Skatteverket uppmanar till skattebrott

Svensk skattelagstiftning saknar all legitimitet. Till och med skatteverket uppmanar folk att bryta mot lagen, rapporterar Aftonbladet.se. Skall jag skratta eller gråta?

Nickel and Dimed

Roderick T. Long has a post on his blog about Barbara Ehrenreich's book Nickel and Dimed, a book I have yet to read. Mr. Long's post is pretty interesting, though. Read it here.

Rich people are necessary

One of the most important points made by the brilliant economist Friedrich Hayek was the necessity of rich people in society. Rich people are necessary for society's techonological, cultural and philosophical development.

Technology

New products are expensive when they are introduced on the market. Just think of cars, radios, TV sets, personal computers, cell phones, etc. Only rich people could afford to buy them when they were new. This is not a bad thing. On the contrary, by buying these products when they were expensive, rich people have been paying the development costs for them, and thus made it possible for the producers to sell them cheaper.

Culture and philosophy

Within a class of rich, or financially independent, people, there will be persons who does not have to, and indeed does not, work for their living, because they earn their living from trust funds or inheritances. Most of these individuals will probably not do many useful things (except buying expensive products, as stated above), but among this class, there will also be outstanding individuals with the time and money to explore and support new cultural and philosophical ideas. I do not think that culture and philosophy cannot be explored and spread by people who are not rich, but it can hardly be doubted that rich people contribute to society's cultural and philosophical development.

Super size me

I watched Morgan Spurlock's documentary movie Super size me yesterday. If anyone have missed it, Super size me is Spurlock's mad experiment: for thirty days, he had three meals a day at McDonald's. He had everything on the menu at least once, and he wasn't allowed to eat or drink anywhere else than at McDonald's.

I saw this movie out of curiosity. Of course, I didn't think it would change my views on the subject much, and it didn't. Spurlock gets sick. He gains weight, his liver gets damaged, his sexlife gets worse, he gets depressed (except when he eats). The impact of his McDiet is huge. Of course, one could always question whether the documentary is sincere. However, I have no doubt that eating junk food every day is not healthy. It will do bad things to you.

The movie mentions law suits against McDonald's. Spurlock doesn't actually say whether he's for or against making McDonald's pay for making people sick. He does question their will to inform their customers, and I could agree in his criticism there. However, as Spurlock points out in the end of the movie, McDonald's is a company that makes billions of dollars, worldwide. Of course they don't want to stop making money.

It's up to you where you eat and what you eat. That is your personal responsibilty.

Institutionalised force

I define a state as an organization which claims a monopoly of the use of force, of legislation, of inner and outer defense (police and military), and of taxation, over a given territorial area. The usual defense for the state, as opposed to anarchy, goes something like this: "Without a state, there will be chaos. Society will fall apart, and biker gangs and other criminals will be the new rulers".

Let's stick to the facts. Government, in its better forms, is what you have in countries like Denmark and New Zeeland. In its worse forms, government is what you have in countries like the Soviet Union and Pol Pot's Cambodia. Anarchy, i.e. stateless society, has succesfully been practised in Iceland and the American West, and less succesfully in Somalia (which I still find preferrable over Cambodia).

Actually, I sincerely believe that the state increases the amount of force in society. The reason for this is that government and its institutions provides a power structure for power freaks and others with attitude problems. I doubt that my readers are surpriced by my claim that many police and military officers are aggressive and violent, and that many bureaucrats are rud. I believe this aggression, violence and rudeness from government is made easier (for government) by the lack of competition in those areas which have been monopolized by government.

The reason for this is that government can externalise its costs to the tax-payers. The tax-payers do not pay taxes voluntarily. They pay because government forces them to do so. In a stateless society, it is reasonable to suppose that protection will be offered by private defense agencier (PDAs). I cannot predict human action in detail, since human action to an extent is unpredictable. It is not, however, completely unpredictable. Conscious beings, e.g. humen, respond to incentives, and since firms (such as PDAs) are run by humen, firms too respond to incentives.

