bloomj31: But when Republicans are in power, I worry less because they usually want to send money to the military or Israel and I'm all for that (oversimplication again, but for the most part, I support military spending and helping out Israel.)
But when Republicans are in power, I worry less because they usually want to send money to the military or Israel and I'm all for that (oversimplication again, but for the most part, I support military spending and helping out Israel.)
So you are for expanding our world police force and imposing our will across the world? Supporting more military spending does exactly that.
And you are also in favor of welfare, as long as Israel is getting the money?
Do you consider yourself a libertarian?
Robbery: The nation's fastest growing career!
Duties: Giving the people their bread and circuses, extracting payment by force, validating legitimacy, etc.
Job Outlook: Ever increasing and shows no signs of stopping!
Libertarian for Life,
I support whatever the military people say is necessary, that's why I'm glad to see Obama actually listening to his generals, he just can't really afford to keep fighting because of all the bailouts and stimulus and what not.
Yes, I'm in favor of giving Israel whatever it needs to protect and sustain itself.
Yes, I consider myself a libertarian.
bloomj31:I support whatever the military people say is necessary
Dude, I want to be nice to you, but ARE YOU SERIOUS?
What if the "military people" say a draft is necessary? Would you then support a draft?
bloomj31: I support whatever the military people say is necessary, that's why I'm glad to see Obama actually listening to his generals, he just can't really afford to keep fighting because of all the bailouts and stimulus and what not.
Do you believe that if a general says that it is ok, that that makes it ok?
Plenty of state hired economists also tell us that the stimulus bill is saving jobs, military generals are also state hired.
Never ever trust what anyone hired by the government says.
Eric: What if the "military people" say a draft is necessary? Would you then support a draft?
No, I wouldn't support a draft. I suppose I should've qualified that statement by saying that whatever the military says it needs in terms of funds, I think we should give it to them. People are a different story.
MatthewF: Dude, I want to be nice to you, but ARE YOU SERIOUS?
You don't have to be nice to me, and yes I support the military in terms of funding. If they need the money, I think we should get it for them. However, if you don't want to give them a cent I don't think you should have to. But I'd pay my taxes gladly if I knew it was all going to the military.
bloomj31: Eric: What if the "military people" say a draft is necessary? Would you then support a draft? No, I wouldn't support a draft. I suppose I should've qualified that statement by saying that whatever the military says it needs in terms of funds, I think we should give it to them. People are a different story.
State economists tells us they need trillions of dollars, what is so fundamentally different when you put on a military outfit?
Libertarian_for_Life: Do you believe that if a general says that it is ok, that that makes it ok? Plenty of state hired economists also tell us that the stimulus bill is saving jobs, military generals are also state hired. Never ever trust what anyone hired by the government says.
1. If I trust the general in question then yes, I'd follow his advice.
2. Yeah, but I don't trust Paul Krugman and Robert Reich or Larry Summers or whomever else they've got.
3. I trust certain government officials and not others, it depends on the person in question. I don't necessarily assume every single one of them is corrupt.
bloomj31:I support whatever the military people say is necessary, that's why I'm glad to see Obama actually listening to his generals
Libertarian_for_Life: State economists tells us they need trillions of dollars, what is so fundamentally different when you put on a military outfit?
If people want to give their money to the government for bailouts and stimulus, they should be able to, I just don't think that you or I should have to. You shouldn't have to pay for anything if you don't want to. But me personally, I trust the military more than I trust economists.
I know the military industrial complex is a special interest group. So is Israel. They're just two I happen to agree with and would be willing to fund. I'll say this again though: I don't think you should have to if you don't want to.
bloomj31:But me personally, I trust the military more than I trust economists.
There are things I would like to post in response.... but I respect Lilburne too much.
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
bloomj31: Libertarian_for_Life: State economists tells us they need trillions of dollars, what is so fundamentally different when you put on a military outfit? But me personally, I trust the military more than I trust economists.
But me personally, I trust the military more than I trust economists.
Yeah, and I'm asking why you trust the military more. Both are all paid for by the state and have special interests in which they lie to obtain more funds.
Libertarian_for_Life: Yeah, and I'm asking why you trust the military more. Both are all paid for by the state and have special interests in which they lie to obtain more funds.
I already know that any reason I give you will probably be shot down as "sentimental" or "emotional" or "irrational" or "anecdotal" so I'll just say that my position is pro-military for personal reasons and I understand that lots of people don't feel as I do and I'm ok with that.
Would you support the military if they requested infinity dollars?
MatthewF: Would you support the military if they requested infinity dollars?
Lol, probably not.
I didn't think so
So where do you draw the line?
MatthewF: I didn't think so So where do you draw the line?
I don't really have enough information to be able to intelligently answer that question. I would have to do some research on military funding. Perhaps I will.
