Philadelphia Blogger Tax

This story was amusing and offensive. Philadelphia is requiring bloggers to get a business license, which costs $300. The law applies if you have any ads on your blog.

This is a huge regressive tax. Even if your blog generates less than $300/yr in income, you still have to pay the tax.

I'm making less than $5/month from this blog via AdBrite, even with 200+ regular readers. It's very hard for a hobby blog to make more than $300/yr. I'd need 5x as many readers, to go over $300/yr.

I'm pretty disgusted with both AdBrite and AdSense. Google unfairly banned by AdSense account and I switched to AdBrite. Both AdBrite and AdSense serve mostly spammy/scammy ads. The alternatives don't seem substantially better.

Using a blog solely for ad income seems stupid. The only profitable blogs seem to be on "How to make money from blogging!" If I attempt standup comedy or agorism, a blog would be useful for self-promotion.

Even if my ad income were $0, it's still worth it. (My actual income of $5/month is negligible. My goal was to make $20/month, so I could afford self-hosting on a Linode.)

Blogging has been useful because I'm refining my ideas and getting feedback from users. A mainstream media author typically gets *ZERO* feedback from readers.

When I was in my State brainwashing center (school), I learned to hate writing. I was writing about stupid pointless subjects. I had to make sure I never wrote something that offended the teacher. My teachers penalized me for writing in active voice instead of passive voice, so I learned to write in passive voice.

Active voice example: Taxation is theft! Government is an extortion racket!
Passive voice example: Some libertarians believe that government is too big.

In a State brainwashing center, you learn to self-censor while writing. You learn to write in a passive voice. You learn to self-censor and not write things that may offend teacher/State. Blogging helped fix that bad habit.

Even if NYC passed a stupid law like Philadelphia, there's an easy workaround. If you pull all ads from your blog, then the tax doesn't apply. The tax only applies to for-profit blogs.

Also, it seems like a hard-to-enforce tax. How would Philadelphia economic terrorists know if a blogger lives in Philadelphia. I say that I live in NYC, but I could be lying.

Philadelphia's "blogger tax" is obviously unfair. It's designed to censor the Internet. It's a completely unfair tax for bloggers that have less than $300/yr in income. The "blogger tax" makes it hard to bootstrap an Internet-based business.

There's another workaround for agorist bloggers. Advertisers can pay you off-the-books! The more the State restricts the economy, the more potential profits are available to agorists.

In the present, the economy is controlled by large corporate cartels. That makes it hard for me to find legitimate small business advertisers. A large corporation will only advertise in an outlet where there's censorship. Look at how often someone is forced to resign when they say something offensive and corporate advertisers pull their ads.

Philadelphia's "blogger tax" is stupid and offensive. However, any hobbyist blogger can simply pull all ads from their blog. I'd do that if NYC passed such a stupid law. I might do it anyway, because I'm not making much and most of the ads are spammy/scammy.

Race To The Bottom

This story was offensive. There's a new State control program called "Race To The Top". As usual, "Race To The Bottom" would be a more accurate name.

In "Race To The Top", the Federal government is giving states money to spend on education. Superficially, this seems beneficial.

The obvious problem is "This is a partial return of stolen property." The Federal government imposes high taxes. Some money is returned to the states. This creates this illusion that the Federal government is beneficial.

A pro-State troll says "Taxation is not theft. What thief builds schools with the stolen money?" Some tax money is spent on useful things, usually with lots of pork and inefficiency. If a thief spends some of his stolen money on good things, that doesn't make him not a thief.

Besides, most public schools are really State brainwashing centers. Under the guise of "education", children are brainwashed to be obedient slaves.

Similarly, CEOs like to brag about how much money they give to charity. Usually, the CEO is donating to a charity he controls. The fact that a CEO spends money on charity, doesn't justify the huge State subsidies he receives.

Via taxation power and spending power, the Federal government usurps state sovereignty. For example, most states are required to have a drinking age of 21 and a speed limit of 65 mph. Otherwise, the states forfeit Federal highway money. If a state doesn't cooperate, they lose Federal highway money but still pay Federal gasoline taxes and other road-supporting taxes.

The education law comes with strings attached. It isn't free money. To qualify, states must adopt Federal curriculum/brainwashing standards. To qualify, states must adopt Federal guidelines for charter schools. To qualify, states are barred from implementing reforms other than those approved by the Federal government.

One of the most subtle evils of schools is the curriculum. By discussing some things but not others, State brainwashing centers create a pro-State troll bias. Here are some examples.

