Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

New Member Saying Hello

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Typing the words "objectivism forum" got me here. So here is my story. I being 40 or so in age recently read Rand's works starting a couple of years ago. While I knew I thought differently from others, reading her work established a clear objective that I must pursue.

This objective is the same one as in "Atlas Shrugged". I've decided that the benefit society receives from my work is not justified, therefore, I will no longer produce to benefit those who do not. Frankly, I'm tired of using my labor and skill at the expense of time. The ultimate beneficiary of all we produce is the same one trying to deprive us of what we obtained by using the skill and labor.

I own a business. Last year I received a letter from the State workforce commission or unemployment office. It stated that my rate was being increased from .89% to 8.9% to recover lost expense paid out to former Enron employees. This equivocated to the sum of 7K in which I paid by forgoing my salary. This action wasthe catalyst by which I made my decision. If I am expected to do without so that others may have, then I will no longer provide for those who think they have claim to what I have.

The path I have chosen will not be easy, however, it is one that I must take. I have begun to liquidate my assets and formulate plans to close and liquidate my business.

Now comes the part I need your help with. Which investment vehicle will yield the highest return in the safest manner so that I may exit the system permanently?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reply to your questions,

When you own a business, you must deal with many aspects concerning regulation, taxation, and so forth. With that being said, when I spend my time filling out reports, filing taxes, amongst other numerous tasks, I am not being compensated. Therefore, to protect the most valueable asset to me, time, I must decline to perform those tasks. Consequently, if I do not perform those tasks operating as a business, then eventually those that are the non producers will exercise a claim against what they have no claim against.

The action that best serves my life is adding more time for what I want to do. I currently work 7 days a week usually long hours. Many of those hours are non-compensated, I do what I do because I enjoy the work and the action of producing. Removing the benefit by taxation and regulation negates the benefit. Therefore, the best solution is to remove myself from the system in a income earning role.

In the United States we have a situation mentioned quite frequently called outsourcing. Most people do not understand the reasoning for it nor do they care. I understand the reasoning for it but would go a step further. When a product comes into the country, a levy is issued upon said goods in the form of a duty. Nowdays each agency that inspects a shipment also tacks on a fee to the duty. Considering the trade defecit, taking the defecit figure and adding 10-12% of that figure in the form of a direct tax that must be paid within 2 weeks of a product entering a port, you find that gov't actually benefits more from the action of importing versus domestic manufactuing.

I outsourced a complete line of products we used to manufacture. Instead of being able to write off most of the cost of producing, another problem surfaced. The amount of taxes on said goods actually increased the cost on large shipments which were required to meet a target price. My broker has sent reports to me concerning Walmart and their putting off deliveries of product from China so that their target date will ensure the selloff of the inventory in quick fashion. This is done to reduce the tax liability of having unsold inventory. I came to this conclusion by researching the vessel reports and goods stated for import on said vessels. My broker simply wanted to tell me about possible delays in shipping transport for containers. I broke down the report and informed him of the real situation.

We as a country have reached the point of no return. The economy is driven by retail sales and incomes are created by the tax appraiser's office in the form of higher valued assets and property. I could stop my action at any time as I have not reached the point of no return. However, I do not think it is prudent to continue to provide for those that make decisions that have negative effects upon me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

End game wrote:

"...I spend my time filling out reports, filing taxes, amongst other numerous tasks, I am not being compensated. Therefore, to protect the most valueable asset to me, time, I must decline to perform those tasks. Consequently, if I do not perform those tasks operating as a business, then eventually those that are the non producers will exercise a claim against what they have no claim against."

So? Regulations are an injustice. how do you get from that obvious conclusion, to "shrugging"?

EG: "...The action that best serves my life is adding more time for what I want to do."

What do you want to do? And, why aren't you doing it already?

EG: "I currently work 7 days a week usually long hours. Many of those hours are non-compensated, I do what I do because I enjoy the work and the action of producing. Removing the benefit by taxation and regulation negates the benefit."