A PDA cannot externalise its costs the same way as a government does, because the PDA's revenues are paid by customers. A PDA cannot force its customers to hire them. A PDA which engages in harassments of innocent people or warfare will have to charge its customers more. I do not believe that most people are willing to pay more without getting something in return, and thus a PDA which involves itself in destructive action (i.e. harassment and/or warfare) will be out-competed by PDAs which stays out of that.

It should also not be forgotten that governments can be corrupted, much easier than a PDA is corrupted. It is a fact that both local and national governments are corrupted, and there are examples of this in my hometown of Oslo, Norway, as well as of mafia influence of (previous?) Italian governments and the Enron scandal in the US. The incentives for governments not to be corrupted are non-existent or small, since the tax-payers are not allowed to stop paying taxes or to withhold taxes from government.

In the case of a PDA, the situation is different, because a PDA operates on a free market. If a PDA is corrupted, it will lose customers. When it loses customers, it loses revenues, and it will then be less attractive to investors as well as to "corruptors". These facts point to a simple conclusion: a stateless society, where defense is provided by PDAs, will not be a corrupted, violent and chaotic society, but a peaceful and prosperous one.

Entreprenad är inte detsamma som privatisering

Det har varit på förslag från bystyret i Oslo att lägga ut underhållet av tunnelbanetågen på entreprenad (anbud). Detta kallas av många för en privatisering. Det är emellertid inte sant.

Nu är detta förslag skjutet på framtiden, på grund av en framgångsrik aktion från servicemedarbetarna vid Oslo sporveier, som driver tunnelbanan. Genom att vägra övertid har tillgången på fungerande tåg minskat, och tunnelbanan har kört med överfulla, försenade tåg. Många har nog gjort som mig, gått över till att åka spårvagn (trikk på Oslodialekt). En liten seger för de anställda, som inte vill ha konkurrens. Det i sig har jag faktiskt förståelse för. Ingen älskar att bli utkonkurrerad.

Men att kalla ett anbudsförfarande för privatisering är missvisande. Det är fortfarande Oslo kommune som äger lokaltrafiken. Det de gör när de lägger ut verksamhet på entreprenad, är att hyra ut driften till någon annan, som uppfyller politikernas (och inte resenärernas) krav. En entreprenör som vinner ett anbudsförfarande har inte som högsta mål att tillfredsställa resenärernas önskningar, utan beställarnas, som är politikerna i Oslo kommune. Att kalla det för en privatisering är helt verklighetsfrånvänt.

Det enda vettiga, som jag ser det, vore att sälja Oslo sporveier (och släppa konkurrensen fri), sälj alla spår, tunnelbanestationer, etc, och låt en fri och avreglerad marknad ta hand om lokaltrafiken.

Stoppa storebror

Jag hittade idag till siten Stoppa storebror, via HAX's blogg, som rapporterar att Sverige är EU:s näst värsta övervakningssamhälle, endast slaget av Storbritannien.

Statskyrkan

Liberaleren har en artikel om den norska debatten om statskyrkans vara eller icke vara. Liberaleren förespråkar skilsmässa mellan kyrka och stat, vilket jag håller med om. Att staten skall hålla sig med en officiell religion är absurt, och är annars ett kännetecken för totalitära stater (t.ex. Saudiarabien och Iran).

Today's quote

"There is no unemployment in Soviet Russia or in Dartmoor Prison - and for the same reason"
Winston S Churchill

More quotes.

Two kinds of capitalism

There are two different kinds, or definitions, of capitalism.

1. Capitalism as a system of government-granted privileges. Many of the 19th century critics of capitalism opposed this capitalism.

2. Capitalism as a system of free enterprise and competition, with no government regulation of the market. Many of the 20th century defenders of capitalism defended this capitalism.

I totally oppose the first kind of capitalism. I am totally in favor of the second kind of capitalism.

Pledging Allegiance

My article Pledging Allegiance has been published on Lew Rockwell.com. Read it here.

Bloggportalen

Nu är min blogg med på bloggportalen.

