the Usda wants the taxpayer to buy them GUNS

Balbus, he's taken on many Liberals and Democrats, I bet he would tear your ideas apart if you called him.

Besides, my beliefs aren't about what other people think, I decided this for myself, then found media to match. Just like Liberals purposely watch news with a liberal bias. The only difference is, Liberalism demands Government force, and Libertarians abhor it.

I think it's you who's not paying attention to critical facts. You dont care the government violates the Constitution daily, nor do you care they kill citizens, nor, do you care that they took our freedom to protest. Sorry, but you're a typical Britt, and, there's many reasons The colonists didn't stay under the crown: Illegal searches,brutalizing protestors and, disarmament; all of which, happens consistently under the current Government, and current administration, yet, *sigh* the liberals genius answer is to tax even more, and, expand government even more, and the Banksters and WallStreet, love you for it. Because, nothing is more valuable to them, then control over you. The Drug companies/ Cartels, are getting rich through the illegality of drugs, as is the Government and Cia, who use that money, to overthrow foreign dictators. The system is a joke, and even a TINY bit of real research will reveal that, it is mainstream government sponsored media, and government controlled schools, that we have sooo many people, stuck on the empty idea of a "lesser of two evils" system.

 

btw, there is 5-6 posts on the last page, to answer all your Liberal based attacking points. (yeah, thanks for shortening my posting ability)


I guess that's one way of trying to stop the truth from getting out...

 

25

First up the limit on the length of posts, it’s been there for a while it limits me as well and you will see that I have in the past done part One and part Two posts because of it. If you have a problem with it contact the owners of the site.

Second you are doing that silly thing again of implying that people either have to agree with you OR you claim they MUST want and approve of all the things bad in the world.

As I keep pointing out – many people here agree with the problems what we are criticising you for is your solutions which as explained would seem to favour wealth to the detriment of everyone else.

We think your solutions would make a bad situation worse and frankly the more you explain the more that becomes very clear.

So can you stop with the assertions and the bluster and start addressing the criticisms in some rational or reasonable way rather than just telling us we are wrong.

 

Legal System (by point)

How is the jury picked? Are they paid and if so by who or what? Is it voluntary (can you refuse to do it)?

You seem to imply it would be unpaid and voluntary.

How?

*

And who investigates whether a law has been broken or not? I mean if wealth is paying for the security agents and wealth is accused of committing the crime, would the agents be impartial?

As far as I can tell you have not answered can you point to where you think you have?

So there would be several Private Security Firms all competing with each other and all paid for by those with the money to pay for them – again you are talking of private armies.

I mean if one industry is corrupt and is making money wouldn’t other industries just do the same and since they’d have their own armies, who’s to stop them?

Well from experience people with private armies are – this is the lesson of history.

You say your ‘courts’ have no power to enforce any punishment. Those with the wealth and so the power to refuse to be punished would be above the law.

So jury members would not be paid.

But what about the paid security agents, paid for by people that can afford to do so?

Where would the criminals be locked up, and by whom and who’d pay for it?

But what if it’s not seen directly by a family member or friend and what if it is and is self defence but they don’t like it? What then - can the family/friends retaliate anyway – isn’t such a system likely to lead to feuds?
What if it is murder but the killer is wealth with a private army of security agents and the aggrieved family is not rich enough to hire even one?

AGAIN – who investigates who finds the evidence, who pays them to do that?

So someone that is too poor to hire a lawyer in a dispute with a billionaire or multinational corporation that can hire the best team available are going to be on an equal footing?

*

And AGAIN What if a judgment goes against someone in your ‘court’ they don’t think they have done anything morally wrong and see themselves as the victim of a miscarriage of justice – are they in their right to fight? What if they are wealthy enough to have a sizable number of security agents more than do the ‘court’? Does the court go to war with the prospect of losing or allow the person off?

So nothing happens they just get off

I’m asking you - not someone else, if you are unable to make a decision on such a thing why do you think one of your ‘jury’ could?

 

Legal system (in general)

Ok from what we can gleam so far –

Based on a jury system but jury service would be unpaid and voluntary so most people would be unable and/or unwilling to do it.