I gather form this statement that the benefit of your work is "enjoyment[ment] of the work and the action of producing". Taxation negates that?

EG: "Therefore, the best solution is to remove myself from the system in a income earning role."

How would you do that? As an investor, for example, you will still be supporting the looters to some degree.

EG: "We as a country have reached the point of no return."

No return from where? From freedom, and a more rational future? I would bet that most people on this forum would disagree. Certainly most professional Objectivist intellectuals disagree.

I have found that a large number of people who read Atlas Shrugged suddenly see the nature of the problems of the world more clearly, and conclude that we're doomed. I disagree. The world's problems didn't just get worse because you finished Atlas Shrugged. Only your perception of them.

EG "However, I do not think it is prudent to continue to provide for those that make decisions that have negative effects upon me."

It's your choice obviously, but here's a question: will this course of action make you happy? Your particular shrugging may solve your particular problem, if you judge the obstacles in your path as insurmountable. But, if you like your work, and despise the thought of the looters using you as their golden-egg-laying goose, perhaps there're other more productive methods of fighting them. (Contributing to ARI strikes me as one simple alternative, e.g.)

This country is far from the "point of no return", and values are abundantly achievable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G:"So? Regulations are an injustice. how do you get from that obvious conclusion, to "shrugging"?

Regulation is injustice. Simply by the act of regulation an advantage is placed upon those who are not regulated in the same manner as I. Do you not think that collecting income for others without compensation violates the credo of capitalism?

G:"What do you want to do? And, why aren't you doing it already?"

I will do what I want instead of what I am required to do. I have sufficient means to exit the system now instead of creating an additional 20 years of income for those who use it to destroy me through further regulation and taxation.

G:"I gather form this statement that the benefit of your work is "enjoyment[ment] of the work and the action of producing". Taxation negates that?"

Yes, it most certainly does. If I produce to benefit my business and increase it's value, I am penalized by an increase in tax on the inventory or increased value added by a property assessor.

G:" How would you do that? As an investor, for example, you will still be supporting the looters to some degree."

Every transaction that involves money supports a looter in some way. You can choose to minimize the exposure to the looter as I am in the process of. If I invest in tax free municipal bonds, then my income is not subject to tax thereby bypassing the looter completely. However, funding the ultimate looter by granting them the funds in the form of a bond still suppports the looter. You must make a choice in what you must do in which I have.

G:"No return from where? From freedom, and a more rational future? I would bet that most people on this forum would disagree. Certainly most professional Objectivist intellectuals disagree.

I have found that a large number of people who read Atlas Shrugged suddenly see the nature of the problems of the world more clearly, and conclude that we're doomed. I disagree. The world's problems didn't just get worse because you finished Atlas Shrugged. Only your perception of them."

When innovation and achievement is penalized where as non-producing is rewarded, there is no rational reason to continue funding the system that provides for said element. I don't follow, I lead. Therefore, I could care less what the consensus of "Objective intellectuals" beliefs are. I didn't read the book to formulate an opinion of something I was already aware of.

I could care less about the problems of the world as they are not my problem. I am responsible for myself only. Does this sound familiar? My perception is based upon real world experience not some ideal taken from work of fiction.

G:"It's your choice obviously, but here's a question: will this course of action make you happy? Your particular shrugging may solve your particular problem, if you judge the obstacles in your path as insurmountable. But, if you like your work, and despise the thought of the looters using you as their golden-egg-laying goose, perhaps there're other more productive methods of fighting them. (Contributing to ARI strikes me as one simple alternative, e.g.)

This country is far from the "point of no return", and values are abundantly achievable. "

Again, the answer to your question is yes. Whether or not the problem could be overcome, the premise still stands. I use my labor and skill to benefit myself. When that benefit is assigned to another via taxation, then it is my duty to remove that benefit so that other who do not produce cannnot receive what they do not deserve.

I ask one question of you. Can I leave the United States with all of the money I have in cash? When that value is achievable, then we have not crossed the point of no return. If I have earned my money in a manner that is deemed legal, then it is my choice of what I want to do with it. I would not be permitted to leave with the cash without paying taxes on money that has already been encumbered.