"Muslimer bak all terror"

I den danska läroboken "Os og kristendom" får danska femteklassare lära sig att alla terrorister är muslimer. Om artikeln är korrekt är det faktiskt oerhört, minst sagt. Det är dessutom osakligt. IRA är inte muslimer. ETA är inte muslimer. Sternligan var inte muslimer.

Det finns muslimska terrorister. Jag misstänker att muslimer är överrepresenterade bland terroristerna. Men att gå därifrån till att säga "alla terrorister är muslimer", det är helt enkelt att ljuga, och att sprida fördomar. Har läroboksförfattaren glömt tredje rikets läroböcker och dessas skildring av judarna?

Det här stinker.

Borat-effekten

Borat lockar turister till Kazakhstan. Är inte det ironiskt?

Hyresregleringar och korruption

Från ekot:

"I Hällefors väntar tuffa hyresförhandlingar. Det kommunala bostadsföretaget vill höja hyran med 10 procent, det berättade SR Örebro förra veckan. Nu kommer det uppgifter om att de personer som ska förhandla för hyresgästernas del, kan stå i tacksamhetsskuld till det kommunal bostadsbolaget."

Det handlar om en resa till Paris, som det kommunala bostadsbolaget har bjudit hyresgästföreningsrepresentanter på. Snacka om solklart fall av bestickning!

Så går det när man har hyresregleringar. Jag föreslår en omedelbar omställning till marknadshyror i Sverige.

Låt mig göra en liten jämförelse av mina erfarenheter av hyresmarknaden i Karlstad (ca 50 000 invånare i staden, 80 000 i kommunen, 100 000 i Karlstad med kranskommuner) respektive Oslo (ca 600 000 invånare i staden, 1 miljon i stor-Oslo). I Karlstad, där svensk hyresreglering, i form av bruksvärdesprincipen, råder, ville hyresvärdarna ha uppgifter om min inkomst, typ av anställning (hel/deltid, fast/tillfällig anställning, etc), telefonnr till arbetsgivare, osv. I regel gjordes också en kreditkontroll. I Oslo, där fri hyressättning råder, har ingen frågat efter inkomst, ingen har bett om nummer till arbetsgivare (de har frågat om jag jobbar, när jag svarat "ja" har de nöjt sig med det), inga kreditkontroller har gjorts.

Det enda de ber om i Oslo är en deposition. En deposition är ett belopp som betalas in som säkerhet, och som återfås när man flyttar ut, förutsatt att man skött sig, betalat hyran, inte vandaliserat lägenheten, etc. Orsaken till detta system misstänker jag är att vräkningar är reglerade i Norge.

Dock. Det faktum att marknadshyror råder i Oslo gör det lättare att finna en bostad i ett fint område för en låginkomsttagare (som jag nog måste anses vara, med norska mått mätta), än det var att få en bostad i ett slumområde i Karlstad, där hyresreglering råder.

Om Sveriges politiker vill göra någonting åt bostadsbristen, så vet jag vilken medicin som fungera. Inför marknadshyror nu!

Quote of the day

"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard for their own interests."
Adam Smith

More quotes.

Legg ned Mattilsynet

Liberaleren föreslår att den norska matskyddsmyndigheten, Mattilsynet, skall läggas ned. Jag instämmer i detta. Liberalerens kommentar här.

Quote of a hero

"There is no such thing as a free lunch"
Milton Friedman, economist

More quotes.

A hero has fallen

Milton Friedman is dead. Also see here and here (in Norwegian).

On minimum wages

Some sane comments and facts about the minimum wage in USA, on Johan Norberg's blog.

Alla kan ändra sig

Som f.d. SV-politikern Paul Chaffey förklarar i ett inlägg här.

Failure, failure, failure. Will imperialists ever learn?

USA have failed in Iraq. Saddam and his evil regime is deposed, but Iraq is in chaos, torn apart by ethnic and religious hatred, and blind violence. USA have failed in Afghanistan. They deposed the Taliban, but now Afghanistan is torn apart by clan wars. If we go back in recent history, the Vietnam war is still remembered as America's No. 1 military and political fiasco.

