Debates
20 Apr 23
22 Apr 23
@averagejoe1 saidReally, imagine chatting with the omnipotent Marauder. Dizziness comes to mind. Do you think we would be required to sit in classroom chairs, and limit our remarks?
@AverageJoe1
If I may elaborate isn't it more fun to write like we are sitting in two overstuffed chairs shooting the breeze and laughing at each other, like I might say that Shav thinks housing is a right, and slap my knee, laughing, and you would respond. Like TALKING to each other. I think my post reads like that. Now, there is always s Sonhouse, ....
The State!!!!! Long Live The State!!!!!
Karl in full.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
22 Apr 23
@averagejoe1 said*BOOOM!*
This morning, Elon musk, just sent the largest rocket in history into the sky. Day after day launching new innovation for the future of America. But I think we need to tell him he cannot be so rich. What do y’all think. Is he a menace? Should we get serious about what other people have?
22 Apr 23
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidYou obviously didn't sit in any classroom since grammar school (if then).
Really, imagine chatting with the omnipotent Marauder. Dizziness comes to mind. Do you think we would be required to sit in classroom chairs, and limit our remarks?
The State!!!!! Long Live The State!!!!!
Karl in full.
Libertarians like myself would like the State abolished in a perfect world.
@no1marauder saidHey, I agree . If we had a perfect world, we would not need government (The State!). Good pollyanna stuff, but, hey, here we are. Some people just won't leave others alone, so, we need some sort of government. What kind would you like to have....assuming that it would let people live their lives, on their own, independently?
You obviously didn't sit in any classroom since grammar school (if then).
Libertarians like myself would like the State abolished in a perfect world.
Like if I grow potatoes in my yard, can they be my potatoes?
I feel like all of my questions are trick questions for libs, that is why I say all the time that you will not answer them. You will not answer this one.
@averagejoe1 saidYour "you don't answer questions" shtick is a continuing deliberate lie.
Hey, I agree . If we had a perfect world, we would not need government (The State!). Good pollyanna stuff, but, hey, here we are. Some people just won't leave others alone, so, we need some sort of government. What kind would you like to have....assuming that it would let people live their lives, on their own, independently?
Like if I grow potatoes in my yard, ...[text shortened]... r libs, that is why I say all the time that you will not answer them. You will not answer this one.
This particular question has been answered many times by explaining to you the difference between personal property based on possession and private property based on capitalist or feudal versions of ownership.
The short version is you can use your personal property to your heart's content, which would include potatoes in a yard grown by you.
@no1marauder saidOK. Two questions: If I have amassed more potatoes than I can ever consume, may I continue own them free from hassle of any entity or person? This is a trap question, because liberal dogma of the day is that Billionaires should NOT be able to keep their 'riches'.
Your "you don't answer questions" shtick is a continuing deliberate lie.
This particular question has been answered many times by explaining to you the difference between personal property based on possession and private property based on capitalist or feudal versions of ownership.
The short version is you can use your personal property to your heart's content, which would include potatoes in a yard grown by you.
Next, if in our new non-State world, other than potatoes, if I have "private property based capitalist or feudal versions of ownership" may I have total control and ownership of it, to do with as I will (as long as I affect no one else or their liberty), maybe even increase its value with improvements. Get richer? Can I do that without any entity having a say about it?
22 Apr 23
@averagejoe1 saidYou look at billionaires being taxed more and see someone stealing their riches.
OK. Two questions: If I have amassed more potatoes than I can ever consume, may I continue own them free from hassle of any entity or person? This is a trap question, because liberal dogma of the day is that Billionaires should NOT be able to keep their 'riches'.
Next, if in our new non-State world, other than potatoes, if I have "private property based capitalist ...[text shortened]... its value with improvements. Get richer? Can I do that without any entity having a say about it?
We, who aren't sociopaths, look at billionaires and realize those weren't their riches in the first place. That they underpaid someone for their labour, that they cheated on their taxes, that they saved money by using unsafe work environments, that they bought politicians to make it easier on them to do all these things
We aren't stealing from the rich. We are getting back what they stole in the first place and making it harder for them to steal as much in the future
@zahlanzi saidBut you do not answer the question, with the premise that there would be no government. Jump back a few clicks, see what marauder, and I are talking about, and we will welcome your input.
