Governments and extortion.

[jdnoth]

Something that crossed my mind a few days ago:
When a government passes a law, whether it be a tax hike, a criminalization of a substance, banning of a certain media source (games, films) etc, people are given a choice. The choice being to either adhere to the standards undemocratically set by the government and relinquish a certain amount of money or a certain product, or be dragged to a prison cell and have some of your money removed. And if you refuse to be taken to prison or have your money removed, you will be incapacitated forcefully. If you resist the incapacitation, you will be physically harmed to coerce you into submission (usually achieved through electrocution or applying harmful gases to the eyes). If you defend yourself with the same zeal that you are attacked with, you will probably be shot.

Does this remind anyone else of the tactics used by organized crime syndicates?
Just a thought.

 

[Chickenlittle]

For the most part, you elect your leaders to represent you, and they approve the laws passed.

So, what exactly was your point?

 

[jdnoth]

For the most part, you elect your leaders to represent you, and they approve the laws passed.

So, what exactly was your point?

That governments can only use extortion to enforce their laws.

 

[Chickenlittle]

Extortion, you say? How else do you expect them to pay for anything? Not from their own pockets, surely?

Most of their money comes from taxes. They use that money to pay for infrastructure, new jobs, etc. So essentially, you're just paying them back part of what they allow you to have.

 

[Clashero]

The people who pass the laws were elected, democratically, by YOU. They represent you, and they work for you. Nothing undemocratic about that, and CERTAINLY nothing related to extortion.
And crime syndicates certainly didn't provide you with light, water, gas, airlines, paved roads, infrastructure, health services, police services, fire services, a military force to defend the nation (some of the above may not apply to where you live)

 

[ellimist337]

The people who pass the laws were elected, democratically, by YOU. They represent you, and they work for you. Nothing undemocratic about that, and CERTAINLY nothing related to extortion.
And crime syndicates certainly didn't provide you with light, water, gas, airlines, paved roads, infrastructure, health services, police services, fire services, a military force to defend the nation (some of the above may not apply to where you live)

I hate one word posts, but it's hard not to just drop "this" after this quote and move on. I'm not sure what about enforcing laws that you've agreed to follow (by voting for and living here) and essentially voted for by electing your officials seems like extortion to you, but I think you need to recheck the definition.

 

[John Galt]

If crime syndicates built your roads, cleaned your sewers, protected you from other crime syndicates, ran your schools, buses, and trains, then yeah it would be similar to what the Mob does.

Damn, I'm an Objectivist and I don't ***** like that. For Christ sakes, pay your taxes and get over it. Government's a necessity and we actually get to choose who 'extorts' from us anyways.

 

[Clashero]

The people who pass the laws were elected, democratically, by YOU. They represent you, and they work for you. Nothing undemocratic about that, and CERTAINLY nothing related to extortion.
And crime syndicates certainly didn't provide you with light, water, gas, airlines, paved roads, infrastructure, health services, police services, fire services, a military force to defend the nation (some of the above may not apply to where you live)

I hate one word posts, but it's hard not to just drop "this" after this quote and move on.

Clashero feels flattered. Thanks for making my ego feel big

 

[Beelze]

essentially voted for by electing your officials

Don't blame me ? I voted for Kodos.

 

[Malkavian]

If we are to make the SLIGHTEST comparison, it's the other way round. YOU force elected officials to act a certain way, by threatening them with not voting for them(thus putting them out of a job, and depriving them of their salary). It's a very thin comparison, though.

 

[sequio]

Holy shit bowls, are you people serious? First, no one i've voted ever got elected in the city, state, OR Federal level. Second, let me tell you guys a story. The town hall made a mistake about 2 years back and shut off my utilities even though I had paid in advance for an entire year. Of course i had arrived back home in the night so had no way of turning the electricity back on at that moment. I had work the next day so there was no power in my house for 3 days. When i finally was able to show up in person at town hall, they told me i had to pay $75 to turn my electricity and gasses back on because it was shut off. But why was it shut off in the first place? I got into an argument with them and in the end they mocked me with "what're you gonna do, live without electricity for 2 months while you sue us?" Now, did they extort $75 from me? I tend to think they did. According to you guys it's MY fault for not voting the bastard who appointed the asshole who was in charge of billing and utilities. I agree with OP. Once you get some real life experiences in douchebaggery you guys will come around too.

 

[sequio]

So.. let's see if we have this right here.. they are providing a service. You want said service. You don't want to pay what they demand for said service. Somehow they're extorting you. Interesting interpretation.

Now, if they made an error in their service provisions, that's something that you can take to court and sue them over. You did do that, right? Afterward you went to small claims court and sued them for the $75 plus interests and costs and got it returned as a service error? See, if it was extortion, you wouldn't be able to file a civil suit like that.. it'd be a criminal matter. That's another way of telling the difference.

Please read through more carefully.

 

[Malkavian]

So.. let's see if we have this right here.. they are providing a service. You want said service. You don't want to pay what they demand for said service. Somehow they're extorting you. Interesting interpretation.