Simple, allow people to choose whether or not to pay them. Then politicians will only earn as much money as they have provided in services.
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
Stranger:Simple
Agreed, but how do you make that happen?
Stranger: Simple, allow people to choose whether or not to pay them. Then politicians will only earn as much money as they have provided in services.
That is called a business.
If it's all voluntary pay for services than there is no government.
bloomj31:I know the military industrial complex is a special interest group. So is Israel. They're just two I happen to agree with and would be willing to fund. I'll say this again though: I don't think you should have to if you don't want to.
Ok, when the anarchist revolution comes, you can be charitable and give to Israel. Until then I hope that you are against taxation?
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
Laughing Man: Ok, when the anarchist revolution comes, you can be charitable and give to Israel. Until then I hope that you are against taxation?
Ofcourse I am.
Laughing Man: bloomj31:I know the military industrial complex is a special interest group. So is Israel. They're just two I happen to agree with and would be willing to fund. I'll say this again though: I don't think you should have to if you don't want to. Ok, when the anarchist revolution comes, you can be charitable and give to Israel. Until then I hope that you are against taxation?
Or even when there still is a government, why not give money to Israel directly? Why do you need a 3rd party government to give money to someone?
Libertarian_for_Life: Or even when there still is a government, why not give money to Israel directly? Why do you need a 3rd party government to give money to someone?
Ideally, this is how it would happen. But I think that there are lots of Pro-Israel people out there who understand, as I do, that as long as the government is going to be handing out goodies, we may as well fight to have the goodies handed out to the things we are in favor of. That being said, you're right. It should all be done privately. But I don't blame people for seeking aid from the government nor do I blame countries for seeking aid from the US. If it isn't done privately, then it should be done voluntarily. Where the government can only collect the money from people who are willing to give it. And why might some people want the government to do this for them? Some people trust the government. I don't but some people do.
bloomj31:Part of the game of democracy is that everyone gets to vote but they all agree to abide by the rules
Really? You have evidence of this "agreement"?
bloomj31:At the same time, the argument can be made that as long as people choose to live here, they accept that they won't always get what they want or get to spend their money on what they want because of taxes and inflation.
And since slaves chose to live, they consented to being slaves, right? This is the most absurd statement, I think, in human history, that humans make. It is my property.
Let me ask you this. Do your property rights extend over my property? If not, then do you and your neighbors property rights extend over my rights? If not, then it does not matter how many of you get together and vote in people, your property rights still don't extend over my property rights. I worked for the property, not you. Not your children. Not your parents. I woke up in the morning, got my lazy ass out of bed, and went to work. You have absolutely no rights to my property.
bloomj31:That's democracy.
That's tyranny, theft, extortion, murder, and slavery.
bloomj31:So, the real question is: how can there be a tax system where people can opt out when they are displeased with the fiscal policy of the current administration?
There can't be. Because otherwise it would not be taxes. Taxes imply being involuntary. Think about it. What other organization in the world works like the government, mafia or a private sector business. What does a grocery store do if you don't buy the groceries? They kick you out and don't let you have the groceries. What does the government do if you don't buy their product? They throw you in prison and/or take your all of your property!!!! What does the mafia do if you don't pay them? They beat you to pulp or kill you. Seems to be a lot more like the mafia then the private sector, wouldn't you say?
So, you don't think the world could function without a mafia like organization?
At most, I think only 5% of the adult population would need to stop cooperating to have real change.
MatthewF: Stranger:Simple Agreed, but how do you make that happen?
Stop paying, make sure the politicians pay a dear price if they try to force you.
bloomj31:I know the military industrial complex is a special interest group. So is Israel. They're just two I happen to agree with and would be willing to fund.
Would you be willing to die or kill for them or would you just rather pay our brethren to?
A simple way to deincentivize the hunt for political power would be to allow for the hunting of politicians.
We are the soldiers for righteousnessAnd we are not sent here by the politicians you drink with - L. Dube, rip
bbnet: Would you be willing to die or kill for them or would you just rather pay our brethren to? A simple way to deincentivize the hunt for political power would be to allow for the hunting of politicians.
I'd prefer to pay other people to do it for me.
Lol, that's an interesting idea, who would you hunt first?
Spidey, you know that you win philosophically. No question.
I'm not saying that the way our democracy works is 100 percent moral I'm simply saying that it works like a game where everyone agrees to abide by the rules the people in power make. They can fight them, but only through the legal process or by electing people who will change the rules to favor their ideas. The government uses force and coercion to get everyone to play along by making laws that are enforced both locally and at a national level. The lawbreakers, if found and convicted are then punished according to the law.