• You study Benjamin Franklin, but not Benjamin Franklin Bache.
• You read Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, but not "The War Prayer".
• You learn about Thomas Jefferson, but not Lysander Spooner or Bastiat.
• You learn about the slavery debate, but not the Morrill Tarriff.
• You learn "The South fired first at Fort Sumter!" Actually, the Northern troops were trespassing, refusing to leave. The South attempted to negotiate peaceful secession. In every war, it seems that the other guys started it. The reality is that there's gradual escalation of hostility, and one incident is cited by the winning side.
• You learn about Abraham Lincoln, but not about how Lincoln arrested newspaper editors who criticized the Civil War.
• You learn about "Preserve the union!" but not "Maybe they should have the right to secede."
• You learn that George Washington decided to not seek a 3rd term, but not "He wouldn't have been relected."
• Students learn to write in a passive voice instead of active voice.
• Students learn that there's nothing they can do, when a State authority figure abuses their power. If a teacher falsely accused me of misconduct, then I had no choice but to accept whatever the punishment was.
• "Divine right of kings" is obviously stupid. "Social contact" is also stupid, but it's a more complicated and believable lie. State brainwashing centers teach "social contract" and not the "Non-Aggression Principle". "Social contract" is believable, because it sort of sounds like the Non-Aggression principle.
  

That's only a few things. There are a lot of little subtle pro-State brainwashing reminders.

Another important issue is "charter schools". This is a fake reform. Real reform, like "school vouchers", are usually successful but then shot down by bureaucrats protecting their turf, especially the public school teachers' union.

In "school vouchers", parents get a check that they can take to *ANY* State-licensed school. If the public school budget is $11k/student, then a $7k/student voucher saves $4k. With a class size of 20, $70k*20=$140k, enough for a decent teacher salary plus overhead.

"School vouchers" are too much like a free market, offending State insiders. Public teachers' unions lobby against school vouchers. School vouchers were tried and successful, but quashed by State bureaucrats.

Compared to vouchers, "charter schools" are fake reform. You need a State permit to operate a charter school, restricting access to insiders. There's only a handful of charter schools, each explicitly licensed by State insiders. Charter school teachers are still State employees, so they're members of the teachers' union. Parents must beg a State bureaucrat, to place their child in a charter school. With charter schools, the State bureaucrats are still 100% in control, while providing the illusion of reform.

State brainwashing centers are funded via taxes. This penalizes parents who homeschool. You have to pay school taxes plus the cost of homeschooling. Laws and regulations make it hard/illegal for homeschooling parents to share resources. For example, parents can't take turns watching the children, due to laws restricting daycare centers or schools. It's illegal to operate a homeschooling business out of your home.

There was another amusing bit of the "Race To The Top" payout.

New Jersey fell just shy of Ohio (the last state to win funding) because of a simple mistake in the application, reports the New Jersey Star-Ledger: Applicants were asked for information comparing the 2008 and 2009 budgets, but Republican Gov. Chris Christie's administration instead submitted information comparing this year's with 2011.

New Jersey just missed qualifying, based on a technicality! They were supposed to supply 2008-2009 budget data, but instead gave 2010-2011 budget data. Instead of saying "Hey! This is wrong! Fix it!", New Jersey was penalized. That's definitely State bureaucrat and schoolteacher thinking. Arbitrarily penalize someone based on a technical error. In my wage slave job, if I misunderstand requirements, by boss has me redo it, instead of penalizing me and saying "FSK is unqualified!"

There was another amusing bit about the application scoring. A state got bonus points if the teachers' union formally endorsed the application, which seems ridiculous.

The "Race To The Top" school spending program is an excellent example of Federal government abuse of power. Via control of money, the Federal government forces individual states to obey. Education should be none of the government's business.

If you're a State insider, it's a high priority to brainwash the next generation of slaves. Via taxes, parents pay for the cost of brainwashing their own children. State control of school curriculum is a very subtle form of pro-State brainwashing. Even private schools must obey State standards.

It's OK For State Thugs To Lie

This story was amusing. The FBI gave a test to FBI agents, to verify they knew the rules. Many FBI agents cheated on the test!

One of the questions was "Did you cheat on this test?" The cheaters all lied.

Embarrassingly, it was an "open book" test. The FBI agents were allowed to look up the answers during the test. Even with those lenient conditions, they still cheated.

Of course, the cheating FBI agents will not be punished. If you lie to an FBI agent, that's a serious crime. If FBI agents lie, that's OK. For example, Martha Stewart was not convicted for securities fraud. She was convicted for lying to a State thug.

As another example, undercover cops are explicitly allowed to lie, if someone asks "Are you an undercover cop?" Many State thugs work under fake names, in case a "customer" decides to retaliate. Asking for a name and badge #, doesn't mean you'll get a useful answer!

