Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Democracy and liberty

Page 5 of 10 [ 150 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 10  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

DarthMetaKnight
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,105
Location: The Infodome

05 Apr 2018, 6:03 am

Daniel89 wrote:
If 10 people gang up on someone and steal their property its called theft, how many does it take before its not theft?


Once again, your excessively simplistic "libertarian" worldview is showing.

Do you know why people steal? A lot of people steal because they are poor. When people have their needs met, they usually don't steal because the police are an effective deterrent. White collar crime is an exception because they usually manage to circumvent the law anyway.

A social safety net may be "stealing" to you, but this sort of thing prevents actual stealing.


_________________
Synthetic carbo-polymers got em through man. They got em through mouse. They got through, and we're gonna get out.
-Roostre

READ THIS -> https://represent.us/


DarthMetaKnight
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,105
Location: The Infodome

05 Apr 2018, 6:10 am

Daniel89 wrote:
I don't believe taxation is theft, I believe wealth redistribution via taxation is theft.


Then what is the purpose of the state?

Are you trying to create a world in which the government owns only the military and the police?

[quoteThe vast majority of people in poverty are poor because their parents chose to have children they couldn't look after.[/quote]

So? These kids shouldn't die just because their parents couldn't afford to feed them.

If we want to prevent these unplanned pregnancies, we just need to keep abortion legal and make sure everyone has access to contraceptives.


_________________
Synthetic carbo-polymers got em through man. They got em through mouse. They got through, and we're gonna get out.
-Roostre

READ THIS -> https://represent.us/


Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

05 Apr 2018, 6:30 am

DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
If 10 people gang up on someone and steal their property its called theft, how many does it take before its not theft?


Once again, your excessively simplistic "libertarian" worldview is showing.

Do you know why people steal? A lot of people steal because they are poor. When people have their needs met, they usually don't steal because the police are an effective deterrent. White collar crime is an exception because they usually manage to circumvent the law anyway.

A social safety net may be "stealing" to you, but this sort of thing prevents actual stealing.


No one needs to have children when the government encourages people to have children they cannot look after by financially rewarding them for it we get more children born into poverty. I believe if people need government money then they should only get it if they get sterilised.



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

05 Apr 2018, 6:33 am

DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
I don't believe taxation is theft, I believe wealth redistribution via taxation is theft.


Then what is the purpose of the state?

Are you trying to create a world in which the government owns only the military and the police?

[quoteThe vast majority of people in poverty are poor because their parents chose to have children they couldn't look after.


So? These kids shouldn't die just because their parents couldn't afford to feed them.

If we want to prevent these unplanned pregnancies, we just need to keep abortion legal and make sure everyone has access to contraceptives.[/quote]

The government is there to protect our rights. When the government becomes the parent it is open to abuse. Here in the UK we have a growing police state people being arrested for jokes, the government ignoring the rape and sexual enslavement of children and yet nothing happens. Why is this? Because you do not bite the hand that feeds you. As with any relationship whether it be husband/wife, parent/child, employer/ employee or State/ citizen when one is overly dependent on the other it can often lead to abuse with no real chance of escape.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Apr 2018, 1:20 pm

Daniel89 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Taxation is NOT theft. It's what makes society function. Without taxation, society eventually would break down, which would mean vast numbers of deaths, eventually including the very rich.
Poor people are not the cause of poverty, but the symptom. It's heartless to put the blame for social ills on the most vulnerable. That's like saying blacks are responsible for racism, or that gays are responsible for homophobia.
Sorry, just had to blurt that out, as I've been feeling it raging inside me all night.


I don't believe taxation is theft, I believe wealth redistribution via taxation is theft. The vast majority of people in poverty are poor because their parents chose to have children they couldn't look after.


That redistribution of wealth to the bottom is the best way to lift people out of poverty, as business is too tight fisted with their money to hire the poor and pay them a decent wage. As soon as business people realize that they have a responsibility to the rest of society, instead of just to their own greedy impulses, then maybe there wouldn't be a need so much for wealth redistribution from the top. But that isn't going to happen, because capitalism is a con, and the vast majority of us are suckers who buy into the lie that the market will lift us all to riches.
Having children is a natural survival impulse, and to deny that to people because of poverty is to dehumanize them. For as long as human beings have existed, people have had children, whether they can afford them or not, and always will.
The wealthy don't want the masses to raise themselves too high, even though such a notion is beneficial to everyone due to the increased buying power people would have to increase the power of the market. No, even to their own detriment, the wealthy have the flawed human need to have someone to hold in loathing and contempt.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Biscuitman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,674
Location: Dunking jammy dodgers

05 Apr 2018, 1:31 pm

Daniel89 wrote:
Here in the UK we have a growing police state people being arrested for jokes.


Are you pluralising singular events again?



