Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
I just can't make myself care anymore.
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Do you genuinely care about the poor?
Yes, and and like Stormy I prove it with charity.
47%
 47%  [ 35 ]
Nah. I just use "the poor" to guilt-trip egoists.
17%
 17%  [ 13 ]
Screw the poor. I got mine!
35%
 35%  [ 26 ]
Total Votes : 74

Author Message
gowator
n00b
n00b


Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 49
Location: France 75

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stormy Eyes wrote:
Hey, papal_authority, you don't have to point out that I'm outvoted and outgunned. I've known it for years. But I'm going to keep bitching until I can either get off this planet or find employment that pays in untraceable, untaxable cash.



Just save enough money to become a Monaco resident.
You only need a few million then you can not pay income tax!

Is it equal and open to everyone ...no ... becuase it never can be! Its non viable without draining the resources around it..but you can still buy your way in!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nicom
Guru
Guru


Joined: 30 Jan 2003
Posts: 379
Location: La Ilaha Ilallah, wa Muhammadan Rasullu Llah.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You complain about the government taking your money, but do they not also protect your money? It's a trade off, the government enforces laws which keep you from being robbed, in exchange for keeping people from getting desperate enough too rob you. How is property any more of a right than life? We are but animals, and if you damn off somebodies resources, they will burn your damn down to survive, but if you build a small diversion canal, the people downstream still get thier sustanance, the government simply prevents you from building a damn to save them AND you. For the rich, (physical)theft and not respecting private property is the gravest immorality, because it's something they would never need to do, but for the poor exploitation and hoarding are greater crimes than theft, because they would never be in a position to do it. It's very conveinient to demonize things that you are immune to. The government just needs to be reformed to make the deal work better. But understand that accumulating vast resources in the midst of the starved is a totally natural formula for violence, only government intervention can maintain a safe balance.
_________________
Alhamdulillah for the internet. Free media is allowing sense to spread, I can see something blooming :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3347

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:12 pm    Post subject: Re: I just can't make myself care anymore. Reply with quote

Stormy Eyes wrote:
cokehabit wrote:
There was nothing emotional about that, anyway, you should give up your gun so you will never have force initiated towards you, it correllates


I don't give a shit about correlation. My sole concern is causation. Does my concealing a set of brass knuckles in my pocket cause an ignorant teenager to think that I'm a woman, that my fiancee and I are a lesbian couple, and that he has the right to hassle a pair of "dykes"? No. Therefore, I have no reason to disarm -- and every reason to kick the ass of any idiot stupid enough to lay hands on me.

Its the root of causation you should be getting to, not the problem itself
_________________
"Sex: breakfast of champions" - James Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3347

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gowator wrote:
Stormy Eyes wrote:
Hey, papal_authority, you don't have to point out that I'm outvoted and outgunned. I've known it for years. But I'm going to keep bitching until I can either get off this planet or find employment that pays in untraceable, untaxable cash.



Just save enough money to become a Monaco resident.
You only need a few million then you can not pay income tax!

You can do it for free in Jersey and Guernsey, islands off the UK
_________________
"Sex: breakfast of champions" - James Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yardbird
l33t
l33t


Joined: 20 Apr 2002
Posts: 689
Location: nl.leiden

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stormy Eyes wrote:
BaronVonOwn wrote:
Indeed, I should learn never to doubt the reading abilities of someone who can work through Atlas Shrugged and be able to tell you what she said.


Hey. Compared to Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, Rand's a fucking lightweight. But, to be fair, Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky wrote in Russian, and their works were translated into English.


Personally I find Dostoyevsky pretty much easy to read. But I read it translated too. Have you ever read Burrough? That's tough in my opinion...
_________________
Albert Einstein wrote:
I consider it [...] urgently necessary for [...] workers to get together, both to protect their own economic status and [...] to secure their influence in the political field.


http://www.bluescarni.info
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thalion
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Sep 2003
Posts: 71
Location: not in the USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:54 pm    Post subject: Re: I just can't make myself care anymore. Reply with quote

littleendian wrote:
An example: What do you do with children of a poor family born with birth defects that need to be operated? Let them die because their family can't afford the surgery?


