Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Leslie on January 07, 2004, 07:26:02 AM
-
But never disgusting!!!:mad:
Or a political activist.
If you were referring to me Skuzzy, at least have the character to name me, and not leave your last words open to speculation. Thank you.
Les
-
:rolleyes:
-
I must have missed a good thread!
-
Don't get your pants in a bunch Leslie. I believe you just happened to be the last poster in the thread before he locked it.
-
It wasn't you Leslie.
-
I was wondering what politics had to do with the Mars landing post....
Did the bi-liberal neo-con Nazis put him ("M") upto it? :rofl
-
I thought it was pretty apolitical (with a few exceptions). Questioning the placement of resources is not disgusting and neither does it denigrate the effort associated with the endeavour. I'm sure you can find plenty of history books that question the wisdom of the Arnhem operation, for instance. That isn't disrespectful to the protagonists. I also wouldn't call those books disgusting.
-
where were the personal attacks that must have been edited out of that post?? they musta been good.. I thought that was generally the rule for closeing a thread...
-
I don't see what was so "political" about what Miko said. Is it illegal to dissagree now?
-
Originally posted by Saintaw
I don't see what was so "political" about what Miko said. Is it illegal to dissagree now?
seems so.. or have 'different views'... someone signed a patriot act behind our backs lads.. the rules for closeing a thread have changed!! lol
-
Saintaw: I don't see what was so "political" about what Miko said. Is it illegal to dissagree now?
Pretty much anything I say on this board is political, Saintaw.
"Political" basically means coercive, under the threat of violence. As opposite to voluntary, economic or charitable ways of human cooperation.
Every time I speak against coercion - especially governmental coercion, that's political. Even if that coercion caused some spectacuar visible results (and plenty of ignored ones that may not be so great).
Some people think that slavery is OK, if it is used in good (personally approved by them or condoned by majority) causes. I disagree with them. But they are not wrong in accusing me of politicising the issues.
miko
-
Well, i gather that your main point was that there is some other things needing money (minor economic concerns cfr dago) that could be better spent than probing space. I might not totaly agree with you on that (I would not survive without a microwave oven!)... but where goes a BBS when everyone has to post "ok, I agree with you" ?
-
well "someone" need to say their opinion about everthing and "someone" does it all the time, those "someone" have to be heard. And if those "someone" get ignored the "someone" get really angry and post even harder facts that "someone " else did.
I guess "someone" need to get a real life :D
-
The Microwave oven came from an accidental discovery made by a scientist working radar equipment in the 1940's. It melted a chocolate bar in his pocket. :)
-
Saintaw: Well, i gather that your main point was that there is some other things needing money (minor economic concerns cfr dago)
No, Saintaw, that was not my main point.
My point was not where the money is spent but the fact that it is coercively exptorted from people in the first place.
For Dago slavery may be a minor economic concern but that is not true for everyone - especially the unwilling slaves.
miko
-
what about velcro?? I saw the movie men in black.. they said velcro came from outer space!!
-
Miko
But would not slavery not fit into your "free Market WonderLand" We know Child labor is there
-
Originally posted by kappa
what about velcro?? I saw the movie men in black.. they said velcro came from outer space!!
You're not suppose to remember that...
Please look into the light...
BLEEEEEEEP!!
-
Trell: But would not slavery not fit into your "free Market WonderLand" We know Child labor is there
Not preventing parents from voluntarily sending their children to work rather then watch them starve is kind of different from forcing a person to part with his freedom or property.
What, you insist that the children starved? Surely, the child is not sent to the mine if the parents could sent him to a private boarding school instead.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Trell: But would not slavery not fit into your "free Market WonderLand" We know Child labor is there
Not preventing parents from voluntarily sending their children to work rather then watch them starve is kind of different from forcing a person to part with his freedom or property.
What, you insist that the children starved? Surely, the child is not sent to the mine if the parents could sent him to a private boarding school instead.
miko
**Yawn**
Amazing that the same people argue about the same things that they were just told not to argue about.
-
If you so anti-government or whatever you want to call it..why not just move & get the **** out. Try to find someplace where the gov. doesn't take your $$ & redistribute.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Saintaw: I don't see what was so "political" about what Miko said. Is it illegal to dissagree now?