There are two legal systems, one for insiders and one for non-insiders. The FBI cheating scandal is a clear example. State insiders are protected by sovereign immunity. It's OK for State insiders to break their own rules.

David-Kevin: Lindsay

This story was interesting. A man calls himself "David-Kevin: Lindsay". He says that he's "not legally a person". Therefore, he doesn't owe income taxes.

was convicted in Provincial Court on five counts of failing to file income tax returns between 1997 and 2001.

He was sentenced to 30 days in jail on each count, to be served consecutively for a total of 150 days, and fined $5,000.

After appeal, the sentence was reduced to "time served".

Only 30 days in jail for "failure to file an income tax return"? State thugs in Canada must be real wimps! In the USA, "failure to file" usually leads to at least a year in jail, per year.

I also was disappointed by "David-Kevin: Lindsay". It would have been better for him to pick an SQL injection attack for a name.

David-Kevin: Lindsay is going around giving speeches on how the income tax doesn't apply to him, because he no longer legally qualifies as a person. I would prefer to see someone saying "All taxation is theft! The income tax is immoral because it means you don't own your own labor!", rather than arguing legal technicalities.

This argument comes up over and over again. "There's some magic paperwork I can file with the State. Then, I'm no longer subject to income taxes or property taxes." If such a loophole worked, everyone would do it. If such a loophole worked, then State thugs would rapidly close it. Tax-avoiding loopholes are only available to State insiders.

It is pointless to argue, in a State court, against State taxes. A slave will never get a fair trial regarding taxation, in a biased State court.

There are some people who do it and get away with it. State thugs don't have the resources to kidnap everyone who tries. There's more work to getting freedom than just filing some magic paperwork with the State.

Count The Subplots!

Here's an interesting trick to evaluate the quality of a TV show. The quality of TV show is directly proportional to the number of subplots.

Compare the new Futurama episodes with the originals. The originals had one or more subplots. Some new episodes had no subplots. They are clearly inferior to the originals.

Most episodes of Seinfeld had more than one subplot. They usually came together humorously at the end.

"The Sarah Silverman Show" usually has two subplots. Sarah Silverman does one thing. Her sister and boyfriend do another thing. The homosexuals do a third thing. (Interestingly, that show does not have a laugh track.)

Multiple subplots give a show extra chances to be interesting. If the main plot is boring, one of the subplots might be good.

When a show has multiple subplots, that's an indication of good writing. When there are no subplots, that's a symptom of lousy writing. The quality of a show is usually highly correlated with the number of subplots.

American Legal Extortion

In the UK, there's a rule for civil lawsuits that differs from the USA rule. The loser must generally pay the winner's legal expenses. The "American Rule" is different. Everyone pays their own legal expenses, unless the lawsuit is completely frivolous.

A pro-State troll says "The American Rule creates more access to the legal system." The American Rule encourages frivolous lawsuits. If you have deep pockets and want to harass someone, just file a lawsuit. The victim must spend time and money defending themselves.

Criminal trials are even worse, both in the USA and in the UK. The victim is not threatened merely with financial loss, but with threat of imprisonment. Defending yourself in a criminal trial costs $50k-$100k+ in legal fees. That cost would cripple/bankrupt most middle class families.

The State prosecutor has wide discretion to prosecute whoever he chooses. The prosecutor is protected by sovereign immunity. It's usually impossible to sue the prosecutor for misconduct. A good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict anyone for practically anything.

I read some interesting reform proposals. They'll never be approved, but they're still interesting.

One reform is "If the defendant is acquitted, then the State must reimburse the defendant for his legal expenses." This would severely cut down on frivolous prosecutions. There's no chance this reform will occur.

Another reform is "Public defenders are available to everyone, regardless of income." Right now, you only qualify for a public defender if your income is really low. If your income is around $50k, you don't qualify for a public defender, but you probably can't afford the $50k-$100k+ a lawyer costs. Public defenders are already overworked. This reform will not occur.

The State legal system has a monopoly. There's no accountability. "Democracy" only provides the illusion of accountability. Most people don't realize that the legal system is unfair until they come into contact with it.

The State licensing cartel for lawyers is evil. This restricts supply and drives up prices. I'm a good public speaker. If you wanted to hire me to advocate for you in court, that's illegal, because I don't have a State permit.

The "American Rule" encourages frivolous lawsuits and frivolous criminal charges. Everyone pays their own legal expenses. Insiders with deep pockets can file frivolous lawsuits against smaller competitors. Prosecutors can bankrupt anyone by filing criminal charges.