Yes.

Quote:
So you can be "free"? Is your free life more valueable than the life of a child that needs the money you spend on expensive cars to survive?


As far as I'm concerned, yes.

You might want to ask me for money, and I might even give them... or might not. But when you try to force, you can be sure I'll try to give as little as I can. Bonus curse is for free. Hope it works.

Quote:
Yes, you could say that can be covered with private donations, but will this suffice? I doubt it, humans tend to be selfish, especially those who could give some of their money away because they have a lot.


If it won't, then you'll have to admit that people are worse than what some think they are. We'll have to live with that.

Quote:
Isn't it the better way to install a social system where all people give a little of their income (yes, and freedom) away so the few who really need this money for things like surgery get it?


It's better for those people in need. It's worse for everyone else. I'm in the latter category, so it's worse for me. Now you might try to point out that I can end up being one of those in need - true enough. But I'll make sure that I have enough saved to support me if needed, if really desperate, I would ask my friends for help... if none of that works, too bad for me.

Quote:
I don't disagree, freedom is a very important thing. But only AFTER the physical safety of all has been established, and if that costs a little of my freedom, I don't have a problem with that.


And why "physical safety of all" is so badly needed?

Quote:
Look to Germany: We have a social system. Yes, our system makes it hard (compared to the US) to become rich, but it also makes it harder to drown in poverty. There are less social differences because our system irons out the extremes (by e.g. putting higher taxes on the rich than on the poor or by forcing everyone to have certain ensurances).


Thus, you remove incentive (some) people have to work to become reach. You kill ambition. Result? People living in such countries will evolve into mindless automatons. In fact, we already have a word for that: consumer. Eat. Fuck. Sleep. Work (optional). Die. No evolution. No growth. The West had pretty much already come to this.

I don't want to be a part of this.

Quote:
Extreme social differences promote envy and greed, hatred and acts of violence are the results.


And?

Quote:
That's not the kind of world anyone wants to live in, no matter how free it is.


Speak for yourself, please.
_________________
'If you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you - and then you realize that, all this time, you've been looking at yourself.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
papal_authority
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 31 Mar 2004
Posts: 1823
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stormy Eyes wrote:
The US is already slowly becoming crappier and crappier, despite the fact that papal_authority and company have most, if not all, of the policies they advocate in place. Do you think that more socialism will work? Listen: socialism might work in Europe, where countries are small and populations are mostly homogenous. But the US is too physically big and too diverse; what works for some societies is inappropriate for others.

That's a really interesting theory actually. Although Canada's population is probably as diverse, it's an order of magnitude less than the U.S.'s population. Also IIRC, the U.S. has neighbourhoods more divided by ethnicity than does Canada. Not that I'm conceding that libertarianism would work, but perhaps more federal socialsim wouldn't work as well there?
_________________
The free market gave me gonorrhea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GatoVolador
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 268
Location: California, USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmmm, this got me thinking. It seems to me that perhaps the root of most of humanity's problems is that there are just too damn many people.

The upshot of this is that none of the ideas posited here can be effective in solving said problems.

The socialist state will eventually collapse under its weight, especially as it will require more and more workers to support the system while at the same time the numbers of those that live off the system grows disproportionately as humans live longer and longer.

In the libertarian (in the American sense of the word) world, the ever more fierce competition for the insufficient resources will devolve into the break down of order and a return to a feudal system. The fact is, no matter how well you are armed and how much of a "man" you think are, there'll always be someone better armed and manlier. Though humans often see themselves as "higher" than animals, the fact is that when you put enough of us together in too small a space with too few resources we start to kill each other, just like rats in an overcrowded cage.