Pretty much anything I say on this board is political, Saintaw.
"Political" basically means coercive, under the threat of violence. As opposite to voluntary, economic or charitable ways of human cooperation.
Every time I speak against coercion - especially governmental coercion, that's political. Even if that coercion caused some spectacuar visible results (and plenty of ignored ones that may not be so great).
Some people think that slavery is OK, if it is used in good (personally approved by them or condoned by majority) causes. I disagree with them. But they are not wrong in accusing me of politicising the issues.
miko
Some people think slavery is ok? They are wrong for accusing you of politicising? Since Skuzzy is the one that said you were wrong for politicisng and your quoted response refers to that thread are you then saying he thinks slavery is ok? Maybe you'd care to clarify just what you are trying to say?
-
BigGun: If you so anti-government or whatever you want to call it..why not just move & get the **** out. Try to find someplace where the gov. doesn't take your $$ & redistribute.
Governments are pretty much elsewhere. The switch from free society to socailism started in 1870s and occured pretty much everywhere in the western world and was exported to the other areas.
A reluctant slave/serf may still prefer one master to another. That does not equate to the general agreement to oppression.
I have problems with government oppression in general.
I make examples based on american government actions because such examples would be most undersatndable to americans. Even though it is not the most oppressive government.
When I talk to other people, I try to find examples from their own experience.
They are wrong for accusing you of politicising?
If you read what I said, I specifically wrote that "they" are absolutely correct accusing me of politicising. That's what I am talking about - politics. I do not hide it.
Some people think slavery is ok? Maybe you'd care to clarify just what you are trying to say?
Taking away the people's property, results of their labor by coercion is oppression/slavery. Even if one is claiming to act in the coerced person's interests or someone else interests or because he is in majority.
miko
-
I misread it Miko. However, I wasn't really questioning that so much as trying to nail down if you were talking about Skuzzy. I'll ask it more plainly. Are you saying that Skuzzy thinks slavery is ok? That seems to me to be the point of your post.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
miko
Government EVIL EVIL... BAAAAAD!
Anarchy GOOOOOD
Government EVIL EVILE... BAAAAD!
Anarchy GOOOOOD!
Roads are BAAAAAD
Thick brush and forests GOOOD!
Electricty and lights in the house are BAAAAAD!
Candles and lanterns GOOOOD!!!
Police, EMT and Fire departments are BAAAAD!!!
Suddenly dying and no one around for miles GOOOOD!!
Telephone BAAAAAD!
Smoke signals and drums GOOOOD!
-
AKIron: I'll ask it more plainly. Are you saying that Skuzzy thinks slavery is ok? That seems to me to be the point of your post.
Of course not. I am sure Skuzzy is against slavery in general. I believed that pointing out to him that the project he is rejoicing about was financed by extorted money would be the same kind of service as pointing out to a jew that the tasty snack he intends to it is pork. Or pointing out that a present someone's got is a stolen property.
I suspect that most people just do not think how the resources for their favorite projects are provided.
The great american railroads were financed primarily by the southern slave labor (cotton tariffs), the NASA programs are financed by taxes collected from people who might have preferred other uses for that money. I think it is important to understand that, regardless whether we can do anything about it.
miko
-
Nakhui:
Roads are BAAAAAD
Thick brush and forests GOOOD!
Electricty and lights in the house are BAAAAAD!
Police, EMT and Fire departments are BAAAAD!!!
Suddenly dying and no one around for miles GOOOOD!!
Telephone BAAAAAD!
All those things are still mostly provided or were successfully provided by private enterprise.
miko
-
I am very happy my tax dollars go to NASA. I wish more of it would be sent to NASA instead of the many programs the government funds that I consider superflous.
You are basically against taxes without having direct control on how they are spent, if I surmise correctly.
And again, a thread completely derailed.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
AKIron: I'll ask it more plainly. Are you saying that Skuzzy thinks slavery is ok? That seems to me to be the point of your post.
Of course not. I am sure Skuzzy is against slavery in general. I believed that pointing out to him that the project he is rejoicing about was financed by extorted money would be the same kind of service as pointing out to a jew that the tasty snack he intends to it is pork. Or pointing out that a present someone's got is a stolen property.