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

05 Apr 2018, 1:32 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

That redistribution of wealth to the bottom is the best way to lift people out of poverty, as business is too tight fisted with their money to hire the poor and pay them a decent wage. As soon as business people realize that they have a responsibility to the rest of society, instead of just to their own greedy impulses, then maybe there wouldn't be a need so much for wealth redistribution from the top. But that isn't going to happen, because capitalism is a con, and the vast majority of us are suckers who buy into the lie that the market will lift us all to riches.
Having children is a natural survival impulse, and to deny that to people because of poverty is to dehumanize them. For as long as human beings have existed, people have had children, whether they can afford them or not, and always will.
The wealthy don't want the masses to raise themselves too high, even though such a notion is beneficial to everyone due to the increased buying power people would have to increase the power of the market. No, even to their own detriment, the wealthy have the flawed human need to have someone to hold in loathing and contempt.


No capitalism is not a con it is the best system, it has lifted us to riches we are sitting here now in different countries talking to each other thousands of miles away because of capitalism. Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system.

Wealth redistribution is not the best way to lift people out of poverty, the best way to end poverty is to prevent it in the first place by not having children. If we look at Ethiopia in the 80's it was going through a famine and had a population of 40 million, it couldn't feed itself now it has a population of over 100 million meaning many more will die in the next famine.

Having children may be a natural desire but for people to take responsibility and not have children is not dehumanising to them. Creating another person without consent and bringing them into poverty that is dehumanising.



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

05 Apr 2018, 1:34 pm

Biscuitman wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
Here in the UK we have a growing police state people being arrested for jokes.


Are you pluralising singular events again?


About 9 people are arrested each day for social media posts I can imagine a lot of them are jokes. Not that it matters arresting anyone for non violent speech is insane and unjust.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Apr 2018, 1:53 pm

Daniel89 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:

That redistribution of wealth to the bottom is the best way to lift people out of poverty, as business is too tight fisted with their money to hire the poor and pay them a decent wage. As soon as business people realize that they have a responsibility to the rest of society, instead of just to their own greedy impulses, then maybe there wouldn't be a need so much for wealth redistribution from the top. But that isn't going to happen, because capitalism is a con, and the vast majority of us are suckers who buy into the lie that the market will lift us all to riches.
Having children is a natural survival impulse, and to deny that to people because of poverty is to dehumanize them. For as long as human beings have existed, people have had children, whether they can afford them or not, and always will.
The wealthy don't want the masses to raise themselves too high, even though such a notion is beneficial to everyone due to the increased buying power people would have to increase the power of the market. No, even to their own detriment, the wealthy have the flawed human need to have someone to hold in loathing and contempt.


No capitalism is not a con it is the best system, it has lifted us to riches we are sitting here now in different countries talking to each other thousands of miles away because of capitalism. Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system.

Wealth redistribution is not the best way to lift people out of poverty, the best way to end poverty is to prevent it in the first place by not having children. If we look at Ethiopia in the 80's it was going through a famine and had a population of 40 million, it couldn't feed itself now it has a population of over 100 million meaning many more will die in the next famine.

Having children may be a natural desire but for people to take responsibility and not have children is not dehumanising to them. Creating another person without consent and bringing them into poverty that is dehumanising.


Sure, capitalism has lifted people out of poverty - - when it's reigned in, workers are allowed to bargain collectively, and when the super wealthy aren't so eager to hoard all wealth to themselves. Take all that away - which is happening all too often today - and the promise of capitalism does ring hollow for the majority.
Having children through the act of love, and extending love to those children, is the most human thing of all. People shouldn't be denied this human right just because they live in poverty. Incidentally, all of us have had forebears who had lived in poverty with numerous children, and yet a lot of us in following generations have turned out okay.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

05 Apr 2018, 1:58 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

Sure, capitalism has lifted people out of poverty - - when it's reigned in, workers are allowed to bargain collectively, and when the super wealthy aren't so eager to hoard all wealth to themselves.
Having children through the act of love, and extending love to those children, is the most human thing of all. People shouldn't be denied this human right just because they live in poverty. Incidentally, all of us have had forebears who had lived in poverty with numerous children, and yet a lot of us in following generation have turned out okay.


"Reigned in"? Hong Kong and Singapore were two tiny Islands with no natural resources yet people flocked into them for the opportunities capitalism created. The rich Hoarding all the wealth to themselves? The only nation that has a tradition of the super rich giving vast sums of money to charity is the US.

Just because lots of people have turned out okay does not make having children morally acceptable. You are creating another person without consent gambling with their life and you are not the one who pays the price.



Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

05 Apr 2018, 2:39 pm

Daniel89 wrote:
No capitalism is not a con it is the best system, it has lifted us to riches we are sitting here now in different countries talking to each other thousands of miles away because of capitalism.