I think that in the long run, this whole left/right division will cower before the immense size of the problem presented by humanity's exponential growth in numbers.

Regards,
Jay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thalion
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Sep 2003
Posts: 71
Location: not in the USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jayb wrote:
Hmmm, this got me thinking. It seems to me that perhaps the root of most of humanity's problems is that there are just too damn many people.


Yay! Get your nukes out of your lockers! today - because tommorrow might be too late...
_________________
'If you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you - and then you realize that, all this time, you've been looking at yourself.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Quantumstate
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 270
Location: Dallas

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thalion wrote:
Quantumstate wrote:
The measure of a society is how we treat our less-fortunate.


Why? Who defined that to be a measure?

I paraphrased a famous line in philosophy, which is internationally-recognized to be true, under the full weight of history.


littleendian wrote:

I don't disagree, freedom is a very important thing. But only AFTER the physical safety of all has been established, and if that costs a little of my freedom, I don't have a problem with that.
...
If you're a liberal, that doesn't mean you have to donate everything you have. It means you strive for a system where everyone gives away a little so everyone can lead a decent life.

Agree. I just spent all morning helping my mother, who is 77 and disabled with COPD, get one of the last flu shots available this season. We have only half the doses that will be needed because one of the only two companies that makes the vaccine, has been decertified. So why are there only two companies? Because it's not profitable since it's mainly seniors and children who need it. The line was 250 people long, all over 65, and some over 90! (I got there at 7:15, so she was #61) Was somebody commenting on busted health-care systems and rationing in other countries? WhoTF was that?

She commented to me that it seems the Republicans just want seniors to die. Broke my heart. There are five different kinds of Viagra, but one flu vaccine; if that doesn't say something to you, it's not worth it to explain because you're just stupid. "Don't ever try to teach a pig to sing, because you'll just get muddy, and the pig will be annoyed.

Government should do those things that no one else will, like sewer, military, flu vaccine, etc.


cokehabit wrote:
The fact is Stormy is that it takes more effort to care than it does not to, you just cant be bothered and you would rather just give out money than try to get to the real problem which is a change in the social attitude, mainly yours...

YA! To be honest, I've about stopped reading Stormy's writings, because he has several years of growing up to do.

Let's remember, I'm not advocating "giving the ni**ers in the projects money to blow on drugs". I'm talking about the sort of social safety net that is tried and true in countries more advanced than ours, in Northern Europe and Kanada. Especially providing that most valuable of human possessions, a good education.


papal_authority wrote:
We've pointed out again and again how a libertarian society with no government sponsored social programs will be doomed to creating an ever growing class of people living below the poverty line. Not one libertarian has addressed this issue seriously. It's not a moral issue. We all know you don't care about the poor and we don't care that you don't care.

Thank you. I couldn't have said it better.


gowator wrote:
because its not simply about giving that child a bowl of soup one day or a pair of shoes next week... its about building an infrastructure and society where EVERYONE has a chance (whether they waste it or not)
...
You can divide the middle class whereever you want but its ME, YOU and I and the differences between US and the upper echelon is 7-8 zero's a year! Whereas the difference between YOU and ME and the poor is the cost of a operation or bad investment.

Exactly.
(Except WTF is a "busker"?)


Thalion wrote:
littleendian wrote:
An example: What do you do with children of a poor family born with birth defects that need to be operated? Let them die because their family can't afford the surgery?


Yes.

Your mother must be so proud.

What if that defective child is a prodigy in mathematics... or physics... or biology? I'm sure that's never happened though (cough).

jayb wrote:
It seems to me that perhaps the root of most of humanity's problems is that there are just too damn many people.
...

I think that in the long run, this whole left/right division will cower before the immense size of the problem presented by humanity's exponential growth in numbers.


My dad came to this conclusion a long time ago, and has been donating to zero-pop entities for a long time.