I suspect that most people just do not think how the resources for their favorite projects are provided.
The great american railroads were financed primarily by the southern slave labor (cotton tariffs), the NASA programs are financed by taxes collected from people who might have preferred other uses for that money. I think it is important to understand that, regardless whether we can do anything about it.
miko
OK, I think I understand now. You weren't saying that Skuzzy knowingly approves of slavery but that he does so unknowingly. So, you're equating forced taxation to slavery? I guess we have a different opinion as to what slavery is. I always thought of slavery as being primarily when someone was forced to work against their will. I don't believe that to be the case in America. I see plenty of people not working at all, some are even supported by the government.
-
Skuzzy: And again, a thread completely derailed.
Sorry about that, I will try to keep my political emotion in check.
I am very happy my tax dollars go to NASA. I wish more of it would be sent to NASA instead of the many programs the government funds that I consider superflous.
I would also be happy to send much more of my money towards the research and discovery that have it spent on current consumption. I would even send that money to NASA if it were a private organisation operating in competitive envoronment and accountable to its contributors or shareholders.
You are basically against taxes without having direct control on how they are spent, if I surmise correctly.
Exactly. There are legitimate functions of government like protection of rights and property. Unfair competition with private business and research institutions is not one of them.
There are still plenty of people who are voluntarily funding all kinds of research, arts and other cultural acheivements. There were even more before governments persuaded people to leave the concern for the future to them. I am full of confidence in the spirit of free humans so I woudl not worry that the progress would stop or slow down. Much more likely it would accelerate.
miko
-
AKIron: I always thought of slavery as being primarily when someone was forced to work against their will. I don't believe that to be the case in America. I see plenty of people not working at all, some are even supported by the government.
When a (considerable) fraction of a person's labor is confiscated, one can say that that particular labor was performed against a person's will.
One can escape such forced labor by stopping work completely - and starving, or begging. Or illegally joining the black market economy.
Unlike real slavery, a person cannot be forced to work against his will - that is true, but this is not a principal feature of slavery. Coersion is.
In US and many other countries it is true that a person who does not wish to work may often receive the government's support. But such people are just enjoying the results of that "tax slavery" or others. And vote accordingly.
When a choice is between being a "slave" (net tax payer) and profiting from "slavery" - by being a net tax receiver, be it welfare, subcidies, etc., the society will predictably deteriorate.
miko
-
The government is always going to control NASA miko. Too much of the research ends up in the DoD. The government wants to control what goes to the private sector, in this particular area.
If you want to control how your taxes are spent, then contact your local representative about it. I do. Everytime NASA has had a failure, I write a letter pushing to keep them funded.
Complaining about it on this board is not going to make any difference at all. If you want to make a difference, then get out the pen, stamps, envelopes, and start knocking on doors.
Oh, and your defense on why it is slavery is a very long reach and thus sounds more like dramatic flare than anything else. A bit difficult to take seriously.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
One can escape such forced labor by stopping work completely - and starving, or begging. Or illegally joining the black market economy.
Miko, you left out an option. One could also move to Canada, Mexico, or many other places. Slavery has traditionally denied the right to become unensalved at will.
However, I do agree with you that over burdensome taxation can feel like slavery, at least to one that has never know it's true yoke.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
[
Of course not. I am sure Skuzzy is against slavery in general.
miko [/B]
So he's for it IN particular?
-
Skuzzy: The government is always going to control NASA miko. Too much of the research ends up in the DoD.
The legitimate defence-related research is fine with me. Most of it can and should be contracted to private companies but some certainly belongs to the government domain.
If you want to control how your taxes are spent, then contact your local representative about it.
But the majority is the one that decides here. So I may register my futile protest but it's not going to affect anything.
Complaining about it on this board is not going to make any difference at all. If you want to make a difference, then get out the pen, stamps, envelopes, and start knocking on doors.
It's not this kind of difference that I am looking to achieve.
Hundred years ago the idea of socialism and welfare state was repugnant to most of the western world. The monarchy was considered a normal form of government by most europeans. The ideas of welfare state were discredited.
There were always politicians pushing for more socialism but they got nowhere.