If people are just scrapping by or trying to survive they’d be unwilling to do it - basically if would be only those with the inclination and wealth enough to have the free time. It would become a kind of entertainment for the idle rich.

What is to stop people being bought? You hire some unemployed people to be jury members to sit on your case?

There would be no regulatory, inspection or investigative system set up so all investigation would have to be paid for by the plaintiffs, which would be an includible advantage to those with wealth, who could afford to pay for an investigation or disrupt one (bribing or intimidating witnesses)

The standard of legal council would depend on ability to pay – a poor person having no money to hire a lawyer would have to try and do it themselves while the wealthy could hire a team of the best lawyers -. again advantage wealth.

And in the end these courts have little power to enforce any ruling, so it’s likely the weaker members of society would get punished but anyone with the wealth and power to resist would be untroubled.

Also you seem to suggest that people should take justice into their own hand and retaliate in person if they feel they have been wronged.

As I say your ‘solution’ would seem to just turn a bad situation worse.

 

Government

So there would be government and you are still not answering my question about democracy - you seemed to be against it so how would you government be formed?

Would that government still be paid for through voluntary contributions?
You want to get rid of the Federal layer but how?

To point out again once wealth is in control as they would be in your system, how would you stop them?

I mean you reduce the power of governance and give more power to wealth (as explained) and at some tipping point wealth will control governance directly. It would have control of ‘government’, the judicial system and the security agents (police and army).

How do you take that away from them?

But more importantly why would you want to give them that power in the first place.

That was local and State government laws and regulations that were contested by Federal Government.

Have you read any history?

But again you do not address the criticism about there never have been a free market and their never could be one (other than just telling me I’m wrong) have you a rational counter argument?

*

 

Welfare part one

But what about those you don’t see - to REPEAT an outstanding criticism -

“localism is fine up to a point but only up to a point, for example someone – say X – lives in a prosperous area with high employment, they might ‘evaluate’ and find little reason to give since there are few disadvantaged.

But only a few miles away their could be a town with high unemployment with many people in hardship but since X doesn’t live there, doesn’t go there and so cannot ‘evaluate’ that towns needs they have to suffer hardship.

If you have a national scheme with the duty, time, and knowledge to ‘evaluate’ things nationally if can move resources to those places where it is most needed.

But if often then that you get self serving arguments or ones based in prejudice and bias.

Why should I give money to people I haven’t personally evaluated I mean they are most likely feckless, scroungers.

The people around here don’t need so much help probably because they work harder than those feckless scroungers.

It’s basically a system that is most likely to advantage wealth.

*

To repeat another outstanding criticism of that - but the greatest effect on a person’s life is where and to whom they are born. This can give someone advantages or disadvantages that can affect their whole lives and their possibility of them having success or failure, long before they have the independence to take certain actions themselves, before they can reasonably be expected to set themselves career goals.

To repeat another outstanding criticism of that – this is just the old self serving con game of the deserving and undeserving poor. The deserving being those that don’t ask for help and so don’t need any. And the undeserving being those who do ask for help thereby showing that they are scroungers and wasters who don’t deserve any help.

So it was plain - the argument went – that there was no need to give assistance to the disadvantaged.

The problem was that these people were often the same people but just at different stages of life or circumstance.

And as I pointed out this is very similar to the right wing argument often put forward today that if people are responsible and make “better decisions” they don’t need assistance but if they’re irresponsible and make “poor decisions” they don’t deserve assistance”

To repeat another outstanding criticism of that - Let us imagine a plague, a disease that could affect anyone but will actually end up only affecting half of the population* But nobody knows which half.

In such a situation I think most sensible people would want the community’s government to try and do something about it and be willing to pay in the funds to tackle the situation.

Now lets say that half a population are born into disadvantage and half not. But since no one can choose beforehand to which half they are to be born, it basically means disadvantage could affect anyone.

The difference with that situation is that there is the problem of hindsight, when those born into advantage are taxed to help the disadvantaged, they don’t go ‘oh I could have been born disadvantaged myself’ they might go ‘why should I help them’. It is like knowing who would be affected by the disease and who not.