[Edit: removed "white space" at end of this post caused by extra carriage returns. --Felipe]

Edited by Felipe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use my labor and skill to benefit myself.    When that benefit is assigned to another via  taxation, then it is my duty to remove that benefit  so that other who do not produce cannnot receive what they do not deserve. 

Duty to whom? Yourself? Other people that produce? Worry not about duty.

I applaud your decision to shrug; I hope it is as simple and easy as possible. Personally I'm not in a situation where I could shrug even if I wanted to, but my "tax burden" is correspondingly low.

The reason I think that many Objectivists do not shrug is that they are not in the situation in the book; we are not locked into a nightmare world where fighting our enemies only helps them. Our "sword" in this battle is not the attempt to comply with ever-more-crushing regulations, it is to dismantle the moral foundation for those regulations; to kill the monster at its root. If you shrug, you will not reduce the size of the government one whit; you may simply make it more difficult for those who remain. However, if you continue to work, and pick up that "sword" to fight, you may succeed in helping topple regulations and punitive legislation.

Your decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the board. As far as "safe" investments are concerned, I think that your decision will depend on how far gone you think the United States government is. If you think our fiat currency is doomed and worthless, and that perhaps sooner than anyone realizes the entire system might come crumbling to smitherines, you might be best to simply buy a whole lot of gold, or some other precious or valuable material that you can keep in your physical possession.. And dig it in the backyard.

If you don't think the end of the world is near, then you might consult professional investers or money managers that you can trust with the issue.

Also, regarding your taxes, have you considered consulting with professional tax accountants and tax lawyers? I am only a student and don't own a business yet, but the more I learn about issues like the one you're discussing, the more I realize how many people are in similar situations to yours.. and how many honest and productive people are making their livings in assisting people like you- getting taxes to the legal minimum, etc.

But maybe I've missed the point of your post. At any rate, I feel a little bashfull that I might come off as if I'm giving you advice. Mostly I'm curious how a real business man would respond to suggestions like these, as they are among things I've considered for my own future. Hope to see more of you!

-David R. Marsilia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The path I have chosen will not be easy, however, it is one that I must take.
Hello EndGame, When you "retire", what will you do with your time? You say you enjoy your work. When you retire, will you be doing things you enjoy?

We as a country have reached the point of no return.
Where there are minds, there is hope. As someone who was not born in the U.S.A., I feel obliged to point out that this is the best country on earth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

End game wrote: "I ask one question of you. Can I leave the United States with all of the money I have in cash? When that value is achievable, then we have not crossed the point of no return..."

With all due respect, this statement is absurd. A "point of no return", is exactly that: a state of things in which there is no event or movement which could possibly prevent this nation from reverting toward total destruction and tyranny.

To claim that the fact that your tax rate is not currently zero is proof that we have reached that point simply doesn't follow. If tax rates started going down, as a result of pro-capitalist ideas slowly making inroads, but had not yet reached zero, then we'd still be at the "point of no return"? If Objectivism became more influential and government were radically reduced, and funded by an interim flat tax -- but still a tax -- then we would past the "point of not return"?

I have no opinion on the decision to "shrug", or whether one's taxes in a particular case may render one incapable of happiness. Certainly such cases exist; whether the present is one such case I have no way of knowing.

But I can respond to the claim that such a decision is necessary because we have passed a "point of no return". Frustration is not knowledge. Being the victim of an injustice does not necessarily imply that the future is irretrievably lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gnargtharst,

I never stated that my tax rate should be zero. I stated that regulation applies to me that does not to another. I collect sales tax for the State. That action is a self defeating task. Why should I be responsible for another entity's funds?

G: "With all due respect, this statement is absurd. A "point of no return", is exactly that: a state of things in which there is no event or movement which could possibly prevent this nation from reverting toward total destruction and tyranny."

