|
No, there is a way to have no government, even while keeping criminality low. There's been a few experiments here and there on how it would work, but the main thing is that there's no initiation of force involved. The wild west was one of those, and despite the bad reputation today things were pretty peaceful and orderly there, with only a few murders every five or ten years per city in average. The premise is that people are overall peaceful, and will want to establish order on their own. People can be their own moral agents without a coercive group with the monopoly of force to back them up.
Libertarians are the ones who say government is a necessary evil, and there's nothing particularly wrong with that, it's just that I believe it might not be necessary at all.
The solution is exposing each and every lie until the truth can stand on its own.
Bush doubled the size of the federal government, and initiated two useless wars, so of course not. He's as conservative as Hitler would have been. The left/right paradigm is a farce, and both parties are just interested in perpetuating big gov't in their own way. Fascist against Socialist if you will. Not even real socialism tbh, I wouldn't call a $22 trillion banker bailout socialism, and that was/is a bipartisan effort.
I apologize if it makes no sense to you, but with time it shall, it's just not easy to admit certain things. We'd rather be more confortable knowing everythiing's being taken care of... it's part of the human psyche, which also makes it easier for evil to.. do evil.
|
Why is protesting the government bad (if you don't agree with it)? What happened to free speech?
If you think people protesting are extremists in general, then I guess that makes everyone from AFL-CIO, ACORN, and SEIU extremists as well.
I consider myself independent and fiscally conservative. I disagree with what the government is doing. I must be a crazy extremist.
Let the bashing begin.
|
On August 13 2009 12:27 imabossdude wrote:
Why is protesting the government bad (if you don't agree with it)? What happened to free speech?
If you think people protesting are extremists in general, then I guess that makes everyone from AFL-CIO, ACORN, and SEIU extremists as well.
I consider myself independent and fiscally conservative. I disagree with what the government is doing. I must be a crazy extremist.
Let the bashing begin.
Once you allow government to profile people based on ideology, be certain that eventually everyone but the extremely.. lobotomized, will be in their radical blacklists. Anyone who disagrees with the status quo in any way has a greater chance to bomb federal buildings, ergo, they all need to be profiled 
Where to draw the line? That is a question you should not leave to the government to decide...
Also, you're obviously an extremist 
|
Exactly Yurebis.
Everyone needs to stop being partisan and be rational and logical instead.
Both sides spin the facts to pander to their audience. You have to separate the lies from the facts though.
Like, saying AARP supports the healthcare bill is false. (as of now)
So why did Obama say it? He should know better.
|
I lie all the time too, don't believe a single thing I say. I just ask everyone not to believe the government either
|
Imho you guys complain for no reason.
If you payed the ammount of taxes we pay here in Brazil you would already have started shooting people.
And in exchange for those taxes we dont have a decent public health system (it works but lines are just tooooooo fucking big) everyone who can buys the private option
Our public schools are a joke (altho public colleges are not, only people who studied in private schools get in without some kind of affirmative action) everyone who can buys the private option
All our major roads are getting privatized
our police protects only its own interests (again, those who can buy the private option)
Brazil is the one country I know where theres a public and private option for everything, and everyone who is able tries to get the private one.
Ironically, the massive amount of taxes left our coffers filled with cash, made all busines who thrive here extremelly resilient, and left us almost immune to the financial crisis now Brazil is experiencing a boom is almost every sector, petrobras is giving the government so much money its investing in everything, opportunity is in every corner, its the beginning of a Brazilian golden age, and altho you could argue otherwise, we got here because of carefull government planning.
|
I agree, Brazil is poised to pop, along with China and India. Each country is now getting proper infrastructure needed for growth, and has a huge labor supply to support it.
The U.S. on the other hand, has illegal aliens sucking us dry for healthcare and public schools, and half of them don't pay income taxes. We already have a large part of the populace with their hand out waiting for the nanny government to take care of them. Makes me sick.
|
Can we like... not lump all conservatives together? Pleeeease?
Fuck man, these people scare ME, and I consider myself further right than your average conservative ticket voter. I may not agree with Obama's choices and policies, but these people trying to recruit radicals... fuck they're insane.
|
On August 13 2009 11:20 D10 wrote:
The question is, wether small or big, do you want a government that is efficient in what it proposes to do or not ?