When someone sues you, you might be angry at the scumbag who sued you. You also should be angry at the inefficient State legal system. You can't ignore a lawsuit. If you do, a crazy person will give a default judgement against you and thugs with guns will come to kidnap you or steal your property. The State legal monopoly is dependent on the State violence monopoly. That's the reason judges bend over backwards to favor a policeman, when he is accused of misconduct.

The State legal system is one big scam, both in the USA and in the UK. "If you don't like the USA then move!" is an invalid argument. Each country is ruled by a slightly different gang of thugs. Via international treaties, these thugs have agreed to offer equally lousy terms to all slaves.

The State legal system is inefficient. Access to the legal system is restricted, due to the State licensing cartel for lawyers. This inefficiency is mostly irrelevant, because the State has a monopoly. State insiders love an inefficient legal system. That makes it practically impossible for someone to hold them accountable. Insiders may ruin any non-insider, by filing a frivolous lawsuit or frivolous criminal charges.

State Prostitutes

This anecdote is frequently quoted:

Man: Will you have sex with me for $100M?
Woman: OK
Man: Will you have sex with me for $5?
Woman: Of course not. What type of woman do you think I am?
Man: I know what type of woman you are. Now, I'm just determining the price.

Consider an analogous situation. Suppose a State thug is arresting/kidnapping me for tax evasion or agorism.

FSK: If the law said "Murder all the Jews!", would you say "It's the law. I have to enforce it. I'm just doing my job."?
State thug: Of course not!
FSK: Why are you kidnapping/arresting me?
State thug: It's the law. I have to enforce it. I'm just doing my job.
FSK: I know what type of person you are. I'm just determining the price.

If the President went on TV and said "Murder all the Jews!", that would be obviously evil. In a democracy, any non-Jew could rationally vote for "Murder all the Jews!" Most actual laws are just as silly.

The President doesn't declare "Operating a small business is illegal!" Instead, there's a bunch of taxes and regulations that cripple small business. Under the guise of "Rule of law!", this theft is enforced by thugs "just doing their job".

If the police murder their victim, that's obviously evil. State thugs usually try to kidnap the victim alive. If you put someone in prison for 10+ years, that's superficially less evil than killing someone. You're still stealing a huge chunk of the victim's life.

If the law was "Everyone has to work for the government 2.5 days per week!", that would obviously evil. Via income taxes, the net effect is the same. Stealing someone's labor via taxes is literally stealing their life. The wage cattle get an illusion of freedom, so they're more productive slaves. Working directly for the State, my productivity might be X. In the "free market", my productivity might be 10*X or more. State thugs steal more, by giving me a limited illusion of freedom.

The *LEAST* skilled workers are the ones working directly for the State. They have the most to gain from theft. The "clueless loser" body language of State thugs and bureaucrats is more obvious now.

If you're a highly skilled psychopath, you get a job as a hedge fund manager or as a lobbyist. If you're a low skill psychopath, then you work directly for the State. The least skilled workers have the most to gain from the State. They work for the State, and try to preserve the scam. If you're a skilled worker, you don't fear getting fired, because you get a new job. If you're an unskilled State parasite, then you're totally dependent on the State to earn a living.

I see some studies comparing "private sector pay" to "public sector pay". It might be *MUCH* worse than that, if the *LEAST* skilled workers are the ones working for the State!

By hiring the least skilled workers, the State extracts maximum loyalty from its thugs/bureaucrats.

I saw the inefficient State legal system while serving on jury duty. I was impressed by the gross incompetence of the bureaucrats and bailiffs. I was wondering "Am I really afraid of this?" Once State thugs make it a priority to kidnap and torture you, you're SOL due to their superior resources. The State has numbers but not skill.

I wonder if most State thugs are really cowards? They're just putting on an act.

State thugs are brainwashed "I'm just following orders!" If you have an army of people willing to obey orders without questioning them, then all sorts of evil becomes possible. The police, bureaucrats, and judges all say "I'm just following orders."

If you're willing to commit evil for a paycheck, you're a criminal. If I tried to hire an assassin, most people would agree that's a crime. State thugs do essentially the same thing, but that's acceptable. In effect, the IRS and FBI are a private army working for Lloyd Blankfein and other insiders.

Most people know "I was following orders." doesn't excuse crime if you're a concentration camp guard. Current abuses of the State are nearly as evil, but it's disguised via "Rule of law!" Via "color of law", crimes are made to seem acceptable or desirable.

Kidnapping/arresting someone and torturing/imprisoning them seems less evil than outright murdering them. It's still a crime.

Most State thugs are willing to perform evil, in exchange for a paycheck. Most of them are probably not consciously aware that they are performing evil, due to their pro-State brainwashing. Some of them are psychopaths, doing it on purpose. The scam of the State works, due to a carefully calibrated mixture of psychopaths and intelligent-but-duped people.