You may refer to "point of no return" however you wish but my statement stands. Freedom is ownership without encumbrance. Your position that my statement is absurd is ignoring the basic principle of Objectivism. My wealth is mine and no other has a claim against what I own.

Under a flat tax, I pay on what I consume. This tax is applied across the board. Instead I pay a tax for unemployment for the malfeasance of another corporation. Congress solely has the power to tax. Those taxes are required to be applied equally. Show me where the tax paid to a State agency, not a federal agency solely for the benefit of former employees of another corporation are applied equally. Again, I am not responsible for the actions of another including a corporation.

My departure from the system is my choice. I don't feel frustrated in the least. I am happly with my decision. My lifestyle will morph into another. That other livestyle will still involve what I enjoy. However, the benefit will solely be for myself, not others. I shall not say what I will do. That would not be prudent to broadcast on a public forum.

Software nerd,

Yes, this is all I can say. On your other statement, the mind is the most valued asset. However, since others want to lay claim against your knowledge, I say do not allow them to benefit from said knowledge. The time is now to stop what I call looters. Our economy is driven by a false set of numbers, ideals, and worthless script in the name of currency. The only resort now is a reboot of the system. Those that have knowledge and skill will continue, the looter will not.

Bold Standard,

We do not have access to safe investments anymore. The hand has a long reach. This is why many intelligent and savy companies have relocated offshore at great expense. To limit the damage when the hemoraging begins. Assets outside of the limit of the hand cannot be attached or seized. Now gambling that assets might be nationalized instead of seized should give you an idea how most successful corportations believe will be the norm in the future.

Business is a game of protecting what you have from those who want what you have. Furthermore, taxes fall under the same premise. I say game over, hence my screen name. They need me, I don't need them.

JMeganSnow,

The duty is to myself. I have no responsibility to those who remain. They must make their own decisions. If I follow though with my plan you are correct in the assumption that it won't make much difference. However, I no longer will play the game which in turn will increase the liability of others in the same arena. Therefore, they could possibly come to the same conclusion of I. Taking a fragile system and denying the system what it needs could have a positive effect at least for those in the future even though that is not my intention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

End game wrote: "You may refer to "point of no return" however you wish but my statement stands."

Yes, it does. Incorrectly. Your comment was that since you can not cash out and leave this country with all of your money, then we have passed the point of no return. I assume that the "we" here is we as a society, and that the "point of no return" means that the political regression toward tyranny cannot be stopped. The argument doesn't follow.

End game: "Freedom is ownership without encumbrance..."

Among other things.

End game: "...Your position that my statement is absurd is ignoring the basic principle of Objectivism."

Specifically, I claimed that the position "I cannot presently cash out 100%, therefore society's slide toward totalitarianism is unstoppable" is absurd. Which principle of Objectivism does this ignore?

End game continues with details of the injustice he endures. I have no quarrel with this description. Injustice is injustice. Graduated taxes, tarriffs, government-mandated licenses and fees, etc. -- it's all very unjust. But the decision to "shrug" is not the to-be-assumed response to every injustice; this was my only claim. I only made this response because I feel it's too flippant to claim that the US is "beyond the point of no return". At the very least this point is certainly not self-evident. Further, I believe it's far from the truth. This implies no disrespect to those who are victims of injustice, just a respect for perspective.

For anyone to whom happiness is acheived by shrugging, I say: Happy shrugging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G:"Yes, it does. Incorrectly. Your comment was that since you can not cash out and leave this country with all of your money, then we have passed the point of no return. I assume that the "we" here is we as a society, and that the "point of no return" means that the political regression toward tyranny cannot be stopped. The argument doesn't follow."

May I board a plane to leave the country with all of the funds I have in cash way in excess of $10,000 without hinderance? In what way does the seizure of my funds if I chose to do as above not ring with tones of tyranny? I earned it, paid taxes on it, now the same entity want to lay claim on it again? My guess here is that you have not had many experience of late dealing with financial transactions. Anything from getting a cashier's check or wiring money is brought under scrutiny including paying cash for anything. How is it exactly we can put a stop to this under the present system?