The socialism was only able to spread when the public opinion changed. Ultimately, it's all about the ideas.
So my intent is to help chnange the ideas so that people do not support oppressive government systems.
I understand that I am not likely to affect many people immediately, but even if I did not "convert" a soul, that does not mean my efforts are wasted.
This society is headed towards the major crisis. Once that crisis occurs, the people will be much more receptive to reexamining the old ideas and looking for the new ones.
Maybe they will remember what I said here and take a look. After all, I zeroed in on the austrtian school because they were most accurate over the 150 years of predictions that came true.
When societies suffers major upheavals, the public may switch to all kinds of terrrible ideologies - witness nazism in germany and bolshevism in Russia or Terror in France or Empire in Rome in the wake of collapse of the previous order.
Having a libertarian ideas available for people is not the worst choice.
miko
-
Whether or not you realize it, you have gotten so deep into the political quagmire you are not able to be objective anymore. That is just an observation.
So, you are advocating socialism? You do not like a majority ruled government. There is no such thing as a perfect government and your ideas have just as many flaws as any others I have witnessed.
You have soured your credibility as you no longer appear to be able to just discuss without putting a political spin on a topic. Basically, you come off as an activist, whether you mean to or not. Just FYI.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
You do not like a majority ruled government.
Oh, the irony :)
-
I for one, enjoy reading Miko's post.....
Skuzzy, i would have thought Miko would be the last person you rain anger down on.. He never initiates an attack on someone... He speaks his mind and for those that are intersted, for whatever their reasons, he will clarifly himself as best as possible.. Some view his statments as anti-american... I veiw his statments as an alternate way of thinking... A new light on the subject if you may.. Sometimes I disagree... but I mostly agree with him... on most all accounts.. No one here is forced or 'coersed' into reading him..
How can you complain about derailing a post?? Once a post is place before public eyes, unless peps are being paid to narrate, it will undoubtably posess and progress a life of its own...
-
Originally posted by MrLars
Oh, the irony :)
lol MrLars lol!! can we start a vote of which threads are locked and which threads are edited?? lmao
-
But do we need it in every thread? :rolleyes:
Miko and Grun should start a club.
-
kappa, I am not angry at miko. I do not get angry about this board.
If someone starts a thread, then they do so as they would like to discuss the topic. The constant de-railing of threads is disruptive and disrespectful to the thread starter.
Poeple derailing threads have the option to start their own, and they also have the option to NOT post in the thread if they cannot respect the reason the thread exists to begin with.
Political derailments are often the worst as they draw an entirely different crowd with a different agenda and thus the thread starter has lost his/her oppertunity to discuss what he/she wanted to discuss.
Is it so hard for people to respect the thread and starter of the thread?
Doing so would make for a better discussion board. I should not have to moderate that into existence.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
The constant de-railing of threads is disruptive and disrespectful to the thread starter.
Poeple derailing threads have the option to start their own, and they also have the option to NOT post in the thread if they cannot respect the reason the thread exists to begin with.
I should not have to moderate that into existence.
Skuzzy - all conversations with more than one speaker... digress...
Especially BBS threads... that is the nature of BBS....
This software has the option of ignore... and listeners and responders have the option of not replying to off-topic remarks- it takes more than one to digress.
You would have better luck trying to pour the ocean into a hole in the beach one cup at a time.
When you are able to snatch this thread from my hand then it will be time for you to go into the world, grasshopper.
-
Nak, I participate in many well run bulletin boards. The digression is kept to a minimum by the posters themselves. No one blatantly derails threads like is done here.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
The Microwave oven came from an accidental discovery made by a scientist working radar equipment in the 1940's. It melted a chocolate bar in his pocket. :)
And the very first microwave oven was as big as a refrigertor! :cool: :D
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Nak, I participate in many well run bulletin boards. The digression is kept to a minimum by the posters themselves. No one blatantly derails threads like is done here.
Roy, we *KNOW* this was you, your facial features and beard are undeniable:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107635,00.html
You can fess up now and tell us about the Natural BBS you frequent.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Nak, I participate in many well run bulletin boards. The digression is kept to a minimum by the posters themselves. No one blatantly derails threads like is done here.
Skuzzy, post links. :D
-
You wouldn't like them. All tech stuff.