It seems like political-military interventions usually fail. Someone might point out the Korean war as successful for America and its allies. That, however, could be discussed. Let me just say that the fact that North Korea still exists cannot be considered a success for American foreign policy.

Not even WWII was a complete success. WWII was followed by the Cold war, a Europe divided by what Churchill called "an iron curtain", with most of central and eastern Europe ruled by the chairman of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. I would not call that a success.

My bottom line is: Mind your own business! If you make the problems of other countries your problems, their problems truly become your problems. Or, as the hippies would have said: "Make love, not war!"

Kulturpolitik, igen...

Nu vill Sveriges kulturminister Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth att svensk tv-lagstiftning skall gälla för bolag som sänder från England (läs: tv3).

Det var ju en lysande idé! (Ja, jag är ironisk.) Skall så svenska staten reglera allt som kan mottagas i Sverige via tv? Och varför bara tv? Man kan prenumerera på utländska tidningar även om man bor i Sverige (när jag bodde i Sverige prenumererade jag på Time och the Economist). Borde inte staten ta sig en titt på deras artiklar, och annonser? Hur skall staten göra med allt som ligger ute på internet? Där finns det ju massor av onyttigheter.

Som jag brukar säga: lägg ned kulturdepartementet.

Walter Block on unions

Walter Block on unions.

Privatisera mera! (II)

Liberaleren kommenterar det faktum att vissa politiker här i "den sista sovjetstaten" tycker att det är en bra idé för den norska staten att köpa aktier i hel- eller delstatliga svenska företag, som är på planerad utförsäljning.

Hakelius

Johan Hakelius om att allt kanske inte är som man tror.

Wine

Norwegians drink more wine. The consumption of wine in Norway has increased from 31 million liters in 1995 to 61 million liters in 2005. On the average, this means that every adult in Norway drank 38 bottles of wine last year.

Is this a problem? Not necessarily. It depends on how this wine is consumed.

However, the Norwegian authority AKAN demands higher prices, less bars and less wine comments in the media. This would supposedly make Norwegians drink less wine.

What is this about? Raising children? Sadly, no. This is about making it harder for adults to get themselves a glass of wine. I must've missed something. When did government become my substitute parent, and when did I become a child?

Privatisera mera!

Sveriges regering planerar att sälja svenska statens innehav i SAS. Här i Norge har det från flera håll föreslagits att norska staten skall köpa såväl svenska statens (och danska statens, om de säljer sitt innehav) innehav i SAS, som andra statliga innehav i Sverige, som skall säljas ut.

Jag är för svenska statens utförsäljning, och emot att norska staten köper. När det gäller privatisering så är jag för privatisering av principiella skäl, om man vill kan man säga att jag är för privatisering för privatiseringens egen skull.

Jag har inte gett norska staten fullmakt att använda mina skattepengar för att köpa aktier i SAS eller Vattenfall. Det spelar faktiskt ingen roll om ett hel- eller delstatligt företag går med vinst. För det första, om jag vill få del av den vinsten kan jag själv investera i företaget. För det andra tvivlar jag på att vinsten från statliga innehav gynnar mig eller andra skattebetalare.

För övrigt borde norska statens innehav i Statoil endera säljas eller skiftas ut bland skattebetalarna.

Rumsfeld resigns

US defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld regigns. Wonderful. When is Cheney resigning?

Dagens sitat

"Språket forfører til å tro at medlemmene i den nasjonale gruppen "nordmenn" er like. Men det er de ikke. Jo nøyere en nasjon analyseres, desto mer oppløses den. Også derfor er det en god idé å overlate nasjonsbestemmelsen til den enkelte. En tradisjonell muslim og et medlem av Guds menighet på Vegårshei har mye mer til felles enn de to har med punkere i Oslo. Likevel skal punkeren og menighetsmedlemmet være så kulturelt like at de inngår i samme overordnade kulturgruppe."
Peter Normann Waage, journalist og forfatter, Aftenposten idag

Fler citat.

Free Karem!

