• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Pirate Party: Philosophy and Policies

Korimyr the Rat said:
Universal basic income is not a minimum wage. Universal basic income is a pension provided by the government to everyone, with any monies earned on the free market applying on top of that. The tax rates may be higher than you like, but it's actually a freer market than the current system because both the employer and employee are free to negotiate the price of labor without coercion on either side.
Click to expand...

I get the premise, however, you have to understand something...


Who pays those increased taxes? The people relying on the basic wage promise? No, right? So, the people making more? Like....the 1%? Also known as, the business owners? What this would pretty much do is have businesses pay, via taxes, for a wage promise that would then allow for a "more level playing field" for wage negotiations between...the business that pays for the wage promise, and the people GETTING it.

That is an UNfree market.

I'm not saying I'm against the idea of it, on the face of it at least. But call a spade a spade.
 
KevinKohler said:
Who pays those increased taxes? The people relying on the basic wage promise? No, right? So, the people making more? Like....the 1%? Also known as, the business owners?
Click to expand...

Everybody who has an income above and beyond the universal basic income, so almost everyone. Everyone pays. Workers pay according to their wages and businesses pay according to their profits.

Profits which will go up because of the reduced burden of hiring employees.

The universal basic income benefits everyone, not just the poor.

KevinKohler said:
I'm not saying I'm against the idea of it, on the face of it at least. But call a spade a spade.
Click to expand...

I reject your premise entirely. Neither the existence of government services nor the taxation to pay for them makes the market less free. The minimum wage and Obamacare make the market less free, and I am proposing that we abolish both.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Everybody who has an income above and beyond the universal basic income, so almost everyone. Everyone pays. Workers pay according to their wages and businesses pay according to their profits.

Profits which will go up because of the reduced burden of hiring employees.

The universal basic income benefits everyone, not just the poor.



I reject your premise entirely. Neither the existence of government services nor the taxation to pay for them makes the market less free. The minimum wage and Obamacare make the market less free, and I am proposing that we abolish both.
Click to expand...

In theory, so does the minimum wage.


Bottom line, doing this WILL increase the taxes paid by wealthier americans, and businesses. Taxes for the poor aren't going up, simply because they can't. So it will be paid for by the only people that can afford it. Ergo, it becomes a burden born by companies.

I know this sounds like hair splitting, but it's only because the difference between this party and anarcho capitalists (who reside within the libertarian party) is similarly splitting hairs.
 
KevinKohler said:
I know this sounds like hair splitting, but it's only because the difference between this party and anarcho capitalists (who reside within the libertarian party) is similarly splitting hairs.
Click to expand...

I think there is a profound difference between a government that respects its citizens' rights and no government at all. There's certainly a difference between a party that doesn't support public education and a party that does.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Universal basic income is not a minimum wage. Universal basic income is a pension provided by the government to everyone, with any monies earned on the free market applying on top of that. The tax rates may be higher than you like, but it's actually a freer market than the current system because both the employer and employee are free to negotiate the price of labor without coercion on either side.
Click to expand...

if you give a no skill high school dropout 20k a year, why would they ever leave their couch?

what is their incentive and motivation to improve themselves?

that is what some of these whack ideas miss on

basic motivation.....we already have too many who let the government take care of them

now you want to add to that number?

after awhile, you will find out there are enough people contributing for the number of people taking from the pot

we are already close to that problem now
 
gdgyva said:
if you give a no skill high school dropout 20k a year, why would they ever leave their couch?
Click to expand...

For the same reason that people go to college and go into debt rather than take jobs that pay them 20k a year immediately: because they want more money.

Or, you know, because they want to do something with their lives.

Some people will inevitably abuse the universal basic income system; that's part of how government works. But the universal basic income isn't designed to reward people for doing nothing-- it's designed to reward people for doing the kinds of work that the capitalist economy doesn't reward on its own, like stay-at-home parents and volunteer workers.

gdgyva said:
basic motivation.....we already have too many who let the government take care of them

now you want to add to that number?
Click to expand...

Put another way, it is taking all of the welfare and social programs that only benefit the poor and ensuring that they benefit everyone.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
(Model courtesy of Rick Falkvinge, falkvinge.net)

I am no longer politically homeless; I have found a party that matches my ideals closely enough to be worth supporting. That party, still in its infancy, is the United States Pirate Party. Here I will explain, with the assistance of the founder of the original Swedish Pirate Party, what the Pirate Party stands for and why I am willing to associate myself with it.

The core principle of the Pirate Party is Empowerment-- the empowerment of the people to govern themselves, to participate in and drive the political process and the media culture. They believe both in the freedom from-- the freedom from unjust intrustion into their lives-- and the freedom to arrange one's own affairs and choose one's own employment without economic coercion. They believe that government is responsible for and answerable to the people and should serve the peoples' interests first and foremost.

