How do you feel about next November?

[Peter Parka]

The only response I have to the elections is nausea at all those people cheering at the appointment of the newest top slavemaster, and prattling on about how this choice (to the extent it even exists) somehow makes us 'free'. Democratic propoganda is possibly the most sickening and tragic propaganda I've ever had the misfortune of being bombarded with.

So how would you go about choosing a system of government then or would you just abolish it and let anyone do whatever they want, harmless and harmful?

 

[LiberalVichy]

So how would you go about choosing a system of government then or would you just abolish it and let anyone do whatever they want, harmless and harmful?

I'd hold people responsible for their own actions, instead of pretending that a giant violent mafia can be used for a productive purpose.

 

[Peter Parka]

I'd hold people responsible for their own actions, instead of pretending that a giant violent mafia can be used for a productive purpose.

So how would you go about choosing who does that then?

 

[LiberalVichy]

So how would you go about choosing who does that then?

The fundamental problem with the questions you're asking is you're assuming the government is something other than specific individual people. If it is possible for individuals to interact with eachother without recourse to invasive violence (which it must be, or else civil society would be suicidal) then making some specific group of people unaccountable for their initiation of violence (which is what taxation is, aside from all other government activities) is certainly not going to improve the situation. The fact that you believe it is POSSIBLE to differentiate between harmful and harmless action demonstrates that the 'need' for a government is a shibboleth.
Beyond that, the government is not what it's members or the pseudo-intellectuals pigs feeding at its trough say it is, as any perusal of the history of any government can readily demonstrate. Government is, always has been and must be a violent criminal gang whose very conduct and sanctioned violence make it sheer nonsense to think it is in any way capable of 'defending' people. One does not hire the wolf to protect the sheep.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

So how would you go about choosing who does that then?

 

[Peter Parka]

Yeah! Meanwhile back in the real world...:smiley24:

 

[LiberalVichy]

Yeah! Meanwhile back in the real world...

You see, I'm being perfectly consistent with the real world. The idea that a giant mafia gang can improve our safety and behaviour is what's unrealistic.

So how would you go about choosing who does that then?

Whoever people want to pay, or volunteers or whatever. You know, like security gaurds and insurance companies and even the much-despised vigilantes (not that some of them aren't crazy at present). Or, you could even do it yourself if you wanted.

 

[Peter Parka]

You know, all of a sudden, Carthage is actually starting to sound like he actually has a clue what he's talking about.

 

[LiberalVichy]

You know, all of a sudden, Carthage is actually starting to sound like he actually has a clue what he's talking about.

You know, insinuation is not a substitute for argumentation.

 

[Peter Parka]

You know what, under your theory, if I was allowed to have the freedom to go and get you killed because you pissed me off, I'm pretty sure you'd change your mind pretty quick about the evil Mafia government.

 

[LiberalVichy]

Yes, but you see, I'm not even allowed to refuse the government's 'protection'. As far as your opinions as to the result of a stateless environment, given that most people have absolutely no understanding of economics you'll excuse me if my intensively considered, researched and strongly supported knowledge doesn't fold under the winds of some dude's opinion. You can pay all the taxes you want. I'm just saying I don't want any part of it.

 

[Peter Parka]

So if I was to come after you to try and kill you, you wouldn't want the Police getting involved?

 

[All Else Failed]

I'd hold people responsible for their own actions, instead of pretending that a giant violent mafia can be used for a productive purpose.

without government funding a lot of technological and scientific advances would have never come about.

 

[LiberalVichy]

without government funding a lot of technological and scientific advances would have never come about.

Want to bet that you have no empirical evidence to back that up?
Furthermore, where do you think that money came from? The government produces nothing, it only takes what others have produced. At most the government has developed technology and advances in areas where people did not want to put their money. I mean, for Christ's sake, all the rocket technology NASA used and even the atomic bomb were developed privately long before the government ever put them together, at enormous cost with no payoff except robbery and death. This myth is a favourite among the incompetent of academia, who want funding for their pet project and have their vanity hurt because people think their own lives are more important than some monomaniac's absurdly expensive and non-productive schemes.

So if I was to come after you to try and kill you, you wouldn't want the Police getting involved?

I might, if I was desperate, but I'd rather contact a private company or take care of it myself. Unfortunately the government has made this all but illegal. Honestly, how hard is it to understand that what I fundamentally object to is that I'm not allowed to disagree with your opinion as to how 'awsum' these jack-booted thugs are supposed to be at protecting me, much less protect myself from them.

 

[All Else Failed]

Want to bet that you have no empirical evidence to back that up?
Furthermore, where do you think that money came from? The government produces nothing, it only takes what others have produced. At most the government has developed technology and advances in areas where people did not want to put their money. I mean, for Christ's sake, all the rocket technology NASA used and even the atomic bomb were developed privately long before the government ever put them together, at enormous cost with no payoff except robbery and death. This myth is a favourite among the incompetent of academia, who want funding for their pet project and have their vanity hurt because people think their own lives are more important than some monomaniac's absurdly expensive and non-productive schemes.
I might, if I was desperate, but I'd rather contact a private company or take care of it myself. Unfortunately the government has made this all but illegal. Honestly, how hard is it to understand that what I fundamentally object to is that I'm not allowed to disagree with your opinion as to how 'awsum' these jack-booted thugs are supposed to be at protecting me, much less protect myself from them.

Ask any scientist that used government funding to research. Without those millions, or perhaps billions, the advances would not have been made. Or not made in our life times. I'm sure you enjoy many things afforded by science and government funding.


The government produces many things that are useful. Do you enjoy running water? Electricity? Your computer? Medicine?

 

[Peter Parka]

The government produces nothing, it only takes what others have produced.

What th hell are you talking about? Loads of services are produced by the government!

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Ask any scientist that used government funding to research. Without those millions, or perhaps billions, the advances would not have been made. Or not made in our life times. I'm sure you enjoy many things afforded by science and government funding.


The government produces many things that are useful. Do you enjoy running water? Electricity? Your computer? Medicine?

I suspect you will find the LiberalVichy a formidable opponent.

Just a hunch.

 

[All Else Failed]

Meh, nothing I can't handle. I don't want to cause any conflict.

 

[LiberalVichy]

The government produces many things that are useful. Do you enjoy running water? Electricity? Your computer? Medicine?

Produced with resources which were taken from people who actually produced them and thus diverted from where people would actually desire to put those resources. Also, it's an economic fact that the government cannot produce a Pareto-superior condition, it can only DECREASE wealth since - by definition - it took resources and put them into places that the actual creators and consumers of that wealth did not desire them (or else taxation wouldn't be necessary!).
All those services the government 'provides' were provided at cost to myself and others by services forgone and are typically 'provided' by the government because competition is forbidden or extremely restricted.

 

[All Else Failed]

Produced with resources which were taken from people who actually produced them and thus diverted from where people would actually desire to put those resources. Also, it's an economic fact that the government cannot produce a Pareto-superior condition, it can only DECREASE wealth since - by definition - it took resources and put them into places that the actual creators and consumers of that wealth did not desire them (or else taxation wouldn't be necessary!).
All those services the government 'provides' were provided at cost to myself and others by services forgone and are typically 'provided' by the government because competition is forbidden or extremely restricted.

So? You get to live better now. Plus, I really don't think people would object their taxes going towards important research that will help them in the end.