Student blogger Abdel Karim Suliman Amer, also known as Karem, has been detained by Egyptian authorities. The Daily star has a story about this. You can also sign a petition.

Today's quote

"Once the principle of proportional taxation is abandoned, it is not necessarily those in greatest need but more likely the classes with the greatest voting strength that will profit [...]"
Friedrich A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty, p. 313

More quotes.

Sort arbejd

Danska liberator rapporterar om EGO:s civila anhållning av Danmarks skatteminister, och ett försvarstal för nyttan av svart arbete. Här.

Climate change

Bjørn Lomborg comments the climate change hysteria.

Mer kulturpolitik

Sverige kulturminister, Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth, ifrågasätter huruvida "public service" skall använda stora belopp för att köpa in stora idrottsevenemang.

När skall hon (och andra politiker) inse att politiker inte skall diktera kulturen? Lägg ned public service! Nu!

Den svenska modellen...

Maciej Zaremba har en artikel om hur byggbranschen i Sverige fungerar, eller inte fungerar, på dn.se.

The problem with unions in Sweden and Norway

Let me first say that I am not against unions or collective bargaining. Economically, collective bargaining may or may not be beneficial to the workers. That depends on each case.

Just like the 19th century libertarian French economist, the brilliant Frédèric Bastiat, I think workers should be allowed to organize themselves. Of course, employers should be free not to hire union members, just like workers should be free not to work for employers who does not allow unions, and unions should be allowed to organize peaceful boycots against companies who does not allow unions.

I have no problems with unions qua unions. I do have problems, however, with coercion. That is why I have problems with today's Swedish and Norwegian unions (I here mainly think of the large ones, such as the Swedish LO and TCO, and the Norwegian LO).

What I'm speaking of is the fact that "Big Labor", the large unions, have in practice became a part of the state (you could say this about "Big Business", too, but that is not the subject of this post). Instead of keeping to their proper function -negotiating about wages and other working conditions with employers- those unions have allied themselves with the Swedish Social democratic worker's party and the Norwegian Labor party. Since those parties have been important in Sweden and Norway, especially in Sweden, where the Social democrats have been in power 61 of the last 70 years, they have been able to effect the legislation in those countries.

The unions didn't get this for free, of course. In both Sweden and Norway, LO has turned into a part of the Social democratic election machine, and I don't doubt that the Social democrats of both countries have LO to thank for getting votes from so many workers (although their number have been decreasing with the slow death of the industrial society).

I started this post with saying that I have nothing against unions or collective bargaining, and now I'm repeating that statement. What I see as the proper function of a union is to negotiate about wages and working conditions (which undoubtedly are necessary functions at least in some cases) with employers.

Take the unemployment benefits in Sweden. Unemployment benefits are received from something called an "a-kassa". There are many different "a-kassa"s, but almost all of them belong to different unions. To be able to get unemployment benefits, you have to be a member of an a-kassa. In theory, you can be a member of an a-kassa without being a member of the union it belongs to, but in practice, that means the union will put your request at the bottom of the pile of papers.

It doesn't end there. The a-kassa is said to be an insurance, however, it doesn't work live any sane insurance, since it's financed by the state (90% of it is financed by the state of Sweden), i.e. the tax-payers.

My problem with the unions of Sweden and Norway is that they are a part of the state apparatus.

Kulturpolitik igen

Side 2 rapporter att Norges kulturminister Trond Giske öppnar för att grundlagsfästa att kommunerna använder pengar till kultur. Kan inte politiker lära sig att hålla fingrarna undan istället?

Borat visar flatheten i kulturrelativismen

Filmen om Borat (som jag inte har sett ännu), visar faran med kulturrelativism. Jan Gradvall kommenterar det på di.se. Poängen med Borat är egentligen inte att roa, utan att oroa. När vi visar förståelse för "konstiga utlänningar" med "underliga seder", så relativiserar vi vad vi står för.