Odd thing....the thread on German toilets has stayed on topic more than any other thread in this forum.
Wonder if I should read anything into that?
-
Originally posted by Airhead
Skuzzy, post links. :D
I'm sure that's high on his list of things to do. Right up there next to having all his teeth pulled or an unanesthecized castration.
Reminds of the Far Side cartoon where the car is leaving the driveway and a dog in the back seat leans over the door window and tells the dog outside the car that he is going to the vet to get tutored. :eek:
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
So, you are advocating socialism. You do not like a majority ruled government. There is no such thing as a perfect government and your ideas have just as many flaws as any others I have witnessed.
Better check your definition of socialism; Miko's the farthest thing from a socialist.
-
Typo, should have been a question. Corrected.
-
Skuzzy, I think you're confusing socialism with autocracy. Socialism is an economic idea -- that of a central authority redistributing society's capital as it sees fit. Capitalism, rule of free markets, is the opposite of socialism.
Autocracy -- rule by one -- or any of its derivatives (plutocracy - rule by the wealthy; absolute monarchies and oligarchies also falling into the category of an autocracy) is a political idea. Democracy is generally regarded as the opposite of autocracy.
So, you are advocating socialism? You do not like a majority ruled government.
It is possible to advocate other forms of government besides democracy without advocating socialism -- as I believe Miko is doing, although I don't know what his political alternative is. But his economic policy is that of the free market -- the farthest thing from socialism.
-
Originally posted by Tarmac
Better check your definition of socialism; Miko's the farthest thing from a socialist.
Miko is far away from alot of things.
How anyone can defend his arguments as even remotely rational is beyond me.
In my not so humble opinion (surprise) he has recently joined the ranks of other memorable 'activists' that used to frequent this board. They used to be mildly entertaining and then made the mistake of assuming they were being taken seriously.
Once the realization and subsequent shock sets in that not only have they erased any credibility they might have had, but others just dont want to listen to them anymore it goes downhill. Pretty soon the arguments get even more ridiculous and offensive simply to attract attention ::coughweazlecough::
Discussions are fun, arguments are more fun, personal attacks are orgasmic, but attempting to advance your own political opinions in every thread you enter, regardless of its initial topic, gets extremely annoying after awhile.
Usually ignoring would do the trick - but when the post is offensive or crazy enough to invoke a response from 90% of the community the initial topic is pretty much dead.
I say tar and feathers. Tar and feathers, I say.
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
Miko is far away from alot of things.
How anyone can defend his arguments as even remotely rational is beyond me.
Which arguments? If you're referring to the "the sky is falling" arguments (as others have dubbed them), then I don't know enough to have an informed opinion. I'd bet a lot of his detractors don't know enough either. Whether he knows enough or not, well, that's one of the reasons for discussing. :)
As for his views on liberty and personal freedom, I think the country would be a better place if the pendulum of popular opinion swung a bit his way.
-
Why even bring this on the BBS?
A simple e-mail to Skuzzy would of accomplished the same thing, but without airing the laundry.
-
Thank you Tarmac. I realize there are other forms of government, but for the life of me I cannot put a finger on what his would be.
I see a lot of complaints, but no solutions. Maybe I missed it somewhere along the line. Quite possible.
The only thing I noted was he was against paying taxes without having the immediate ability to dictate how the money was spent.
I think it an unattainable goal due to the amount of bueacracy that would be required.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
The only thing I noted was he was against paying taxes without having the immediate ability to dictate how the money was spent.
Ahh, then you're missing the point. The only way for us to ensure that our money goes where we want it to, in terms of the communal good or any other social cause, is to spend it ourselves. As in not get taxed for it in the first place.
There was a time when governments did not tax you so that they could give housing loans, did not give welfare checks, and did not give social security. The world still spun, people lived just fine.
