannot produce themselves or are prevented from producing is not evidence of consent. It is only evidence the tax exists. Consent is impossible to give unless the individual does it. Your argument relies on a rationalization that person A can consent for person B. Which is ludicrous.

I do not defend capitalism as it exists today, it relies on rationalization. I defend a truly free market, reliant upon actual consent of the willing participants.

 

[bu$hleaguer]

Who forced you to go work there?

You keep saying you're not forced to sign anything or to fill it out but that doesn't change the fact that you still get money withheld. What argument are you trying to make? Sorry, just confused with what you're trying to argue

 

[Padawanbater2]

There's 24 hours in a day and if you're only working 8 of them and you can't pay your rent, get a second or third. That's what I did.

Do you think people should have to work more than 40 hours a week to survive?

 

[UncleBuck]

You keep saying you're not forced to sign anything or to fill it out but that doesn't change the fact that you still get money withheld. What argument are you trying to make? Sorry, just confused with what you're trying to argue

who forced you to hire anyone?

 

[UncleBuck]

No, I DO NOT consent.

prepare your anus, klanman.

Consent is impossible to give unless the individual does it.

you told me you were aware of the property taxes when you bought your house, and bought it without duress.

you raped and enslaved yourself, pedo.

 

[Padawanbater2]

No, I DO NOT consent. The fact that a tax is levied and a person buys a particular product they either cannot produce themselves or are prevented from producing is not evidence of consent. It is only evidence the tax exists. Consent is impossible to give unless the individual does it. Your argument relies on a rationalization that person A can consent for person B. Which is ludicrous.

I do not defend capitalism as it exists today, it relies on rationalization. I defend a truly free market, reliant upon actual consent of the willing participants.

If you didn't consent to the tax, you wouldn't make the purchase

What's stopping you from creating any product yourself?

 

[Rob Roy]

whatever amount they agree to voluntarily when they sign the withholding agreement, dipshit.

Voluntary agreements are usually a good thing. Can you show me the agreement that individual people made with this coercive thing referred to as the Federal Government allowing confiscation of their labor?

How about the agreement the guy that owns Wendy's made with you agreeing to let you use his bathroom floor for a sewer? Is that floating around somewhere or is that some kind of "social shit contract" that relies on, well...nothing ?