Om vi är för jämlikhet mellan könen så gäller det alltid - överallt! Även i Kazakhstan, så att säga. Att man kommer från en diktatur är ingen ursäkt för att inte respektera andra människor. Om vi är anti-rasister så gäller det alltid - överallt! Det är inte "förståeligt" om folk från diktaturer i Mellanöstern och Centralasien hatar judar och zigenare. Och så vidare...

Borat lär oss viktiga saker om oss själva. Precis som Gradvall så tror jag att Sacha Baron Cohen (alias Borat) försöker att få sin publik att tänka, åtminstone mellan skratten.

6 november

Idag är det svenska dagen i Finland, och Gustav Adolfsdagen i Sverige. Ifall någon vill ha en ursäkt för att fira.

Don't vote! (II)

In Sweden, politicians often say (at least during election campaigns) that "the most important thing is that you vote, even if you vote for our opponents". I have not been following election campaigns in any other country close enough, but I'd be surprised if this is a Swedish phenomena.*

There is a simple reason. To keep the legitimacy of the system, the state (i.e. the politicians) needs the sanction of the victim** (i.e. the subjects, or the so-called "citizens", of the state).

In the last EU parliament election, less than half of the Swedish voters actually bothered to vote (and the same thing happened in 1999, in the previous EU parliament election). This terrified Swedish politicians.

I believe this illustrates my point: politicians need the sanction of the victim**. Not voting is probably the most threatening "act" you can commit against the democratic state (I will not discuss the meaning of democracy in this post). The only thing that comes close to not voting is to not pay taxes. However, not voting is probably worse, because someone who doesn't pay taxes but still votes recognizes the legitimacy of the state apparatus, and thus indirectly also recognizes that not paying taxes "is a crime".

Therefore, don't vote!

*I did read about "Rock the vote" in the US, however, which proves that this is a democratic phenomena.

**An expression I've "stolen" from the name of a chapter of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, although I'm pretty sure she would disapprove of my use of it.

Don't vote! (I)

I don't vote. The short reason for why I don't vote is because voting means legitimating the state - giving it the sanction of the victim.

I have voted before. I've even been active in party politics. (I did, however, not vote in the two last elections of which I belonged to the electorate - the EU parliament election of 2004 and the Swedish riksdag ("parliament") election of 2006.) I have, however, realized that voting will not take me from "here" to "there", from a statist welfare-warfare state to an anarchist society.

There are simple reasons for this. One is that voting will be interpreted as demand for politics, for leaders, for someone or someones to tell us what to do, to take our money and control our lives. No matter if you vote for a "socialist", "liberal", "conservative", "nationalist", "green", or whatever there is, this will be seen as a recognition of the state. It will be seen as a recognition of the legitimacy of the statist order.* There's a point in this. After all, if you don't recognize the state as your rightful ruler - why participate in the voting act?

That's why I don't vote.

*Per Bylund is commenting on this on Lew Rockwell.com.

The criminal returns to the scene of the crime

An Abu Ghraib offender heads back to Iraq. One could call this insane. Sadly, it's only logical. To do the dirty business of war (yes, there's a war in Iraq, and the US government is involved in it, no matter what President Bush says), you need people willing to use the dirty methods necessary.

Muligheter for alle

Jag har nyligen läst "Muligheter for alle. Dynamisk vekst i en liberal markedsøkonomi" av civilekonomen Lars Peder Nordbakken.

Boken, som är på ca 300 sidor, är en grundkurs i marknadsekonomi. Som sådan är den läsvärd, även om det är en hel del jag inte är överens med författaren om, och även om det finns bättre grundkurser. Bland de bättre vill jag nämna "Ekonomisk praktika" av Thomas Sowell.

Nordbakkens bok är inte bara en grundkurs, han deklarerar tydligt att han ger uttryck för sina ståndpunkter i boken. Dessa ståndpunkter är vad jag har koncentrerat mig på.

I mycket är jag överens med Nordbakken, och hans förslag skulle innebära en kraftig liberalisering av dagens Norge (eller Sverige, om hans recept skulle testas där). Han förespråkar bl. a. avskaffade tullmurar, avskaffande av odelsloven (som reglerar vem som har förtur till jordbruksmark), m.m.