Am I in favor of this? Not exactly. But until I find something better, I'm not personally going to try and see it dissolved. I will instead make a concerted effort to win the game by playing the game. That means finding candidates who match my ideology. It might not work. We shall see.
bloomj31:They can fight them, but only through the legal process or by electing people who will change the rules to favor their ideas.
Or we can just stop obeying them.
bloomj31:That means finding candidates who match my ideology. It might not work. We shall see.
You mean finding master's that match your ideology. I myself don't want a master.
And let me explain the game a little better. It used to be that the slave master's claimed to own not only the products of the slave's labor, but to own the slave himself. Now the master's say that the slave's own themselves, and the master's own the products of the slave's labor. Not only that, they let the slave's vote for the master's! Just so wonderful! Oh yeah, and if the slave's try to claim their property, then the slave owner's renege on their promise that the slave owns himself and will take him and throw him in a prison and run his life. Be good slave!
Spideynw: Or we can just stop obeying them. You mean finding master's that match your ideology. I myself don't want a master. And let me explain the game a little better. It used to be that the slave master's claimed to own not only the products of the slave's labor, but to own the slave himself. Now the master's say that the slave's own themselves, and the master's own the products of the slave's labor. Not only that, they let the slave's vote for the master's! Just so wonderful! Oh yeah, and if the slave's try to claim their property, then the slave owner's renege on their promise that the slave owns himself and will take him and throw him in a prison and run his life. Be good slave!
A risky proposal.
There's no question that the government acts as a quasi slave master. The question is: how much slavery are people willing to put up with?
I could stand 10 percent slavery. 40-50 percent is too much for me. Maybe 1 percent is too much for you. We all have different tolerance levels.
bloomj31:I could stand 10 percent slavery. 40-50 percent is too much for me. Maybe 1 percent is too much for you. We all have different tolerance levels.
There is only 100% or 0%. There is no partial slavery. Either you own your property, or you do not. Either you own yourself, or you do not. Currently, the state claims you do not. It will take away your life and your property on a whim, if the masters feel you have disobeyed. And that is all they really claim, that you disobeyed. A guy the other day was SHOT in the BACK, because he did not OBEY a police officer and turn around and put his hands on a car. He just wanted to continue the conversation he was having with him is all. He ran because the policeman shot him with a taser. Then he shot him with a gun when he ran away. What happened to the police officer for shooting a non-violent, peaceful slave? A few days suspended with pay, I believe.
You live in a fantasy world if you think that it is possible to make an entity small that is OK with extortion, theft, and slavery. That is the biggest joke of the human race, to believe we can control such a beast.
Do you think that your "it's either 0 or 100" thing falls into the false dichotomy or slippery slope logical fallacy arena?
bloomj31: Do you think that your "it's either 0 or 100" thing falls into the false dichotomy or slippery slope logical fallacy arena?
Do you own yourself or do you not? Do you think you can just partially own yourself and be partially owned by someone else at the same time?
Spideynw: Do you own yourself or do you not? Do you think you can just partially own yourself and be partially owned by someone else at the same time?
I think I'd like to own myself fully but I don't. I think I own myself partially and would like to get more of myself under my own control. So yes, I can be partially owned by myself and something else at the same time. To me, they're not mutually exclusive. However, there are levels of external ownership that I find unacceptable which is basically anything more than 10 percent. And right now, the government gets about 40 percent of everything I make and 20 percent of everything my investments make. This is unacceptable.
bloomj31:So yes, I can be partially owned by myself and something else at the same time.
Oh really? Try selling some cocaine and let's see how that works out with the government "partially" owning you.
Pretty tough to discuss things with someone that does not understand that it is an impossibility to partially own someone. Either someone owns his or her self or s/he does not. There is no "partially".
See, two people can own a piece of land, because if there is a dispute, they can just split it. Two people cannot own one person, because there is no way to resolve a dispute. One has to win over the other. And the one that wins, is the owner, in full. Not only that, but you obviously do not understand the idea of property. Property belongs to the person with the best claim. How can someone have a better claim over yourself, than yourself?
Spideynw: Oh really? Try selling some cocaine and let's see how that works out with the government "partially" owning you. Pretty tough to discuss things with someone that does not understand that it is an impossibility to partially own someone. Either someone owns his or her self or s/he does not. There is no "partially". See, two people can own a piece of land, because if there is a dispute, they can just split it. Two people cannot own one person, because there is no way to resolve a dispute. One has to win over the other. And the one that wins, is the owner, in full. Not only that, but you obviously do not understand the idea of property. Property belongs to the person with the best claim. How can someone have a better claim over yourself, than yourself?
Doesn't owning of property depend on the ability of the owner to protect said property?
bloomj31:Doesn't owning of property depend on the ability of the owner to protect said property?
Not in a civilized society that understands property rights.