G:"Specifically, I claimed that the position "I cannot presently cash out 100%, therefore society's slide toward totalitarianism is unstoppable" is absurd. Which principle of Objectivism does this ignore?"

You take one sentence and not add the context of what I further said, "Your position that my statement is absurd is ignoring the basic principle of Objectivism. My wealth is mine and no other has a claim against what I own." Is not what I own mine or should others have claim to it. Which way do you want it?

G:"But the decision to "shrug" is not the to-be-assumed response to every injustice; this was my only claim. I only made this response because I feel it's too flippant to claim that the US is "beyond the point of no return". At the very least this point is certainly not self-evident. Further, I believe it's far from the truth."

I made the decision based upon many factors involving the financial conditions that exist today, not merely the examples I stated. When the ultimate looter need more revenue, they come knocking at my door. Simply put, I have chosen to no longer answer the door. Their welcome has run out.

By the way, did you notice that trading was halted Friday 15 minutes early and the indices were brought down below the stop gap which halted trading? That sure tells me something, how about you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

End game wrote:

"May I board a plane to leave the country with all of the funds I have in cash way in excess of $10,000 without hinderance? In what way does the seizure of my funds if I chose to do as above not ring with tones of tyranny?"

It does.

"I earned it, paid taxes on it, now the same entity want to lay claim on it again?"

An injustice, to be sure.

"My guess here is that you have not had many experience of late dealing with financial transactions."

Then keep guessing.

"Anything from getting a cashier's check or wiring money is brought under scrutiny including paying cash for anything. How is it exactly we can put a stop to this under the present system?"

Exactly? I don't know. Generally? Gradually change the political climate through fundamental philosophical change. Letters. Articles. Books. Donations to ARI. Broadly, educating oneself and others about rational alternatives to the present culture.

"...My wealth is mine and no other has a claim against what I own. Is not what I own mine or should others have claim to it. Which way do you want it?"

Which way do I want it? End game, in your intro, you mentioned that you are around 40, and have been studying Objectivism for a "couple of years". When you have gotten around to multiplying your efforts in this area about tenfold, then you'll have put in about half the time I have. My position on whether one's wealth properly belongs to oneself, or others, is well established, documented, elaborated upon, and available to anyone who would bother to reseach. Or ask.

This exchange has gotten ridiculous. My objection to your post was on one minor detail: the claim that society has passed the "point of no return". Your conclusion doesn't follow from your argument. (Actually, you have presented no argument, only details of the particular injustices you've endured.)

You've then proceeded with this exchange, responding to my comments as if I approve of these injustices. I don't. I've stated this explicitly, and I hereby assume that this issue has been concluded.

If you wish to persist in your claim that our society is in a downward spiral from which no return is possible, then please let us hear your argument -- what guides the state of society? Why do you feel it is not reversable in this case? What do you make of Objectivist inroads into the culture? Etc.

"...By the way, did you notice that trading was halted Friday 15 minutes early and the indices were brought down below the stop gap which halted trading? That sure tells me something, how about you?"

It tells me that my decision to short Cypress Semiconductor late in the previous week worked out very well. I didn't know trading ended 15 minutes early, as I got out at about 2-2:30 and went swimming. I didn't look at the market again until writing the sentence previous to this (it's up, btw). I must admit, I don't get what this "tells you"; the sentence has an ominous, end-of-the-world vibe, and, yet, here we are.

I'm done with this particular thread. My intentions were benevolent at first, but I believe the tone and content has reached an antagonistic "point of no return". :-) Since I've made my point, I see no benefit to following digressions. I'll continue my original point in a new thread (see "Point of no return").

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Welcome to the board. I hope you do not leave forums such as this and other worthy associations when you leave the economy. (in your present position at least)

I too am less hopeful in the future as many Objectivists seem to be. If you have reached a position where the second-handers have stunted your ability to create values your actions should be applauded. I wish you luck in finding a better situation however. Do you have a hidden island somewhere I, among others, would love to know about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...