Dock. Nordbakken förespråkar ett norskt EU- och euromedlemskap som ett sätt att skapa en stabil ekonomi och valuta (när ett införande av guldmyntfot vore en mycket bättre väg att gå).

Nordbakken diskuterar platt skatt, men förespråkar själv en trestegsmodell, av "rättviseskäl" (varför detta är rättvist förklarar han inte särskilt detaljerat), med 15-25-40% beskattning, enligt en progressiv modell, med ett höjt grundavdrag (Nordbakken föreslår 75 ooo NOK/år) att utgå ifrån. Att jag föredrar platt skatt (eller åtminstone ordentligt sänkta skatter) behöver väl inte ens påpekas.

En av Nordbakkens förtjänster är att han tar heder och ära av den så kallade "aktiva näringspolitiken" genom att visa vad den är - selektiv näringspolitik. Nordbakken ifrågasätter att politiker kan veta vilka näringar som är värda att satsa på.

Boken är bra, men jag köper långt ifrån alla resonemang i den.

War is the health of the state

It is sometimes said that "war is the health of the state". I think few statements are as true as this one. First of all, war means that the state increases its control of the economy. The economy turns into a war economy, i.e. less market and more state socialism.

Second, war means that any critizing of the government (or worse, of the state as an institution) can be smeared as "unpatriotic". This creates a greater acceptance for decreased freedom.

Except the terrible fact that people get killed during a war (including non-combattants), many other things tend to happen during wars, too. Free speech is usually an early victim of war.

Rule of law is another early victim. A few examples from the so-called "land of the free" (USA): Guantanamo bay and now, Bush has abolished habeas corpus. Supposedly, this would not effect American citizens (like this would make things better).

So, why is a peaceful activist captured, without trial or hearing, and tortured, for campaigning against eminent domain?

War is the health of the state. But it means misery for everyone else.

Shut Up and Sing

The Dixie Chicks have made a documentary, "Shut Up and Sing", about how the band members reacted after the controversy with US President George W. Bush in 2003.

This is one documentary I'm going to see!

My tax money is arguing against me

It has been calculated, by the city of Oslo, that between five and ten billion NOK (equals 750 million-1.5 billion US$, 393-786 million £, or 587-1174 million €) are "withheld" from taxation.

A poll has shown that the number of people considering working "under the table" acceptable, is a growing number.

Of course, the city of Oslo is not happy with this. The city is now trying to gain support for the robbery (yes, taxation is robbery) through a propaganda campaign directed towards 10th grade school students (aged 15-16 years), where they teach them the importance of paying taxes and what taxes pay for.

I bet they don't teach them that everything useful financed by taxes could be provided by the market, and that the market solution is half as expensive and twice as good (Friedman's law).

I bet they don't teach them how tax money is used to control their lives and minds.

I am, sadly, paying taxes. I am, however, arguing for the complete abolition of the state, and thus arguing for abolishing taxation. I am doing so without robbing anyone.

Could the city government of Oslo have the decency not to use my money to spread propaganda that I do not agree with?

The question I cannot solve

Why are (classical) liberals so fond of the state? Why do they think that the worst killing machine (I would say it is in the nature of the state to kill, steal and oppress) could be used for good? How can you claim to defend freedom, and call for coercion?

I do not understand.

What constitutes the industrial state

Big government, big business and big labor.

Another example of how government benefits big business at the expense of small business

There was an article in Norway's largest newspaper, Aftenposten, last monday (30 October) about how the Norwegian food authority, Mattilsynet, in three days last week closed 7 (out 0f 28 controlled) restaurants in Oslo.

No one has been hurt by these restaurants, and yet, Mattilsynet can close them from one minute to the next, and command the guests to leave the restaurant.

But, as lawyer Christian Aubert in the restaurant business association Bedre Uteliv says, "This has undoubtedly something to do with which position you have got in society" and he adds that Gilde (a big Norwegian meat producer) did not have to close during the e-coli scandal, in spite of the fact that a child died in that scandal.

This is another example of how government benefits big business at the expense of small business.