From the core principle of Empowerment come the eight spokes of the "Pirate Wheel", the basis of all official Pirate Party policies: Privacy, Transparency, TICKS, Humanism, Resilience, Swarm Economy, and Quality of Legislation.
Click to expand...

I'm particularly supportive because of the TICKS.
IP laws are completely out of whack.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I'm particularly supportive because of the TICKS.
IP laws are completely out of whack.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I think the Pirate Party goes too far with TICKS... or at least, they want to go too fast. I do not think we can eliminate IP laws before finding an acceptable business model to replace them; how can filmmakers hope to recoup $100M spent on making a movie if they do not have an initial monopoly on its distribution? I think copyright and patent terms need to be severely reduced, but we can't do away with them entirely without impacting the ability of our society to produce culture. The models already exist for less expensive cultural products, as crowdfunding and the hostage model are sufficient for novels and comics when combined with the universal basic income.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Honestly, I think the Pirate Party goes too far with TICKS... or at least, they want to go too fast. I do not think we can eliminate IP laws before finding an acceptable business model to replace them; how can filmmakers hope to recoup $100M spent on making a movie if they do not have an initial monopoly on its distribution? I think copyright and patent terms need to be severely reduced, but we can't do away with them entirely without impacting the ability of our society to produce culture. The models already exist for less expensive cultural products, as crowdfunding and the hostage model are sufficient for novels and comics when combined with the universal basic income.
Click to expand...

I agree.
I recently watched a fan made "Predator" series short movie.
Was excellently done, but they had to take donations to make it and couldn't charge for it.
Which is asinine.

Current IP terms are obnoxiously long and theoretically is unconstitutional.
I agree, that IP shouldn't be done away with entirely though.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
I don't think I understand the difference myself. Do you mean land ownership?
Click to expand...

Correct. And by land I mean anything from the dirt we stand on to natural resources to electro-magnetic features.

As a geo-mutualist, I view land as uniquely different from capital in that no one created it. I believe in order for something to be "property" in the same sense as capital it must have a creator. If one is to privately possess land then a rental fee should be paid to the community.
 
Geoist said:
As a geo-mutualist, I view land as uniquely different from capital in that no one created it. I believe in order for something to be "property" in the same sense as capital it must have a creator. If one is to privately possess land then a rental fee should be paid to the community.
Click to expand...

I do not believe the Pirate Party has an official stance on land ownership besides an opposition to using privately-owned land for rent-seeking behaviors.

I, personally, believe in land ownership and consider property taxes-- at least on one's primary residence-- to be an abomination.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
I do not believe the Pirate Party has an official stance on land ownership besides an opposition to using privately-owned land for rent-seeking behaviors.
Click to expand...

Sounds like they lean geoist, then, which is cool.


I, personally, believe in land ownership and consider property taxes-- at least on one's primary residence-- to be an abomination.
Click to expand...

Personally, I view all taxes to be an abomination, too (though I am tolerant of some sin taxes). I see the term land value "tax" as a misnomer. I prefer calling it restitution, a user fee, or rent.
 
Geoist said:
Personally, I view all taxes to be an abomination, too (though I am tolerant of some sin taxes). I see the term land value "tax" as a misnomer. I prefer calling it restitution, a user fee, or rent.
Click to expand...

The only taxes I consider acceptable are taxes on voluntary economic behaviors-- the income tax, transaction taxes, and sales taxes on non-essential goods.

I object to sin taxes because I object morally to the notion that the government has the legal and moral authority to engineer our behavior "for our own good".
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
The only taxes I consider acceptable are taxes on voluntary economic behaviors-- the income tax, transaction taxes, and sales taxes on non-essential goods.
Click to expand...

I think it may be a bit of a stretch to call the income tax "voluntary." In order to thrive, let alone survive, in this society one NEEDS a steady income.

LVT aka ground rent is not only fair but just, as it is restitution to the rest of the community denied access to nature.

I do, however, agree on a universal basic income (Thomas Paine called it citizens' dividend). We would just disagree on its source.

I object to sin taxes because I object morally to the notion that the government has the legal and moral authority to engineer our behavior "for our own good".
Click to expand...

That is how I used to view it, too. I still don't necessarily agree to them, but I tolerate them because those "sin" behaviors negatively impact the rest of us by raising costs costs in health care, insurance, etc. Until the cost of smoking is 100% on the user, the most objection anyone will see from me on cigarette taxes is a shrug.
 
Geoist said:
LVT aka ground rent is not only fair but just, as it is restitution to the rest of the community denied access to nature.
Click to expand...

As long as it excludes one's primary residence, I have no strong objection to property tax. A person should be able to own the land they live on free and clear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom