The sovereign citizen movement rejects the legitimacy of the government. Its fast-growing popularity has had authorities scrambling to get a handle on how far its tentacles have reached.

Unfortunately, Mr Oxby was persuaded by this theory during the seminar, which I infer from his evidence, was presented in a persuasive and charismatic manner."

He was ultimately fined $14,000.

  • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Okay, fine. If you tax the ultra-wealthy at 100% for example, then they have no incentive to work and therefore will no longer be ultra-wealthy and that will pay for what maybe 1% of what’s necessary to fund these services and now there are no more ultra-wealthy people so who are you going to tax? The middle class of course.

      • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right, but the government is a very wasteful spender. As an example, the US government spends the market cap of Apple Incorporated every 100 days. If Apple did that, they would not exist in 100 days. But the government continues to exist. I completely understand that once you obtain a certain amount of wealth, you really don’t need any more. However, with that said, I think taxation is the wrong way to handle it and that using another service is the correct way to handle it.

          • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Okay, if the government is supposed to provide a basic quality of life, then they are failing at that job and need to be replaced.

              • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Exactly, which also shows the differences because I very firmly believe that we cannot vote hard enough to escape this situation. I and many others have lost complete trust in our institutions and we act accordingly. Why vote when it does no good? In fact, if anything else, I would be willing to vote for shit policies in order to watch the train wreck happen faster in order to get to a better place faster.

        • Dkarma@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I love how you dont even understand the concept of a line of credit and everything is a zero sum game. You have a very broken outlook on life. Very toxic mindset.

          • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Credit and the I must have it now mentality is most of the problem with people today. You don’t need credit when you actually have money.

            • Gorgritch_Umie_Killa@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The ‘asset wealthy’ being spoken of here use credit all the time as they arent in a liquid position to transact at that point, but provably do have the capital in assets to satisfy the transaction. And we all use credit, often in very reasonable situations.

              For instance, a first home buyer borrowing when interest rates are low, locking in a low interest rate for a long period, can be very beneficial for the individual concerned, where house prices get higher for an extended period. Even if it does lead to some perceived realty market stickiness.

              Widespread use of Credit is not the problem (in this regard), and in fact could be a sign of a more trusting global society beginning to establish itself.

              Credit is also bot new. It is the OG, and has been with us since well before tokenised money. Read David Graeber’s ‘Debt’. And look up debt sticks, or the origin of the yin-yang symbol. The essence of David Graeber’s argument is tokenised money, uniquely gold, is used when you transact with someone you are unable to trust, credit is used when you can trust.

              It’s of course more complicated now, the vendor is not so reliant on trusting the individual in front of them, and more reliant on the name on a bit of plastic in their pocket.

              • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s true. And by locking in a low interest rate on a home, for example, the buyer is basically shorting their fiat currency and saying that they believe it will be worth less in, say, 30 years than it currently is right now. And they would be right. Inflation is only going to get worse and worse as time goes on, and the government’s financial situation gets more and more dire. And so they turn to the printing press, which then dilutes the value of the fiat currency that has already been issued, hurting the individual. So what an individual should do is take out a super low interest loan on something like a home and convert the majority of their money out of their government fiat currency and into something tangible such as gold or Monero where inflation won’t ravage it away. Shorting government fiat currency is a great way to preserve your wealth.