Hacker News Reader

Comment by fianchetto | Hacker News Reader

> They are not being forced to close.

They were told they "must" close by the state. I'm not sure how anyone can construe that as voluntary.

They were told they must stop if they are not exempt. The companies position is that they are exempt. They have chosen not to gamble that the commonwealth will rule in their favor during the appeal; however, that is their choice and they could have continued to operate.

A smaller entity being threatened by a larger entity is a form of force.

Do you think you pay taxes "voluntarily" also?

Yes, because you can always relinquish your citizenship and leave the country if you don't want to pay taxes. It should be noted that all "voluntary" market transactions occur pursuant to the implicit threat of force. When I buy something, I reserve the right to invoke the state's use of force if the product is say defective, while the seller reserves the right to invoke the state's use of force if my payment is say counterfeit currency. Per your definition, there are no voluntary transactions in any country with even the most basic government. Which is certainly a self-consistent definition, though it's arguably not that useful unless you believe that full-fledged anarchy is feasible.

Not to be harsh, but your argument is all over the place.

Well in fairness, that's the exact way the argument is usually seen deployed by those opposing state regulation of anything who eventually end up hyperventilating about jackbooted thugs forcing you to register your car at the DMV.

> who eventually end up hyperventilating about jackbooted thugs forcing you to register your car at the DMV.

It's a poor argument that can be derailed by what you think another might say.

"Yes, because you can always relinquish your citizenship and leave the country if you don't want to pay taxes."

Thank you for this comment, I thought I was the only one on HN with that opinion.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com