(*And I’m not saying disadvantage is a disease, I’m just using the plague idea as an example)

 

Welfare part two

To repeat an outstanding criticism of that view - many people needing assistance are working and of course there needs to be work available to them.

As pointed out many times a large number of people getting foodstamps are working they are just getting such a low wage that they need the assistance.

Supposedly about 30% were working and 32% were elderly or disabled according to a 2010 USDA survey.

TO REPEAT another outstanding criticism of that - that didn’t happen in the past – that is why people fought to get descent and reasonable programmes that actually helped people.

it should be remembered that private assistance was never capable on its own, it was always backed up or ran alongside public assistance. In the US this was based originally on the English Elizabethan poor laws, which the colonists had brought with them when they came to Americas.

Now even in upturns such private assistance as was given however genuine and heartfelt as it could be, could be inadequate, but during downturns that system was often overwhelmed (and giving could even drop in times of greatest need as people looked to their own needs).

“While the genuine warmth emanating from these volunteer institutions produced a true sense of community with revitalising effects in depressed urban neighbourhoods, participants quickly realised that private charity was not enough. Charity Organisation Societies modelled on those of London and Berlin had emerged in the early 1880’s to be succeeded by Associated Charities designed to prevent duplication of effort among the score of secular and church philanthropies, but relief measures possible under a system of private endeavour, no matter how earnest or how efficiently organised, could not handle the problems arising in periods of economic distress.

Public institutions to care for indigents, the ill, the widows and orphans, the aged and the insane never had money enough during boom times, and when hard times set in and the burden increased, city welfare budgets lagged still further behind the amounts needed.”
The Rise of Urban America by Constance Mclaughlin Green

Also we have discussed such things as sewage works and housing amongst others where public money and government legislation did a lot to help to improve the lives of people.

 

Welfare part three

You think begging is the best option? Wouldn’t he have to take the child along to prove he had one? would you want kids begging on the streets, just to get by?

TO REPEAT – as I’ve pointed out above that didn’t happen in the past.

Good for you - what about the 1000, 10,000, 100,000 children you didn’t see? What about the next day did you go back and give them another sandwich? Do you think a sandwich is going to get that mother and child out of that situation?

Again this as with the above this doesn’t seem to be about making a bad situation better but making it much, much worse.

 

If you say so. i just know when i came here 2 years ago, I never had that problem, and now, i have it nearly every post...

i wouldn't use the word "approve," I would use the word "consent." But, that's a huge difference between you and I. I'm not trying to insult anyone, and I want you to know that. But, our point of view is different, because you see corporations/rich people as the bad guy, but, I think it is the Federal Government and Croney "Capitalists," who abuse the system of force, to manipulate the market. I think Big Brother taking our Rights, killing us, spying on us etc. needs much more of an urgent response, than anything that's in the Liberal agenda.

Frankly, I disagree. First of all, I already made it clear, no one would be "cut off" of foodstamps Right away, and left to starve, because #1 The states would take over foodstamps for awhile #2 Charities and common decency. You don't need to force people to pay into these things. Our "Celeberty Millionaire" show, gives to charities. They give out food, housing, and, even, "kars for kids."

Moreover, I think it is more detrimental to people, to steal from (let's say) 75% of people who are willing to work, to give to the other 25%, that are just as capable of working, and give it to them, to sit around, and play video games.

Look, that's not to say I'm mad at anyone getting foodstamps. Because when it comes down to it, it's OUR money, so if you can get something back from them, do it, or they will spend it, doing the evil things they do. I'd cut military spending and the corrupt federal programs first. Return the people their money. and, I think everyone would see that keeping the fruits of our labor, and allowing corporations to compete for services people want, and consentually buy into, would be much more efficient.

I feel the same about your views. I think boosting up a Government, that treats it's own people as a foreign enemy, is a dire mistake, and hypocrisy, right in it's face. The Richest Community in the US, voted Obama. Multi-Millionaires also support this type of Liberal non-sense. That's because they're trying to make america like Europe (since there is so much new found patriotism there,) but, it isn't going to happen.


I'm sorry- I just disagree with everything you're saying. you always claim i'm "making assertions," when, I feel like you're doing that. I've addressed everything you've said, I think it's just easier for you, to claim I didn't..