Think about it -- I believe the government takes over 50% of our money, by the time all is said and done. Let's assume that 50% is the number for the sake of argument. How much of that goes toward "necessary" communal things like national defense, police, etc (note these are things that ensure life and property are protected and that the free market can funtion unhindered by theft, fraud, extortion, etc.)? We cut all that socialist stuff (by socialist I mean the government taxing people and redistributing it to others as it sees fit) and throw it away, along with all the bureacracy associated with it. Now how much money do you have personally? A lot more. For the sake of argument, let's say you now take home 85% of your money. That's a 35% increase -- as in 35 percent that you could donate to cancer research, a space exploration society, a homeless shelter, or any other program that you see fit. If one of these nonprofits does something you don't approve of -- misallocate funds, engage in unethical business practices, or give methadone as treatment to drug addics (assuming you don't approve of that), you vote with your dollar. They either change, or they go on without you. Or they go out of business and someone else takes their place. That's something that government bureaucracies rarely do -- go out of business. As a result, the government just keeps getting larger.
I don't have all the answers by any means, but that's the direction I'd like to see this country go. Not the way it's going now -- toward bigger government, higher taxes, and more control over me.
-
Originally posted by Tarmac
Which arguments? If you're referring to the "the sky is falling" arguments (as others have dubbed them), then I don't know enough to have an informed opinion. I'd bet a lot of his detractors don't know enough either. Whether he knows enough or not, well, that's one of the reasons for discussing. :)
You know the problem there, don't you? There are a lot of pretty smart economists in the world who have access to public media, and you don't hear the incessant "We're all doomed!" funeral dirge we frequently hear here. It's almost as if he believes he possess a unique knowledge of economy simply no one else has yet grasped. Maybe he's right, I'm not an economist, but the point has long since been well made. It's turned into a drone by now. I don't have to read it all, and honestly (for the most part) I've stopped because of the unvarying tone and quality. There's nothing new to hear. Couple that with inane comments about slave labor, and how can you take it seriously? Comparing tax dollars to actual bondage? That's a semantic game only- like the old game of saying:
"Motion is impossible, because between two points on a line there are an infinite number of points. Since time is finite, it is impossible to cover an infinite number of points in an finite amount of time. Motion is impossible."
Undoubtedly we need to do things better, but to suggest we've never been in trouble straits before seems uninformed.
-
Originally posted by Kieran
You know the problem there, don't you? There are a lot of pretty smart economists in the world who have access to public media, and you don't hear the incessant "We're all doomed!" funeral dirge we frequently hear here. It's almost as if he believes he possess a unique knowledge of economy simply no one else has yet grasped. Maybe he's right, I'm not an economist, but the point has long since been well made. It's turned into a drone by now. I don't have to read it all, and honestly (for the most part) I've stopped because of the unvarying tone and quality. There's nothing new to hear. Couple that with inane comments about slave labor, and how can you take it seriously? Comparing tax dollars to actual bondage? That's a semantic game only- like the old game of saying:
"Motion is impossible, because between two points on a line there are an infinite number of points. Since time is finite, it is impossible to cover an infinite number of points in an finite amount of time. Motion is impossible."
Undoubtedly we need to do things better, but to suggest we've never been in trouble straits before seems uninformed.
I agree, I don't buy the "we're doomed" predictions. And the "we're doomed" predictions are exaggerated by other people blowing them out of proportion and overlooking the fact that governmental change happens in decades, which are incomprehensible to many voters and politicians on 4-6 year timetables. So the problems may not come to a head in our lifetimes, or at least not until we're too old and our children have to deal with them.
But I do agree with him that in the long term this country, and much of the world, is headed in the wrong direction and that the current notions of "progress" are leading us astray -- away from personal liberty. I want to see the country head back in the other direction -- away from socialism and the nanny state and back toward personal liberty and accountability.
So are we doomed? No, nothing is inevitable. But to recognize that something is wrong, and getting worse, and remain silent is a disservice to myself and the future of the country.
-
IN!
-
People have been saying we're doomed since our anscestors discovered rubbing sticks together had an interesting effect. I would say we are doomed. That is pretty inevitable. The true question is when.
-
Skuzzy: Whether or not you realize it, you have gotten so deep into the political quagmire you are not able to be objective anymore. That is just an observation.
I disagree but as you've said, I may not realise it. So that is a chance for anyone to point out flaws in my premises or logic, not just my presonality.
I will try to post more appropriately - like starting threads instead of causing to derail others. Some times my opinion on what constitutes a derailment may differ from other's. I appologise. My goal is not to piss people off - even those who love to be pissed off.
