the problem with pazuzu is he doesent understand human nature. its not a matter that the state parasitizes off people production of labor, its that a person who produces the most in any group often has the advantage in controling other people because he has more than anyone else and the ability to influince them with what he has, this quickly spirils into him no longer producing anything while having other people produce for him and pitting them against eachother in order to maintain his position. over a long time this population which is cooperating weather they like it or not will produce ofspring that are either better at creating technology that everyone can use to produce more, or create people who are better at manipulating the producers in the community to maintain their authority or gain authority which does ultimately serve the community against outside threats

Ok i give you my thoughts that nobody really cares, also sorry for bad english.
I think that Government is important but should be less powerfull, there are rules people withing the country should follow: no kill, no rob ect. if you break them you get to be punished by the law enforcement, government should take money off the people who lives and uses its services, but it should be as small percentage as possible. if you are going to kill somebody you have to face concequences. this is the most free thing i can imagine for now

why is the state above the laws it proposes? why is it wrong for person a to rob person b, but not for the state to rob person a and b?

"A state is a compulsory political organization with a centralized government that maintains a monopoly on the legitimate use of force within a certain geographical territory.[1][2]" this is, I think, a fairly clear and neutral definition to work off of for "state"

Just so we're not running into definitional issues

What you mean by Rob?

Welp. The state is a product of the market

Thats one thing answered

Only insofar as people see others accumulating wealth and want to parasite off of them without producing anything themselves, and they do so under the threat of violence

How is that the product of financial transaction?

Not financial transaction but financial institutions

Which is a product of transactions

the individual always falls to the well focused collective

Financial institutions such as?

@Arch-Fiend how do i not understand human nature? the person who produces enough to hire people to voluntarily produce for them ins't leeching off of anyone, or taking advantage, unless you're an actual marxist and believes in the theory of value, which has been thoroughly debunked

What is a financial institution?

If you're talking about banks those exist because of the state

but pazuzu every government in history was formed that way

Source?

human history

Banks exist because of people

Source? @Arch-Fiend

There were banks that formed absent actual government presense

The first banks weren't even state sponsored

if you dont care to listen to what someone has to say then you really dont need to be having a conversation with them

The modern banking system exists on the basis of fiat currency

Bank = i have money and i can lend you some, but you have to give me back every month by ??% increase.
also i wont give you more than i'm ready to loose on each person because i dont trust you and if you dont give me back i wont give you anymore and will tell other (banks) not to have business with you

I am reading what you are saying, I am also providing some counter points

I'm listening, but you're making a statement and I want a source for that statement. @Arch-Fiend The thing is that historically, ruling classes were not the merchant class, but rather, the warrior class.

If you need sources for whatever I'm saying, please ask and I'll gladly provide

When i say financial instutitions, i dont mean buildings but rather contracts between people to work for goods or alot trading that one individual alone coulsnt possibly produce

Like 2 people trading with 2 other people

You don't need the state for that

Yeah no state is needed for normal financial exchange

It isn't until the second half of the 19th century that the merchants effectively took over as the leading class in society. Samura to Zibatsu (Spelling?) in Japan,

Or any financial exchange, even for shit like law

People just want it to regulate existing modes of transaction

AskTheRisk i dont know how about your country but in my country some company avoid % you have to pay government by directly selling product to the costumer without company involvement

it doest take cuts if you directly sell to another person but when you start business than government comes in play

Isn't that what the black market ends up being, ultimately?

Not all black markets are bad but they get ugly fast