So, are you Piers Morgan? MI5? Seriously- you seem to have such an agenda...

 

Re word count.

Maybe the post word count has been lowered I don’t know I have no control over that. If you have a complaint you need to direct it at the site owners.

 

25

Consent - to permit, approve, or agree. (Randon house dictionary)
Sorry mate but I do speak English.

Sorry but not sure what you mean, and if you have not been trying to insult people why have I had to warn you about statements of yours about other people’s lack of intelligence for not agreeing with you.

And you do it again - implying that people either have to agree with you OR you claim they MUST want and approve of all the things bad in the world.

I don’t think all corporations or all of the rich are ‘bad’ but I do believe if criticism is warranted it should be given.

To me it is about the balancing of interests, between the few and the many, for the betterment of all and the society as a whole.

As explained at length and in detail the main criticism of your ideas is that you would vastly increase the power of the few to the detriment of the many – something you still refuse to address as can be seen by your post.

 

25

We disagree on a lot but I’ve explained in detail why I disagree – criticisms you refuse to address.

As the statement makes clear you would cut it off and leave people to stave if assistance wasn’t there.

I’ve explained in detail why I disagree with that and why it would seem to advantage wealth – but you still refuse to address those criticisms.

This has all been covered in the outstanding criticisms you are still refusing to address. This isn’t about improving people’s lives it is about making them worse.

Again all covered in outstanding criticisms – as pointed out many times – many people receiving assistance are working or are seeking work – as pointed out before - you seem to be trying to sow division, hate and mistrust as a means of pushing ideas that would only seem to advantage wealth.

As explained many times your solutions are the things been criticized in that they would all seem to advantage wealth to the detriment of everyone else – everything you claim here has outstanding criticisms leveled at them that you refuse to address.

Repeating assertions over and over does not address the outstanding criticisms

OH HELL here we go AGAIN – this is the same silly ho-ha about anyone not agreeing with you must want and approve of all the things bad in the world.

Will you stop being silly and begin answering all the outstanding questions and criticism of your views.

I know you disagree the question here is – CAN YOU ADDRESS THE MANY OUTSTANDING CRITICISMS OF YOUR VIEWS?

Again I have to point out that YOU ARE A LIAR

But please prove me wrong and point to the specific places you think you have addressed my criticisms? I must have asked you this a hundred times when you’ve made this claim so far you have NOT been able to produce anything to back up you claim you’ve addressed the criticisms.

Oh you’ve told us we are wrong and you are right many times but that isn’t a rational defense so can you produce any rational or reasonable counter argument to the outstanding criticisms and if not why not?

 

25

Oh I have an agenda in regards to your ideas – I’m pointing out that they seem deeply flawed - would only seem to advantage wealth – look like they would make a bad situation worse and that you seem unable to address any criticisms of them in any rational or reasonable way.

Is that clear enough for you?

 

consent, is to condone something; it's different than wanting to be spied on, or "approving" of it.. You
accept the world around you, without question. That is a form of consent. If you consent to the system, you're basically consenting to the results of that system.

that's right. the government has murdered citizens, spied on citizens
and, relies on theft as means of survival. So, of course I believe
anyone who sees Government as the savior of society is wrong.

What you decide to tell people is your business. I'm entitled to my opinion, and, I believe Government is a system of force, that is inexcusable, even for any or, all of their alleged "benefits."

and we can all see what a great job Government does with th[I][FONT=Verdana]at too, huh? *s[/FONT][/I][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]arc[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]asm*

[B]Btw, this is wh[/B][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]at it [/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]alw[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]ays comes b[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]ack to. You believe Government is for the "betterment of [/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]all of society"


[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]and if you believe th[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]at, I h[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]ave [/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]a crumbling Government Ro[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]ad, you c[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]an m[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]ake p[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]ayments on, for the r[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana][FONT=Verdana][I][FONT=Verdana]em[/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT][/FONT][/I][/FONT]ainder of your Natural Life...

As I've explained to you repeatedly, your criticisms are the same ones they push through the Liberal media. But, they hardly ever allow Libertarians to defend their views.