When a post starter explicitely says what kind of discussion he is trying to elicit, I do not violate it.
So, you are advocating socialism? You do not like a majority ruled government.
As Tarmak said, I an against socialism. State socialism was started by Bismark in mid 1800s kaiser Germany - hardly a "majority ruled government".
If a government cannot take away people's property trough taxes of regulations, it does not matter whether it is a democracy or other republican form.
If a government can take take away people's property, democracy would accelerate slide into socialism but is not a cause of it.
There is no such thing as a perfect government and your ideas have just as many flaws as any others I have witnessed.
There are more or less perfect governments. Those that lead to increase in civilisation are certainly better that those that lead to its downfall. Right now we are at the peak of our prosperity, not in the middle of a real war. Nevertheless there are several unsustainable trends that cannot be solved withing a generation and there are no answers how to solve them in the future except through crisis. That does not seem to me like a stable system.
US was growing sustainably for long periods, so we know it's possible.
Many people realise we have problems - economic, social, democraphic. Most people do not realise that they were caused by government intervention into economy since about 1913 or even earlier, as in the case of the business cycles.
The only thing I noted was he was against paying taxes without having the immediate ability to dictate how the money was spent.
Leaving the question of the military budget and dept of justice aside, the majority of the budget is used to (unconstututionally) fund services that can be much better provided by a private market, local governments or state governments rather than teh federal government.
When a private individual spends money to buy necessary services or for charity, he dictates how it is spent. That is how it was in US for largest part of its history - which also saw the spectacular rise in human welfare despite a huge continued inflow of impoverished immingrants.
You have soured your credibility as you no longer appear to be able to just discuss without putting a political spin on a topic. Basically, you come off as an activist, whether you mean to or not.
I freely admit that am an a political activist. If I put it in an improper place, that reflects on my sense of tact but why would it affect my credibility? Speaking out of place is different from lying.
Saurdaukar: Discussions are fun, arguments are more fun, personal attacks are orgasmic, but attempting to advance your own political opinions in every thread you enter, regardless of its initial topic, gets extremely annoying after awhile.
I appreciate such kind of comments very much. I wish you said so sooner. I will try to be more considerate.
Obviously it is hard to estimate for me - or any other person - how closely people take matters that are of great importance to a speaker. For instance I cannot imagine spending a minute of my time watching or discussing a spectator sport, but many people seem to do it to the level of obsession. I bet that people treat your own playing AH as a form of obsession if you bring it up in an improper place.
But saying sings out of place bears no reflection on whether they are true. Not liking or believing my ideas or their implications does not affect my credibility.
Kieran: pretty smart economists in the world who have access to public media, and you don't hear the incessant "We're all doomed!" funeral dirge we frequently hear here
But that was the case before many previous collapses. The establishment is greatly involved in funding media and education, so it is natural to expect certain bias.
Nevertheless, plenty of noted economists are saying the same thing I do on public forums and in the media.
It's almost as if he believes he possess a unique knowledge of economy simply no one else has yet grasped.
That's a bit of an overstatement. I make no secret that my economic views are of Austrian School - that was officially established in 1870, has quite a few adherents, many other famous schools acknowleging the correctness of most of their theories (suppy-siders, monetarists) and the wealth of books is easily available.
The Mises institute website is ranked about 2,500 and libertarianstudies.org is around 700 by Alexa - above washtimes.com, worldnetdaily.com, rushlimbaugh.com, townhall.com, etc. The philosophy is not widespread but not obscure.
Comparing tax dollars to actual bondage?
Both are based on coercion by (tthreat of) violence. The difference is only in degree and labels attached.
but to suggest we've never been in trouble straits before seems uninformed
Depends on what you mean by "we". If you mean USA, we have experienced more visible troubles in our downfall to socialism.
If you mean "humanity" and by troubles you mean occasional downfalls of civilisations, I do not care to live throug one of them without trying to prevent it.
The downfall of Rome set the progress of civilisation back by 500 years and it took about 1000 years to return back to about the same point. We could be living in a year 3500 right now if they did not screw with monetary and fiscal policies that we are promoting now in US and for the rest of the world.
Regards,
miko