From: jek@ininx.com (John E. Kreznar)
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 06:19:26 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Crypto & Taxes [WAS Re: Cybersecurity]
In-Reply-To: <9511031621.AA11770@zorch.w3.org>
Message-ID: <m0tBqd0-000147C@ininx.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hallam writes
   Stewart writes
   >Froomkin writes
   >>Hold on.  This is more "factoid" than "fact": recall that income
   >>is PAID by people as well as EARNED by people.  Most payers have
   >>easily detectible physical presence and assets that can easily be
   >>attached by regulators.  It will be a cold day before, e.g., my
   >>employer agrees not to report my earnings.  And the same is true
   >>for most employers in most industries.

   >Unfortunately, this is true, at least for people whose employers
   >are subject to income tax somewhere.  Taxing businesses doesn't
   >make sense economically - you could collect almost as much money
   >with far less disruption to the underlying economy by taxing it as
   >wages for workers and

   Why unfortunately? I happen to consider that our modern social
   ecconomy is a high point of civilisation.

Far from civilized, taxation is a residue of our savage past, and its
resurgence in this century is a backwards movement.

Relations among civilized people are by mutual consent, or not at all.
Taxation (and government generally) is an attempt by one segment of
the population (the political segment) to impose a relation upon the
rest of us to which we do not consent.

   It is certainly a tremendous achievement.  We can educate the
   entire population, provide them with health care, prevent famine
   and provide protection against crime and aggression by other
   states. All in all rather a good deal.

   While one might wish to personally avoid paying taxes there are no
   benefits if everyone avoids paying taxes. There are significant
   areas of the ecconomy which can only be funded through social
   mandates, roads for example.

My interest in cypherpunks is for its potential to enable a personal
cryptographic defense against the arrogant aggressiveness of these
arbitrary and intrusive politically motivated ``social mandates''.

What is your interest in cypherpunks?  To know your intended victims,
perhaps?

   Few people realise that when they use their credit card in a
   supermarket they are supplying a direct mail marketing company with
   a profile of their spending paterns. They are also providing a
   statement of where they are, and indirectly their income, residence
   etc.

So, don't use a credit card!

   What is needed is stringent data protection laws which enforce the
   confidentiality of personal information. Note that both the SEPP
   and STT payments systems conceal the credit card number from the
   merchant.  Cryptographic locks on individual parts of the picture
   are insufficient however. What is needed is laws which make the
   financing of the underlying architecture unecconomic.

Ah yes.  More ``social mandates''

[I don't have time to read or write cypherpunks these days, but the
idea that there's something civilized about taxation leapt out at me
and demanded a response.]

   John E. Kreznar  | 44D955A1F452DF66 | Taxes are caused by people
    jek@ininx.com   | A1575DEF434DC152 |  wanting government benefits.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i
Comment: ...because I decline on principle to affirm any nationality.

iQCVAgUBMJvhbQor0ZwpiwZpAQEARgP/bOpwC16JYTxaAA5ExHOEWQl/V6FYTHmo
46MrGVhSh6WLW6yIwMi2I4mhqISjzV6BtFf+/qu6JOOq7JejqdXKZX4SMcAAWuXh
I+p3WSm5QwfLj9rfiKdnCfpO1NNsxx/HBeCIaXEY0tGVbWVp38vf+Kwugoe6a62C
3ylLFqNzgF4=
=NAy5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----