Now, if they made an error in their service provisions, that's something that you can take to court and sue them over. You did do that, right? Afterward you went to small claims court and sued them for the $75 plus interests and costs and got it returned as a service error? See, if it was extortion, you wouldn't be able to file a civil suit like that.. it'd be a criminal matter. That's another way of telling the difference.

Please read through more carefully.

Why? Having read your post and his through a couple of times now, I'd say he is replying with every understanding that can be made of your thread. If anything, you should read OP's post more carefully, and you'd see that the thread is not about random crooks, as will at times appear in official positions, but about the LEGAL workings of government.

 

[bad rider]

Extortion, you say? How else do you expect them to pay for anything? Not from their own pockets, surely?

Most of their money comes from taxes. They use that money to pay for infrastructure, new jobs, etc. So essentially, you're just paying them back part of what they allow you to have.

Damn, reading your post reminded me of <url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/25/barclay-lloydstsbgroup> this *shudder* think, that means i am giving billions to people who won't do there job. I know this is off topic but if a builder dosen't build my consevatory the first time, i don't give him more money. (To make this on topic) Who has to pay for it we do, do we have a choice? Depends if they can be asked to call an election anytime soon. God i hate democracy.

 

[Ezekel]

How is them passing laws undemocratic? I will admit that they pass some dumb laws, and I think taxes are too high but that hardly qualifies them as criminals or extortionists. The US votes every 2 or 4 or 6 years to put the majority of people in power, now you may not have voted for the guy that won, but most of the people did. I didn't vote for Obama, does that mean that I am not bound by the laws that he passes, certainly not.

If you do not like the system, or the laws, then you can leave and you will no longer be subject to them. Or you can work within the system to try and get the people you want elected in office.

 

[sequio]

Why? Having read your post and his through a couple of times now, I'd say he is replying with every understanding that can be made of your thread. If anything, you should read OP's post more carefully, and you'd see that the thread is not about random crooks, as will at times appear in official positions, but about the LEGAL workings of government.

So.. let's see if we have this right here.. they are providing a service. You want said service. You don't want to pay what they demand for said service. Somehow they're extorting you. Interesting interpretation.

Now, if they made an error in their service provisions, that's something that you can take to court and sue them over. You did do that, right? Afterward you went to small claims court and sued them for the $75 plus interests and costs and got it returned as a service error? See, if it was extortion, you wouldn't be able to file a civil suit like that.. it'd be a criminal matter. That's another way of telling the difference.

I said read through more carefully because this is an exercise in reading comprehension. The OP's post was about government using legal means to extort money. My example was the government using illegal means to extort money. Both of your comments were basically to simply vote for someone else. Which one of these three have nothing to do with the OP? The comparison he made to the crime syndicate was in the way they enforced their laws.

To Kwil: Yes, i did sue and got my $75 plus legal fees. However, they extorted the money to begin with by shutting off the utilities illegally, which is what the topic was about: government and extortion. I did not bother to go to a higher court because it was only $75.

 

[Ezekel]

Why? Having read your post and his through a couple of times now, I'd say he is replying with every understanding that can be made of your thread. If anything, you should read OP's post more carefully, and you'd see that the thread is not about random crooks, as will at times appear in official positions, but about the LEGAL workings of government.

So.. let's see if we have this right here.. they are providing a service. You want said service. You don't want to pay what they demand for said service. Somehow they're extorting you. Interesting interpretation.

Now, if they made an error in their service provisions, that's something that you can take to court and sue them over. You did do that, right? Afterward you went to small claims court and sued them for the $75 plus interests and costs and got it returned as a service error? See, if it was extortion, you wouldn't be able to file a civil suit like that.. it'd be a criminal matter. That's another way of telling the difference.

I said read through more carefully because this is an exercise in reading comprehension. The OP's post was about government using legal means to extort money. My example was the government using illegal means to extort money. Both of your comments were basically to simply vote for someone else. Which one of these three have nothing to do with the OP? The comparison he made to the crime syndicate was in the way they enforced their laws.

To Kwil: Yes, i did sue and got my $75 plus legal fees. However, they extorted the money to begin with by shutting off the utilities illegally, which is what the topic was about: government and extortion. I did not bother to go to a higher court because it was only $75.

It was an error, probably not there fault at all. Were the specific people you were talking to being jerks about it, yes. Is it the governments fault, no. Did they do it purposefully to make you pay 75$, no. So they did not use illegally use their position of power to get money, errors are not illegal. Did you deserve the money back, yes, and you got it by legal means.

 

[sequio]

It was an error, probably not there fault at all. Where the specific people you were talking to being jerks about it, yes. Is it the governments fault, no. Did they do it purposefully to make you pay 75$, no. So they did not use illegally use their position of power to get money, errors are not illegal. Did you deserve the money back, yes, and you got it by legal means.

I was gonna reply with a serious post then thought fuck it, what's the point? And OF COURSE the government was at fault. When you do something wrong, it's your fault. I have no idea what their motivation was, it might be because the town's had a deficit budget for years and years. Did they purposely do it to make me pay $75? Not from the start. However, once the utilities was shut off, yes it was all about the $75. Every post till now was basically telling the OP that he's wrong for having such thoughts. So believe what you want.