| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
mordk
Chile8385 Posts
On December 23 2012 06:43 TerribleNoobling wrote: You weren't robbed. You did the robbing. Net tax recipients don't pay taxes - the taxes they pay are better expressed as a reduction in salary. So now honest people who work in public state funded institutions are thieves as well? Come on... Stop trolling | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On December 23 2012 06:39 TerribleNoobling wrote: Taxation is nothing new, I will grant you that. Since as long as the state has existed people have been forced to give their hard earned wealth to the parasites in charge. Taxation is robbery. You have two choices - pay your taxes or go to jail (aka have violence done to you). This is exactly the same choice a mugger gives you in an alley - give up your wallet or get beaten badly. What don't you follow? I think at the chains jumps off at the notion that taxation is actually robbery - because it is not. Living in a society means giving up certain freedoms in order for an increased protection. Taxation is such an example - if you want to have any of the benefits of living in a state (plumbing, roads, education, work) you have to pay a "fee" to access the market. If you are not willing to do so, you are welcome to move out of said society and live in your own little vacuum. This does not make the state evil and also disproves your parallel - contrary to the robber you have a third option - whether or not that option is actually valid is another story. EDIT: Could we get back to the gun debate? That was actually an interesting read, whilst this is just plain waste. | ||
|
TerribleNoobling
Azerbaijan179 Posts
But in a democracy, the people are in charge. That's really the dangerous part about democracy. After all, since our leaders are democratically elected we chose them and - so goes the theory - anything they do we are really doing to ourselves. It's bullshit. First of all, you're not in charge. If you vote or do not vote, nothing changes. It's the exact same. Your vote is meaningless. Worthless. Whoever was gonna be elected is elected whether you stay home or go vote. Democracy has enabled the state to expand it's power far beyond the dreams of autocratic tyrants or tin pot dictators because, after all, we are the government now, so how could the government do anything wrong? | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11497 Posts
On December 23 2012 06:44 Cutlery wrote: Oh ok. I should teach children full time for free? And pay their school books? Know you anything about economy, and how money makes the world go 'round? Without government and taxes, the economy stops working and money is worthless. Worthless. There would be no monetary value left to rob from you. That what you want? No, he wants to say that schools should only be for the people who pay for it willingly. Meaning rich people. Just like roads, police, fire defense, etc... Anarcho Capitalism is fun. I would still really suggest that you guys stop debating with him. He thinks he is smarter then anyone else, and sees everything so clear, while you are all retarded brainwashed sheeple. Anything you say is a symptom of that brainwashing, unless you agree with him. In which case you are also part of the enlightened minority. I know it is tempting to try to convince him that he is actually stupid, but that will never work. Those guys tend to turn up in any remotely politic thread after a given time, and if you don't ignore them, any thread will turn into 3 anarchists talking random crap and all others trying to convince them that it is random crap. I still don't know if they actually believe what they are saying, or if they are just trolling people. | ||
|
TerribleNoobling
Azerbaijan179 Posts
I think at the chains jumps off at the notion that taxation is actually robbery - because it is not. Living in a society means giving up certain freedoms in order for an increased protection. Taxation is such an example - if you want to have any of the benefits of living in a state (plumbing, roads, education, work) you have to pay a "fee" to access the market. If you are not willing to do so, you are welcome to move out of said society and live in your own little vacuum. This does not make the state evil and also disproves your parallel - contrary to the robber you have a third option - whether or not that option is actually valid is another story. You said a lot of things after you said that taxation is not robbery, but none of them support your thesis. You're simply asserting it's not robbery, then asserting it's justified for x and y reasons but you're not proving it's not robbery, which of course you can't do because it flatly is. As far as I know you also have the option of fleeing from a robber so it's not contrary at all. But I'm not going to run away from the state. I'm going to defeat it. It would be cowardly to simply run away from this aggression and leave others to be victim to it. | ||
|
TerribleNoobling
Azerbaijan179 Posts
No, he wants to say that schools should only be for the people who pay for it willingly. Meaning rich people. Just like roads, police, fire defense, etc... Anarcho Capitalism is fun. Just like food too. Cause only rich people eat right? And only rich people have housing. Cause how could the poor have food or housing if the government didn't give it away? Because we're all incapable of fending for ourselves and we need mama welfare state to take care of us. | ||
|
TerribleNoobling
Azerbaijan179 Posts
| ||
|
Cutlery
Norway565 Posts
On December 23 2012 06:48 TerribleNoobling wrote: That's really the dangerous part about democracy. After all, since our leaders are democratically elected we chose them and - so goes the theory - anything they do we are really doing to ourselves. It's bullshit. First of all, you're not in charge. If you vote or do not vote, nothing changes. It's the exact same. Your vote is meaningless. Worthless. Whoever was gonna be elected is elected whether you stay home or go vote. Democracy has enabled the state to expand it's power far beyond the dreams of autocratic tyrants or tin pot dictators because, after all, we are the government now, so how could the government do anything wrong? Nono. Democracy is democracy. What we have is corruption. You are saying that power corrupts, which is true. Sometimes power isn't corrupt and then it corrupts and becomes corrupt. The corruption can be big or small, but while any state so far is and has been imperfect, doesn't make the idea of a state a bad one. Democracy, in theory, isn't corrupt. You cannot be free without restricting laws. And other balance/yin-yang constellations. | ||
KwarK
United States42578 Posts
| ||
|
Cutlery
Norway565 Posts