Its not big or small govt., its limited govt. or expansive govt. Efficiency is irrelevant. The only job of the US govt is to secure the rights of the people. There wasn't even an income tax until 1914 and we were perfectly fine up to that point. We won every war we fought and was the bastion of individual freedom and liberty in the world and throughout history no society was ever freer. Every market is better off in the hands of private citizens. Now what do we have with this expansive nanny state. Every market heavily influenced by govt intervention costs vastly more than a purely privatized market with the govt only making sure that the market is fair and contracts upheld and you can see the effects easily (housing, healthcare, energy, etc.) The point is an expansive govt no matter if it was 100 percent efficient means reduced liberties and freedoms. There is nothing in this world more important than freedom and liberty therefore as a libertarian we seek to limit govt as much as humanely possible to sustain a lawful functioning civil society. This means going back to the size of the federal govt as it was in the mid to late 1800s with the 16th being repeled and replaced with a fair tax.
|
Dont you think in that in the current state the world is in that is a utterly utopian view of libertarianism ? Should you focus on whats possible ?
Also, the country grew a shiload since the 1800s, how do you expect to have the govt the same size as it was then ?
|
United States43598 Posts
On August 13 2009 14:38 imabossdude wrote:
I agree, Brazil is poised to pop, along with China and India. Each country is now getting proper infrastructure needed for growth, and has a huge labor supply to support it.
The U.S. on the other hand, has illegal aliens sucking us dry for healthcare and public schools, and half of them don't pay income taxes. We already have a large part of the populace with their hand out waiting for the nanny government to take care of them. Makes me sick.
The post you're agreeing with was mainly about the success of high taxes and a big government with a two tier system in everything from education to healthcare. You go on to disagree with everything in his post other than the success of Brazil, which you agree with and contrast to the decline in the US, blaming factors similar to the ones you've already endorsed.
It's confusing me to even try and follow the logic behind your post.
|
Unlike natural sciences, you can't readily point to a single factor for the success of anything in economy or politics without debate, because there's no certain, verifiable way to isolate that variable and test it.
In this case I believe the "success" of Brazil would has come thanks to it's private initiatives and people, that is, despite government intervention and not due to it. China's private sectors thrive today despite of its collective government.
Politicians and statists will of course claim success in part of government everywhere they can, but personally I can't find myself agreeing with them anywhere. Capitalism can grown on it's own, without bureaucrats. It's part of the "you keep what you worked for" ideology that drives people to work more, not, "you pay 60% of your labor in taxes to services you won't be using because they're so misused and corrupt".
Economies can still grow despite the cancerous mafia that is big government, as long as people are motivated. How do you motivate people? You could engage in psychological manipulations with the mass, while taxing the hell out of them and planning the whole economy with inefficient overhead, or you could just let people do their own work the way they want it.
Every societal change in history could have been accomplished by society itself, without the use of coercion or force... but that's just a crazie's opinion.
It confuses me more trying to justify the need of big government when people admittedly don't like it's services in any area
|
On August 13 2009 14:38 imabossdude wrote:
I agree, Brazil is poised to pop, along with China and India. Each country is now getting proper infrastructure needed for growth, and has a huge labor supply to support it.
The U.S. on the other hand, has illegal aliens sucking us dry for healthcare and public schools, and half of them don't pay income taxes. We already have a large part of the populace with their hand out waiting for the nanny government to take care of them. Makes me sick.
give them some education, and voila! you have people able to do actual work.
|
On August 13 2009 16:00 Kwark wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2009 14:38 imabossdude wrote:
I agree, Brazil is poised to pop, along with China and India. Each country is now getting proper infrastructure needed for growth, and has a huge labor supply to support it.
The U.S. on the other hand, has illegal aliens sucking us dry for healthcare and public schools, and half of them don't pay income taxes. We already have a large part of the populace with their hand out waiting for the nanny government to take care of them. Makes me sick. The post you're agreeing with was mainly about the success of high taxes and a big government with a two tier system in everything from education to healthcare. You go on to disagree with everything in his post other than the success of Brazil, which you agree with and contrast to the decline in the US, blaming factors similar to the ones you've already endorsed. It's confusing me to even try and follow the logic behind your post.
I'm saying that illegal aliens are leeching off of our country and don't have to pay for hardly any of it. Another portion feels entitled and seeks handouts. I know you probably agree to GB's expansion of government, and look how thats worked out for you guys...
I don't endorse free healthcare to illegal aliens or skipping out on paying taxes that everyone else has to pay. So basically, what I'm trying to say is...
What the hell are you talking about?
I don't believe in the redistribution of wealth. If you don't want to work hard and get education, that's fine, its a free country. But don't expect everyone else to pay for it.
|
This is evidence on my side, not yours What 'evidence'. The fact that the source is the internet? When I brought up the issue of source as issue you have with the information you completely changed the topic in your rebuttal.