You look at billionaires being taxed more and see someone stealing their riches.
We, who aren't sociopaths, look at billionaires and realize those weren't their riches in the first place. That they underpaid someone for their labour, that they cheated on their taxes, that they saved money by using unsafe work environments, that they bought politicians to make it easier on t ...[text shortened]... back what they stole in the first place and making it harder for them to steal as much in the future
Take the easy question first, can I amass a lot of warehouses of potatoes on my property. And no one ever eye my potatoes. You see it flies in the face of liberal reasoning, that I have more than I need. This is a tough question I must admit.
22 Apr 23
@averagejoe1 said
OK. Two questions: If I have amassed more potatoes than I can ever consume, may I continue own them free from hassle of any entity or person? This is a trap question, because liberal dogma of the day is that Billionaires should NOT be able to keep their 'riches'.
Next, if in our new non-State world, other than potatoes, if I have "private property based capitalist ...[text shortened]... its value with improvements. Get richer? Can I do that without any entity having a say about it?
If I have amassed more potatoes than I can ever consume, may I continue own them free from hassle of any entity or person?
Not if people around you are starving.
22 Apr 23
Of course, that goes without saying on the form with every issue.
But MRsuder introduced this societal structure,, upon which I base my premise given his scenario. Marauders premise in no way suggests that the little farmer would have to part with any of his potatoes. And he may not be charitable.
22 Apr 23
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidNo, that doesn't go without saying. Capitalists have a long history of hoarding and exporting food in starving nations. Historically this occurred in India and Ireland and even today (or at least a decade or two ago, IDK about today TBH) the Arabs import beef that was grown in places like Ethiopia where people are starving.
Of course, that goes without saying on the form with every issue.
But MRsuder introduced this societal structure,, upon which I base my premise given his scenario. Marauders premise in no way suggests that the little farmer would have to part with any of his potatoes. And he may not be charitable.
22 Apr 23
@no1marauder saidThere was a day when those 3 weren't yet inventing, either. Is a trip to Mars an'invention"? Prob not, but all the stuff to put it there will have been invented due to....you guessed it....That Darn Billionaire Musk!!!!!
The Wright Brothers, Edison, Ford and others actually invented things.
Musk isn't inventing any rockets.
BTW, the FAA is grounding SpaceX rockets until a thorough safety review is undertaken.
C'mon, you. can do better. Y'all always drum up reasons to hate Trump, but you have none for hating Bullion-aire Musk.
22 Apr 23
@athousandyoung saidOK, I re-read this. Note Marauder has set up in his post above that "one can use his personal property to his hearts content.". He says exactly that. Potato guy can use his potatoes to fill holes, eat, take to church, whatever....No One can get his potatoes.If I have amassed more potatoes than I can ever consume, may I continue own them free from hassle of any entity or person?
Not if people around you are starving.
But, you say, YOU say, you imply, that he Cannot 'continue owning them free from hassle' if people around him are starving.
You are at odds with Marauder. A rarity indeed.
So would the two of you work it out and report in. This is the crux of my questions.
Put Musk in place of potato man. Marauder says he can keep all of his money and 'use it to his heart's content'. You say he cannot if there are poor people around him. Same thing.
22 Apr 23
@zahlanzi saidWhen we all post, and set up hypotheticals or analogies, I think we all stipulate that all monies are, for sake of argument and expediency, are acquired legally. How else could we have a level playing field. You remind me of that idiot, Jimmm682,, who, reading an analogy, said " well,, what if the man had stolen the money". Totally deflated an interesting discussion.
You look at billionaires being taxed more and see someone stealing their riches.
We, who aren't sociopaths, look at billionaires and realize those weren't their riches in the first place. That they underpaid someone for their labour, that they cheated on their taxes, that they saved money by using unsafe work environments, that they bought politicians to make it easier on t ...[text shortened]... back what they stole in the first place and making it harder for them to steal as much in the future
Your post tries to do the same thing. They stole the money? Jesus