But populations in developed countries have stabilized below replacement now, and I'm not so worried about this. AIDS is eliminating (mostly) the irresponsible and dysfunctional right now, as nature is wont. But we must change the careless binge of resource consumption, because the North Pole is melting twice as fast as we'd projected.


Last edited by Quantumstate on Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:49 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
utabintarbo
n00b
n00b


Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 53
Location: Warren, MI, USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quantumstate wrote:
...

The measure of a society is how we treat our less-fortunate. To say it simpler, if we treat those who have had an accident (so they can no longer earn) like savages, then we will be viewed as savage by the rest of the world (not to mention history). Anyone know who the Mongols were? Huns? Nazis? God forbid you should have an accident Gnuageux... under your own rules, you'd be royally screwed. Of course you'd cowardly change those rules if it happened.


I would counter that the measure of a society is how it treats the most able. Does it shackle them out of a misplaced sense of envy, or let them run free to raise the general level of well-being through their good works?

And I find it presumptuous of you to assume all others are as cynical and insincere as you seem to be. :roll:

Quantumstate wrote:

...
Mathematically, a Libertarian philosophy can only lead to a few small enclaves of wealthy in each city, barricaded from 95% of the proletariat (poor people) as in Mexico. You know Mexico don't you? It's where 35 families (of Spanish -Euro-, opposed to Indian descent), control 76% of the nation's wealth. Will you be one of those wealthy when this happens in the U.S.? If you do not now live in one of the top neighborhoods in your city, the answer is no.


What is your evidence of this claim? None. Mexico is hardly a paragon of Capitalism, and not in the least libertarian. Red herring.

Quantumstate wrote:

Civilization breaks down, when the fit are NOT ABLE to get work because of a lack of suitable jobs. A lack of suitable jobs happens when the powerful accumulate large percentages of the nation's wealth into a few tall piles, not circulating it in the economy. Did you know that today in the U.S., 38% of the nation's wealth is concentrated in the hands of the top 5%? Right before the Crash of '29 that number was 35%. The Great Depression was really a massive redistribution of wealth, which brought that concentration down to the mid-twenties for the next 50 years. But starting with the Reagan Administration that concentrtion of wealth has climbed every year. This is a massive imbalance, that deprives the economy of lubricating funds. (read Noam Chomskey if you want to know more)


Ahh, the sainted Noam Chomsky. :roll: I've heard more about him in this forum than anywhere else on the planet. I find that....interesting. I also found this interesting. You might, as well. :)

The lack of "suitable" jobs is a judgement call. Not yours, nor mine, but the person who's willing to take it. This is how a free labor market works. If, OTOH, the government deems suitability to mean "only if it pays over $7 per hour" then the gov't has substituted it's judgement for the individual's (for their own good, of course :roll: ). If the marginal utility of that job is less than $7 per hour, then that job cannot be justified economically, and consequently goes away (either somewhere it can be filled, or just eliminated). This is not a fault of Capitalism, this is the result of gov't intervention into Capitalism.

Quantumstate wrote:

But that aside, and more abstractly, we only advance when we work together. This is why the library system was made, although if it were proposed today we never would have had libraries. (too 'socialist') A civilization's resources must be shared to a reasonable degree, or the brightest lights are left with crap influences and no chance (... ehrm, like you today), impoverishing the future of all.

If you're thinking of race when I'm talking about this, it's a distraction from the fundamental truths. So try to think of what I say in terms of white people only. Race is is the undercurrent that has brought Republicans so far.


More assumptions on your part without benefit of evidence. Where is it written that we can only advance when we work together? Non-sequitur. Where is it written that "A civilization's resources must be shared to a reasonable degree, or the brightest lights are left with crap influences and no chance"? Non-sequitur. How do you know that "Race is is the undercurrent that has brought Republicans so far."? Non-sequitur. Why are there 2 "is's" in that sentence? 8O

Quantumstate wrote:

I'll stop here, because if you don't get it, I'm wasting my time.