On December 23 2012 06:57 KwarK wrote: Get it back on topic gents. ok sooz. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On December 23 2012 06:53 TerribleNoobling wrote: Ghostcom : you definitely should get back to the gun debate. Go start a new thread! What's wrong with that? There is a debate going on here presently. But I don't think you want to have the gun debate, you just want me to shut up, right? No I actually do want the gun debate because that was meaningful, but keep on with your tinfoil hatting. I would urge you to notice the name of this thread and how it does not in any way pertain to the discussion currently at hand. If you want such a discussion go start another thread - heck I might even visit it after having made some popcorn for a good laugh. EDIT: Thanks Kwark. | ||
|
TerribleNoobling
Azerbaijan179 Posts
| ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On December 23 2012 07:03 TerribleNoobling wrote: It's funny how the President doesn't seem threatened by all the guns that are used to protect him. He's probably got a hundred guns in the hands of secret service agents ready to shoot anyone who would harm him. So I guess this is more of a case of do what I say not what I do. Personally I think there is no better way to protect yourself and your family than to own a handgun. What are you going to do if you are attacked? Cry silently and hope your assailant goes away? My home is not really all that likely to be a target of any of the major terror organizations, but nice trolling attempt. | ||
|
Cutlery
Norway565 Posts
On December 23 2012 07:03 TerribleNoobling wrote: It's funny how the President doesn't seem threatened by all the guns that are used to protect him. He's probably got a hundred guns in the hands of secret service agents ready to shoot anyone who would harm him. So I guess this is more of a case of do what I say not what I do. Personally I think there is no better way to protect yourself and your family than to own a handgun. What are you going to do if you are attacked? Cry silently and hope your assailant goes away? Cowboy movies scare me sometimes. Guns everywhere, feels safer to stay inside than to go outside carrying your own weapon. Therefore I feel safer in a society without guns. What I would do if attacked I am not sure. But I feel safer knowing not everyone sitting or living around me is actually carrying a gun. That way, when/if I do get attacked, it won't be with a gun, and so I have more time to figure out what to do, and more than a 50% chance to get out of it with my life. If you want a culture of guns, you get a culture of guns. Funny thing about nature is that it reaches mathematical equilibrium states. These equilibrium states are influenced by many factors, and when things first begin to change the fluctuations are "unstable", while a new steady-state will eventually be reached. If you create a more gun-heavy culture, then a more gun-heavy culture is what you get. Self defence and "safety" promotes gun possession (and fixation), which in turn causes other gun related issues. Such is nature. Nothing is 100% controllable and ideal, and even guns must follow the mathematical laws of nature (statistics). | ||
|
KwarK
United States42578 Posts
| ||
|
KingLol
54 Posts
On December 23 2012 07:03 TerribleNoobling wrote: It's funny how the President doesn't seem threatened by all the guns that are used to protect him. He's probably got a hundred guns in the hands of secret service agents ready to shoot anyone who would harm him. So I guess this is more of a case of do what I say not what I do. Personally I think there is no better way to protect yourself and your family than to own a handgun. What are you going to do if you are attacked? Cry silently and hope your assailant goes away? Defend yourself with something besides a gun instead of being a fat & cowardly troll with questionable personal hygiene. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
TerribleNoobling
Azerbaijan179 Posts
| ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
1) i'd say almost everyone would rather live in a world without guns, to claim gun ban is better, is an obvious and not really up for debate. 2) you cannot remove guns in usa (i'd say borderline impossible) without proper execution, which i have hard time believing us politicians can come up with one. 3) because of point 2, point 1 becomes moot, especially in countries with heavy gun culture. (USA) the debate should focus on how it must be implemented, its been said many times: mental healthcare, stricter screening process, poverty, etc. "with gun world" vs "without gun world" is really just going in circles | ||
|
Cutlery
Norway565 Posts
On December 23 2012 07:10 TerribleNoobling wrote: Cutlery : Yes, I would feel safer in a society where absolutely no one had guns as well. That's not an option. There's no magic 'eliminate all guns' button anyone can press. Guns are everywhere in the US culture. TV/movies, at home, you name it. Guns are a big part of the culture. Hence they turn up in different ways. We're so many people that everything can be reduced to statistics, for such is nature. But you cannot predict how every factor influences this statistics, but prevalence of guns within a culture most definitely has an effect. This is what we're seeing. Changing one factor gives you a new equilibrium state. Reducing the presence of guns in any culture, I'd argue, is very desired. That includes reducing both their visible presence and the idea of them (in our minds) in anything from the constitution, movies, video games, homes, on cops, you name it. This is however very long term and not entirely feasible. For instance movies and video games will continue to be violent. It's the same as saying that talking extensively about school-shootings, and making them a hot topic, actually causes more shootings (at least short term) because it's on everyone's mind. This again causes a greater need for reaction, and hopefully this reaction will be analytically correct. The thing is, we do not know the outcome of any change. Feeling the need to own a gun for self protection is something I'm not used to. I was in a boxing club for a while, training boxing. It gave me a sense of self defence. But then again I've never felt guns as threatening and so boxing was enough to feel empowered and "safe". Guns are NOT debated within my country. NOT discussed, like ever, except for people who enjoy hunting and understand what hunting is. Guns are not a right in my country, and our politically social ways reduce the occurrence of violence. Hence discussing specific points within a culture you have not fully experienced and do not fully know is impossible. And, being on the "outside", it's hard to argue for the need of MORE firearms, as they cause harm. If you use them for protection then use them for protection and shut up about them. But obviously things are starting to go wrong, and so more guns are probably not the answer. The issue is in fact so layered that, most likely, only a change in culture can hope to fix it. So before you propose any such change, think very carefully what it will look like if we go back to the cowboy era where everyone carried a gun. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42578 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
WardiTV European League
Replay Cast
Epic.LAN
CranKy Ducklings
Epic.LAN
CSO Contender
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