I have answered your misconceptions over and over, yet, every post you claim I haven't.



The real criticism belongs on those of you who think we need more government and more taxes. More taxes, first of all, means we're not doing away, with the countless Government programs, that are already wasting our money.


They also don't care that government has to steal from everyones paycheck, in order to maintain it's extravagant existence, in fact they encourage it.


Liberals use the Humanitarian Excuse to justify the force of the Federal Government, which, is the same reason those who want any Government, are accepting Government having power over us. It's the same thing.


You're criticism is really just prying, so you can see if there's something for which, you can discredit me, or, say I want the corporations in charge. Since you found nothing of the sort, you merely claim I haven't answered you..


You are the one, who have defended the Ndaa, Disarmament of citizens, the UN, World Government and, Hr347 and, you're trying to play it off like you don't support Government force? anyone who has been to this forum, knows it is not the case.


My problem with Governments, is, even in their best form, it is a system of force. Their best deception, was convincing the people that they are fair, and that they are for the "betterment for all of society"


When, I have stated, that instituting a giant crime organization to stop "crime" (including peoples behaviors,) doesn't represent the greater good at all.


You say the legalization of Drugs would "only help corporations" But, poor people are prosecuted 5x as much as the wealthy, and, blacks are prosecuted 2x as much as whites. Even though the same percentage uses drugs.

and, we throw people into overcrowded, violent prison systems, as means of changing behavior, and it is pure folly, and, a waste of taxpayer money.

the reason i think you're a government agent, is because you're working hard to discredit me, and "prove" that we need some Government, but, the criticisms you keep repeating, are nothing more than Liberal scare tactics, that PUSH the idea, that people are too dumb or inherently bad, to get along without government watching over them.


Which, brings me to another huge hypocrisy of Liberalism. they give special powers to government, as if they themselves aren't mere mortals. IE, they want to take away citizens guns, but, they don't care about the same politicians having guns, armed bodygaurds or, nuclear weapons at their disposal.


i think Liberals are the ones too ignorant to look at other views, and I believe that's caused by a certain type of greed. they use the humanitarian excuse of 'helping people,' but, don't even consider what type of force you're imposing on 313 million people. which today, people are being murdered and brutalized by police; searched without reason/consent, killed for no reason, spied on, etc.

and, force is the essence of government, so of course, i feel that those of you who want to expand such a deadly and aggressive system, are wrong. moreover, i think liberalism was intentionally adopted by the elite, because they can have croney capitalism and a huge government, yet, stop people from Rebelling by giving them someone else's money.

 

You are illogically equating current and past US Governments with the concept of government.

 

going to work... ttyl eggs.

 

straight up, i'm sorry, but, you're wrong.

Government would not exist if it weren't able to tax.

it's important to look at the literal definitions-
theft
the action or crime of taking something that doesn't belong to you.

tax
a fine required by government.


agreed?

They're virtually the same exact thing. Therefore, Government wouldn't exist, if they could impose violence.


This doesn't only apply to the states, but, everywhere. the best thing humanity can do for themselves is free ourselves from this obsolete system of force, and learn to live together. even if it's rocky in the start, i know it would be better than a group of gangsters controlling everyone's social behavior.


the more i think about it, the more I can't believe that people have come to trust the Government, and, i really can't believe that we've become so accustomed to force, that people would sit here and defend it.


they are constantly killing people, but liberals don't have knee-jerk reactions to that, infact, they either try to avoid it, say it's for the "Greater good,"
and, go on with your life; but god forbid some kid doped up on ssri's, does the same thing- all of a sudden, you have the knee-jerk Liberals, tell everyone that the only way to be safe, is if we give government, all the authority over our self-defense techniques.


I mean, seriously- government does not fix these problems, they create them. The drug war is a problem, spying is a problem, killing the wrong/innocent citizens, on a mass scale, is a problem.


the problem is Government.

 

no, the problem is SOME governments. not the ideological concept of government.

 

25

You have had plenty of chances and it seems clear that your ideas can’t be defended (well not by you).

LIAR – but please prove me wrong and produce any evidence of your supposed rational answers (just telling us we are wrong isn’t a rational answer).