I don't get it, as there is nothing there. :(
_________________
Let the market decide!

And in case it wasn't apparent, sarcasm is yet another of the free services I offer. :roll:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BaronVonOwn
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 46
Location: United States of America

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Skraut wrote:
If you're walking down the street, a wad full of cash in your pocket, it is your freedom to walk right past a homeless person, and not share what you have. However your freedom to do so, deprives the person of what he or she may need to eat to continue to live, or to have the basic necessities to pursue happiness.

Freedom this, freedom that. Rights this, right that. It's all bullshit. I haven't seen one person here support their claim to rights with evidence. Let's talk about what we can or can't do, and its consequences. Stormy sure as hell can walk right by that guy, and if he doesn't care about him (or has more important plans for that money), he will. However, just as surely as Stormy can walk right by him, that guy could toss a beer bottle at the back of his head as he's walking by, knock him out cold, and take Stormy's money. If he thinks he wouldn't get fed any other way, then he probably will. If Stormy doesn't want to be dodging beer bottles and enraged hobos everytime he walks down the street (although that sounds like it might be fun), then he'll either pre-empt the hobos, or give them some money. As preemption is apparently against his beliefs, he'd probably decide in favor of the latter.

Thalion wrote:
Thus, you remove incentive (some) people have to work to become reach. You kill ambition. Result? People living in such countries will evolve into mindless automatons. In fact, we already have a word for that: consumer. Eat. Fuck. Sleep. Work (optional). Die. No evolution. No growth. The West had pretty much already come to this.

Ugh, social Darwinism again. You libertarians just can't get off that, can you? Could we have some enlightened egoism here? Is it in your interests to establish social Darwinism as a norm? If your name isn't Bill Gates, then it most definitely isn't. The rich and powerful would pick apart everyone posting in this thread if social Darwinism was the norm. Guys, in every economic system, there is a surplus of labor. The only system with a 0% unemployment rate was Soviet Russia, and that's because they made up stupid jobs. Toss in globalization, well, look what's happening with outsourcing right now. What do people work for in China and India and the like? $2/hr.? And that's for programming. Does that sound like fun?
_________________
What if we built a large, wooden badger?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BaronVonOwn
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 46
Location: United States of America

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

utabintarbo wrote:
Ahh, the sainted Noam Chomsky. Rolling Eyes I've heard more about him in this forum than anywhere else on the planet. I find that....interesting. I also found this interesting. You might, as well.

I find it hilarious that in the same breath that you attack Noam Chomsky, you hold up freerepublic.com as a good source of information.
_________________
What if we built a large, wooden badger?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stormy Eyes
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 09 Apr 2003
Posts: 1064
Location: Watching God spit-shine my boots.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BaronVonOwn wrote:
If Stormy doesn't want to be dodging beer bottles and enraged hobos everytime he walks down the street (although that sounds like it might be fun), then he'll either pre-empt the hobos, or give them some money. As preemption is apparently against his beliefs, he'd probably decide in favor of the latter.


You should flush those scare tactics in the morning with the rest of the shit. I like your taste in music, but all I can do is laugh at this: "Stormy should STFU and pay his taxes, or a pissed off bum might chuck a bottle at his head." I've had bottles chucked at my head before, but not by hobos. I've had 'em thrown by upper middle-class teens driving Daddy's car.

Bums, on the other hand, usually ask me if I can spare a buck. And I'll tell you this: most of the bums to whom I've given a few bucks could earn a living teaching leftists manners.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BaronVonOwn
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 46
Location: United States of America

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stormy Eyes wrote:
You should flush those scare tactics in the morning with the rest of the shit. I like your taste in music, but all I can do is laugh at this: "Stormy should STFU and pay his taxes, or a pissed off bum might chuck a bottle at his head." I've had bottles chucked at my head before, but not by hobos. I've had 'em thrown by upper middle-class teens driving Daddy's car.