Do you have an issue with someone finding information on the internet? Do you have an issue with our news organizations? Do you have an issue with the Southern Poverty Law Center? I mean, that's where the information is coming from, so if you've got an issue there; fine. start bitching about Fox and MSNBC and the SPLC.
|
nothing surprising, have problems? Blame them on others.
|
On August 14 2009 08:47 L wrote: What 'evidence'. The fact that the source is the internet? When I brought up the issue of source as issue you have with the information you completely changed the topic in your rebuttal. Do you have an issue with someone finding information on the internet? Do you have an issue with our news organizations? Do you have an issue with the Southern Poverty Law Center? I mean, that's where the information is coming from, so if you've got an issue there; fine. start bitching about Fox and MSNBC and the SPLC.
I do have a problem when a supposedly respectable federal agencies puts out a paper to cops all over the country badmouthing all sorts of groups turns out to be an afternoon google job. Your eternal handwaving is showing your statist bias. You had a problem with me doing half assed research, why do you not have a problem with the DHS doing it and publishing it?
|
More government is less Liberty.
And we should never give up our Liberty.
I don't believe in the redistribution of wealth. If you don't want to work hard and get education, that's fine, its a free country. But don't expect everyone else to pay for it.
Thanks.
|
On August 13 2009 14:04 D10 wrote:
Imho you guys complain for no reason.
If you payed the ammount of taxes we pay here in Brazil you would already have started shooting people.
And in exchange for those taxes we dont have a decent public health system (it works but lines are just tooooooo fucking big) everyone who can buys the private option
Our public schools are a joke (altho public colleges are not, only people who studied in private schools get in without some kind of affirmative action) everyone who can buys the private option
All our major roads are getting privatized
our police protects only its own interests (again, those who can buy the private option)
Brazil is the one country I know where theres a public and private option for everything, and everyone who is able tries to get the private one.
Ironically, the massive amount of taxes left our coffers filled with cash, made all busines who thrive here extremelly resilient, and left us almost immune to the financial crisis now Brazil is experiencing a boom is almost every sector, petrobras is giving the government so much money its investing in everything, opportunity is in every corner, its the beginning of a Brazilian golden age, and altho you could argue otherwise, we got here because of carefull government planning.
http://www.heritage.org/index/Country/Brazil
In other words, your Government is hampering the development and growth of your Economy. The Government is actually limiting growth, not encouraging it. One wonders why the duplicity of Brazil's economic situation would be emulated by any country; it's highly wasteful, bloated, and inefficient.
Take for example, the USPS or Amtrak. Why would anyone advocate for more Government run agencies, businesses, etc. USPS loses 7 Billion a year (Amtrak MUCH more than that and have never turned a profit) with no incentive to profitize, running an inferior service to DHL and FedEx and the only reason they aren't out of business despite its horrid inefficiencies and bad business practices is because of apparatchiks who like to choke more tax money out of the populace for this crap and to siphon its funds off for other uses. In other words, Government run business are there solely for the conglomeration of power and increased tax burdens, not to run a profitable, incentivized market based company who offers comparable or superior products.
Why would you argue in favor of more of this? Baffling.
|
On August 14 2009 00:37 nttea wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2009 14:38 imabossdude wrote:
I agree, Brazil is poised to pop, along with China and India. Each country is now getting proper infrastructure needed for growth, and has a huge labor supply to support it.
The U.S. on the other hand, has illegal aliens sucking us dry for healthcare and public schools, and half of them don't pay income taxes. We already have a large part of the populace with their hand out waiting for the nanny government to take care of them. Makes me sick. give them some education, and voila! you have people able to do actual work.
Or you deport them because they broke US codified law and sovereignty. Every other single country on this Earth does this, but when people in the US advocate this, we are racist, bigots, and other pejoratives. Really? Because we like to uphold law and our sovereignty, well guess what, go MinuteMen!!
Secondly, we have the educated populace of AMERICAN CITIZENS, who will work these jobs, but because there is currently limited to no job creation/growth they are out of work. How does, subsidizing the illegal help our Economy in any way? Fact: It doesn't.
Take California. It is estimated that half (This is grossly conservative and most estimates run upwards of 50+ billion) of the current 25-30$ Billion deficit comes from supporting criminals (Illegal Aliens).
Read:
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/pub/Immigration/IllegalImm/GAOCosts.html
This is 1994 folks. This has been an on-going problem for a long time. Neither party will do anything about it. It's damn time to kick out every incumbent (or damn near all), and replace them with politicians who will actually do something. Guess, what, anyone can run and there are a lot of people who normally would never think about running, that are because they see the dire straits this country is in.
So you are either going to uphold the law, or you aren't. Pick a side.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