No, we're sitting here talking thousands of miles away because of the internet, an invention of science and engineering, not because of capitalism. Also you want to know who funded the research that led to the internet? The government, and you want to know how? Taxes.

Edit: I'll also add in, here in the States our entire commerce system hinges on the interstate system, again two guesses on who funded that and how. Our country is also the first and only nation to notch the achievement of walking on the moon, again two guesses on who funded that and how. Our country was also instrumental in ending WWII, again two guess about who and how. We've also invented numerous vaccines and cures, the polio one being the most important, again two guesses for who and how. Cracking atomic energy, two guesses on who and how.

You can bash the government and taxes for a lot of things, but don't try to take credit for the actual good things they've done. It's a mixed bag, just as capitalism is a mixed bag, because humans are a mixed bag.



Last edited by Aristophanes on 05 Apr 2018, 2:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Apr 2018, 2:41 pm

Daniel89 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:

Sure, capitalism has lifted people out of poverty - - when it's reigned in, workers are allowed to bargain collectively, and when the super wealthy aren't so eager to hoard all wealth to themselves.
Having children through the act of love, and extending love to those children, is the most human thing of all. People shouldn't be denied this human right just because they live in poverty. Incidentally, all of us have had forebears who had lived in poverty with numerous children, and yet a lot of us in following generation have turned out okay.


"Reigned in"? Hong Kong and Singapore were two tiny Islands with no natural resources yet people flocked into them for the opportunities capitalism created. The rich Hoarding all the wealth to themselves? The only nation that has a tradition of the super rich giving vast sums of money to charity is the US.

Just because lots of people have turned out okay does not make having children morally acceptable. You are creating another person without consent gambling with their life and you are not the one who pays the price.


Reigned in with consumer and worker safety regulations and rights laws, antitrust laws, and minimum wage laws.
It sounds like you're taking an anti-capitalist stance on human reproduction, as you want to deny parents free will to make new people. Free market reproduction for all!


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Last edited by Kraichgauer on 05 Apr 2018, 2:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

05 Apr 2018, 2:42 pm

Aristophanes wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
No capitalism is not a con it is the best system, it has lifted us to riches we are sitting here now in different countries talking to each other thousands of miles away because of capitalism.

No, we're sitting here talking thousands of miles away because of the internet, an invention of science and engineering, not because of capitalism. Also you want to know who funded the research that led to the internet? The government, and you want to know how? Taxes.


Taxes generated through capitalism. Socialist countries cannot just tax themselves to prosperity. Science and engineering has leapt forward because of the profit motive.



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

05 Apr 2018, 2:45 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:



Reigned in with consumer and worker safety regulations, antitrust laws, and minimum wage laws.
It sounds like you're taking an anti-capitalist stance on human reproduction, as you want to deny parents free will to make new people. Free market reproduction for all!


Consumer protection laws and worker safety regulations are neither capitalistic or socialistic. Minimum wage laws are good as long as they are not too high as employers will not pay more than someone is worth.

Human beings are not property so creating another person without consent and then de facto owning them is nothing to do with capitalism or freedom.



Aristophanes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,603
Location: USA

05 Apr 2018, 2:58 pm

Daniel89 wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
No capitalism is not a con it is the best system, it has lifted us to riches we are sitting here now in different countries talking to each other thousands of miles away because of capitalism.

No, we're sitting here talking thousands of miles away because of the internet, an invention of science and engineering, not because of capitalism. Also you want to know who funded the research that led to the internet? The government, and you want to know how? Taxes.


Taxes generated through capitalism. Socialist countries cannot just tax themselves to prosperity. Science and engineering has leapt forward because of the profit motive.


That doesn't deny the fact the group that actually had the idea and put the resources forth was not capitalism (didn't see a profit in it at the time), it was the government. And I'm not arguing socialism, I'm arguing that you're giving credit to capitalism when it was actually the government that did the hard work.

Edit: Also, capitalism is just a way to organize labor, it's not some god like panacea you're making it out to be. Civilization has been around for over 8,000 years, well before the idea of 'capitalism', and it was doing fine before it and will do fine after it.



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

05 Apr 2018, 3:03 pm

Aristophanes wrote:

That doesn't deny the fact the group that actually had the idea and put the resources forth was not capitalism (didn't see a profit in it at the time), it was the government. And I'm not arguing socialism, I'm arguing that you're giving credit to capitalism when it was actually the government that did the hard work.

Edit: Also, capitalism is just a way to organize labor, it's not some god like panacea you're making it out to be. Civilization has been around for over 8,000 years, well before the idea of 'capitalism', and it was doing fine before it and will do fine after it.


They employed people who went to university knowing with this investment they could go onto earn a good wage.

We were not doing fine prior to capitalism though, look at how much the world has improved since we became a society based on rights not violence. We are not only richer than any other time in history we are also more free.