Bums, on the other hand, usually ask me if I can spare a buck. And I'll tell you this: most of the bums to whom I've given a few bucks could earn a living teaching leftists manners.

Ahh, surely you could tell I was using that example metaphorically? Call it a scare tactic if you like, but it's an indisputable sociological fact that poverty is strongly correlated with crime, and in some historical cases, revolution. All I'm saying is that any rationally self-interested individual should take this evidence into account in his decisionmaking process.
_________________
What if we built a large, wooden badger?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thalion
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Sep 2003
Posts: 71
Location: not in the USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quantumstate wrote:
Thalion wrote:
littleendian wrote:
An example: What do you do with children of a poor family born with birth defects that need to be operated? Let them die because their family can't afford the surgery?


Yes.

Your mother must be so proud.


Nothing new here. This stuff happens and will continue to happen no matter what. There are always things which are simply too expensive, socialism or not.

Quote:
What if that defective child is a prodigy in mathematics... or physics... or biology?


Sad. Chances are rather low, however.
_________________
'If you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you - and then you realize that, all this time, you've been looking at yourself.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thalion
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Sep 2003
Posts: 71
Location: not in the USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BaronVonOwn wrote:
Ugh, social Darwinism again. You libertarians just can't get off that, can you? Could we have some enlightened egoism here? Is it in your interests to establish social Darwinism as a norm?


Not really. It will establish itself if you don't intervene, since it is a norm.
_________________
'If you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you - and then you realize that, all this time, you've been looking at yourself.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stormy Eyes
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 09 Apr 2003
Posts: 1064
Location: Watching God spit-shine my boots.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BaronVonOwn wrote:
Ahh, surely you could tell I was using that example metaphorically? Call it a scare tactic if you like, but it's an indisputable sociological fact that poverty is strongly correlated with crime, and in some historical cases, revolution. All I'm saying is that any rationally self-interested individual should take this evidence into account in his decisionmaking process.


I'm a little pissed off at the moment; please bear with me. (I get annoyed when people blame me for defects in Microsoft's products, particularly SQL Server.)

Yes, I do think it's something of a scare tactic. In every system where there was a revolution, there wasn't anything resembling laissez-faire in place. France was a monarchy, and so was Russia. China was ruled by a decadent emperor. Vietnam was a protectorate of France.

As for crime: we have crime in the United States as it is. Granted, it's not as much as the talking heads on the TV news make it out to be, but it's there.

Now, you know I pay attention to your posts: do me a similar courtesy and keep in mind that I said that I was willing to tolerate a small sales tax to uphold the rule of law that makes it possible to safely buy and sell goods and services. I can treat a minimal tax on consumption as a necessary evil, just as I can treat a minimal state concerned with the preservation of law and order as a necessary evil.

However, I do and will continue to resent income taxes as an intrusion and as interference. To begin with, the money I earn is mine. Furthermore, having to tell the government how much I earn and how much I've paid is a violation of my privacy, which ought to have been guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment. Last, how am I supposed to provide for myself in emergencies and old age if my ability to save is hampered by confiscatory income taxes?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Quantumstate
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 270
Location: Dallas

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

utabintarbo wrote:
Why are there 2 "is's" in that sentence?


Chickenshit, er I mean, "non-sequitur". (Said in that snotty Lexus ad voice)

They are there because, it depends on what the meaning of 'is', is. I laughed when Clinton said this, because he was turning the river of chickenshit back on his Inquisitors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
utabintarbo
n00b
n00b


Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 53
Location: Warren, MI, USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BaronVonOwn wrote:
utabintarbo wrote:
Ahh, the sainted Noam Chomsky. Rolling Eyes I've heard more about him in this forum than anywhere else on the planet. I find that....interesting. I also found this interesting. You might, as well.

I find it hilarious that in the same breath that you attack Noam Chomsky, you hold up freerepublic.com as a good source of information.


