Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Life as a Service

jacquesmattheij.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 170 posts

Re: Life as a Service

#131

Post by infinite8s »

flyinRyan wrote: post #74

The worst part is: if you're a US citizen you're still "opted in" to paying taxes even after you don't live there and no longer use any of the services. In some cases, even if you've never lived there at all or even speak the language (hint: you can get american citizenship from being born on the soil or having a single biological parent who was).

There's an easy solution to that - renounce your citizenship. What's that? You want to keep your American citizenship? Then you must abide by the social contract underlying that grant of citizenship, which comes with certain benefits/obligations no matter where you are in the world.

Re: Life as a Service

#132

Post by Zak »

enraged_camel wrote: post #121
swombat wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one believes that the US is going to use its nukes in all but the most dire circumstances. Does Iran fear that the US will nuke it? No. But it does fear a traditional war.

Nukes are the most effective deterrent we have against non-nuclear states. Of course Iran fears that it may get nuked. Why do you think they are desperately trying to develop their own nukes?

I don't think Iran's primary motivation for wanting nukes is US nukes. It might be, in part Israeli nukes, but I bet it's primarily conventional war with the US and/or Israel. Iran likely believes that having nuclear weapons of its own will discourage conventional attack.

That line of thinking isn't unreasonable. As far as I know, there has never been open conventional warfare between two nuclear-armed states - just minor skirmishes.

Re: Life as a Service

#133

Post by nacker »

jacquesm wrote: post #116
confluence wrote: post #84

I've made up my own law of selfish libertarianism - if you'll indulge me: > It's only a liability or an entitlement until you yourself need it - then it's a fucking right. For example being a young white male born into a middle class western family affords you the ability to state "all I need is contract law - everything else is just impinging on my rights and forcing me to take on obligations I don't appear to benef…

I do not subscribe to the libertarian point of view. I considered 'armoring' the post against this exact accusation but it was long enough as it was without that but I guess I should have seen it coming. You make a mistake in that you think that I disagree with the actual laws, I do with some of them (specifically: the obligation to buy certain products or services without the right to negotiate) but on the whole I a…

Congratulations, you have just realized that you are owned by the Tax Farmers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k67_imEHTPE

Re: Life as a Service

#134

Post by cafard »

According to Henry Sumner Maine, the development of law in the west was one of movement from status to contract. According to Mr. Mattheij, it hasn't gone far enough, I gather.

Re: Life as a Service

#135

Post by jackpirate »

enraged_camel wrote: post #121
swombat wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one believes that the US is going to use its nukes in all but the most dire circumstances. Does Iran fear that the US will nuke it? No. But it does fear a traditional war.

Nukes are the most effective deterrent we have against non-nuclear states. Of course Iran fears that it may get nuked. Why do you think they are desperately trying to develop their own nukes?

According to all intelligence reports by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency and the US's CIA/NSA, Iran is not trying to develop nukes and has fully abandoned their nuclear program. Anyone saying elsewise is simply saber rattling.

What the are doing is developing a civilian nuclear industry. Such an industry---like any other industry---has the potential for making military development easier in the future, but that is not its primary purpose.

Re: Life as a Service

#136

Post by anonymoushn »

confluence wrote: post #84

I've made up my own law of selfish libertarianism - if you'll indulge me: > It's only a liability or an entitlement until you yourself need it - then it's a fucking right. For example being a young white male born into a middle class western family affords you the ability to state "all I need is contract law - everything else is just impinging on my rights and forcing me to take on obligations I don't appear to benef…

I would like to exercise my right to free healthcare. Which doctor do I enslave?

Re: Life as a Service

#137

Post by enraged_camel »

jackpirate wrote: post #135
enraged_camel wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nukes are the most effective deterrent we have against non-nuclear states. Of course Iran fears that it may get nuked. Why do you think they are desperately trying to develop their own nukes?

According to all intelligence reports by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency and the US's CIA/NSA, Iran is not trying to develop nukes and has fully abandoned their nuclear program. Anyone saying elsewise is simply saber rattling. What the are doing is developing a civilian nuclear industry. Such an industry---like any other industry---has the potential for making military development easier in the future, bu…

Considering the current geopolitical climate, you have to be extremely naive to believe that Iran's long term goal is not developing nuclear weapons. A "peaceful" civilian nuclear industry is only the first step.

Re: Life as a Service

#138

Post by unreal37 »

Ah Jacques. You've posted some brilliant articles, Three Roads to the Top of the Mountain[1] is among the best articles I've read on starting a business. In fact, I will go and read it again after posting this. And seek out some other good startup/business related articles you have written.

But this Life as a Service article is just incomprehensible to me coming from you. How selfish! How can the same person who posted the Top of the Mountain post write this? Not sure how life in the Netherlands is so much different from here in Canada, but the article is full of things that are either not true, or overblown. It's depressing to read, and a sad attempt to tear up the social contract we all must be a part of.

"I have no problem paying taxes, but I wish I had a choice about it."

You can't give people a choice about it. You can't have a society supported by some people with loads of people refusing to support it. (Too poor to support it is different.) And how can you complain about that AND complain that the rich and royalty are above the law? You're arguing both sides!

Maybe you want to go find a remote outpost in the Northern tip of your country that you truly get no government services provided to you - no roads, no police, no hospitals, no ID required, no electricity, no internet, or phone service... go do that. But if you are part of society, you must be part of the social contract. Better to accept that and go on to do (or write) something productive that adds value..

[1]http://jacquesmattheij.com/three+roads+to+the+top+of+the+mou...

Re: Life as a Service

#139

Post by AngrySkillzz »

potatolicious wrote: post #106

Given how often libertarianism comes up around and here and some of the attitudes that are repeated demonstrated, it's pretty clear that a large segment of HN's population has never been in a disadvantaged situation in life, either in economics, geography, or race.

I'm not sure that this article is advocating libertarianism per-se, more that it is pointing out oddities in our current system. It doesn't make the claim that life would be better off with less support or regulation.

Re: Life as a Service

#140

Post by Buzaga »

infinite8s wrote: post #130
rglover wrote: post #88

This article is brilliant. Each and every point Jacques makes is spot-on. I'm sure many will disagree with his stance, but he makes an excellent point. Irrespective of our personal preference, we are effectively locked in to and subordinate of our government and its policies. Any self-respecting human who has contemplated this should be sick to their stomach. Realize this: we're floating in space. Not one soul on thi…

Why should you have a choice? Taking this article to it's logical conclusion, no obligations nor rights should be granted to you. As another commenter above mentioned so brilliantly, individuals don't have rights. Rights only arise in groups of individuals.

I fail to see the reason in that statement, why is it so brilliant?
Post reply on HN