I find it interesting that you didn't bother to say anything about the content of the article, yet you denigrate where it is hosted. :roll:
_________________
Let the market decide!

And in case it wasn't apparent, sarcasm is yet another of the free services I offer. :roll:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BaronVonOwn
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 46
Location: United States of America

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stormy Eyes wrote:
Now, you know I pay attention to your posts: do me a similar courtesy and keep in mind that I said that I was willing to tolerate a small sales tax to uphold the rule of law that makes it possible to safely buy and sell goods and services

Well, I try, but in all fairness...

Stormy Eyes
Veteran
Joined: 09 Apr 2003
Posts: 5407

BaronVonOwn
Guru
Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 417

But anyway, regarding the specific policy issues you raise, this is what I have to say. Firstly, the Congress has exceeded its authority by establishing Social Security and other federal welfare programs. These should all be cut. These cuts should be accompanied by tax cuts, and with the great mass of programs that should be cut by strictly interpreting the Constitution, that should allow for the federal income tax to be abolished.

These welfare programs could then be picked up by state government, which do have it in their authority to make such programs. With 50 different states, you've got 50 chances to live in a state where there's no welfare, social security, etc. There's some pretty conservative states out there (Texas, Montana, Idaho, NH etc.) so you'd have a pretty good chance of making it happen. Or if you want those programs, you can choose a state which does provide them. My personal preference? I think Social Security should be switched from the pay-as-you-go model to the banking model, and people should have the ability to opt-out. Welfare should provide adequate coverage for those who were recently laid off, and those with (real) disabilities. Others should not qualify.
_________________
What if we built a large, wooden badger?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BaronVonOwn
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 46
Location: United States of America

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Meh, I missed some of the other points. I gotta go to work now, so I guess it'll have to wait.
_________________
What if we built a large, wooden badger?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Quantumstate
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 270
Location: Dallas

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

utabintarbo wrote:
I find it interesting that you didn't bother to say anything about the content of the article, yet you denigrate where it is hosted. :roll:


Where it's hosted speaks to its validity, in absolute terms.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
utabintarbo
n00b
n00b


Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 53
Location: Warren, MI, USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BaronVonOwn wrote:
...

But anyway, regarding the specific policy issues you raise, this is what I have to say. Firstly, the Congress has exceeded its authority by establishing Social Security and other federal welfare programs. These should all be cut. These cuts should be accompanied by tax cuts, and with the great mass of programs that should be cut by strictly interpreting the Constitution, that should allow for the federal income tax to be abolished.

These welfare programs could then be picked up by state government, which do have it in their authority to make such programs. With 50 different states, you've got 50 chances to live in a state where there's no welfare, social security, etc. There's some pretty conservative states out there (Texas, Montana, Idaho, NH etc.) so you'd have a pretty good chance of making it happen. Or if you want those programs, you can choose a state which does provide them. My personal preference? I think Social Security should be switched from the pay-as-you-go model to the banking model, and people should have the ability to opt-out. Welfare should provide adequate coverage for those who were recently laid off, and those with (real) disabilities. Others should not qualify.


On this, you and I will generally agree, with the exception of your bone thrown to the welfare types. Why should other's bad planning be visited upon me? Is this opt-out-able ( :P ) also? If so, I'm in! :)
_________________
Let the market decide!

And in case it wasn't apparent, sarcasm is yet another of the free services I offer. :roll:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
utabintarbo
n00b
n00b


Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 53
Location: Warren, MI, USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quantumstate wrote:
utabintarbo wrote:
I find it interesting that you didn't bother to say anything about the content of the article, yet you denigrate where it is hosted. :roll:


Where it's hosted speaks to its validity, in absolute terms.


So the fact that the above is posted in a forum called "Off the Wall" says precisely what about it's relationship to reality?

Nice reasoning, dude! :roll:
_________________
Let the market decide!

And in case it wasn't apparent, sarcasm is yet another of the free services I offer. :roll:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum