Quote:My disagreeing with you is not hypocrisy it's me disagreeing with you. Different levels of authority play different roles.
You're not disagreeing with me, you're disagreeing with simple logic. The two are completely different in that I'm not asserting a position, I'm stating logical truth of the world around us.
My position would be that central authority and socialism are favorable to the progress of humankind. Logic says that on the spectrum of possibilities for societal structure there is no such thing as libertarianism except at the limit of the spectrum occupied by anarchy. Everything between full on democratic socialism and the limit as the spectrum moves to anarchy are actually socialism by degree.
So, either you can accept the logical position that you are a confused socialist, or you can close your eyes and cover your ears while yelling, "la la la la, I can't hear you, la la la la," but nothing about the reality of the matter changes from that, only your desire to reinforce your incorrect assumptions about yourself and the way the world works can change.
Quote:Alcohol, tobacco, narcotics it's all up to the individual once they've reached legal adulthood which is 18. At that point as I've said a million times I oppose any legislation to restrict the individuals choice of private consumption.
So, in other words, you do support age limits on alcohol, as long as that age is 18.
Quote:I've never said I support age limits on alcohol. I've specifically argued against all narcotic laws try and keep up.
Quote:So, in other words, you do support age limits on alcohol, as long as that age is 18.
So long as their legal adults today that's 18
Quote:You're not disagreeing with me, you're disagreeing with simple logic. The two are completely different in that I'm not asserting a position, I'm stating logical truth of the world around us.
My position would be that central authority and socialism are favorable to the progress of humankind. Logic says that on the spectrum of possibilities for societal structure there is no such thing as libertarianism except at the limit of the spectrum occupied by anarchy. Everything between full on democratic socialism and the limit as the spectrum moves to anarchy are actually socialism by degree.
So, either you can accept the logical position that you are a confused socialist, or you can close your eyes and cover your ears while yelling, "la la la la, I can't hear you, la la la la," but nothing about the reality of the matter changes from that, only your desire to reinforce your incorrect assumptions about yourself and the way the world works can change.
So you support a 100% tax rate then based upon your need central authority distributing all goods services and payments?
Quote:So you support a 100% tax rate then based upon your need central authority distributing all goods services and payments?
I accept that it's a possible way of running the world.
Really, though, why even have pay and taxes if they're going to be 100%? It would make far more sense in that scenario to use apportioned rationing of resources and product among everyone if people can't be counted on to share fairly.
Of course you can have the kind of low level socialism that the USA entertains right now, too, where your taxes go to pay super wealthy corporations to move jobs to China.
Quote:I accept that it's a possible way of running the world.
Really, though, why even have pay and taxes if they're going to be 100%? It would make far more sense in that scenario to use apportioned rationing of resources and product among everyone if people can't be counted on to share fairly.
Of course you can have the kind of low level socialism that the USA entertains right now, too, where your taxes go to pay super wealthy corporations to move jobs to China.
You should love china it's a model of the communist state you want here.
You want to talk about reality and yet refuse to acknowledge all forms of socialism and communism see distribution of wealth clog at the top.
Quote:You should love china it's a model of the communist state you want here.
You want to talk about reality and yet refuse to acknowledge all forms of socialism and communism see distribution of wealth clog at the top.
So you think that unlike what we have in America right now (the largest wealth disparity the nation has ever had is currently ongoing in the USA) getting rid of the minimum wage and labor laws and eliminating social programs, public education, and taxes is how to stop wealth from all accumulating at the top?
I just want to pat your precious little head.
Quote:So you think that unlike what we have in America right now (the largest wealth disparity the nation has ever had is currently ongoing in the USA) getting rid of the minimum wage and labor laws and eliminating social programs, public education, and taxes is how to stop wealth from all accumulating at the top?
I just want to pat your precious little head.
Funny we have more social programs and more of socialist government than ever before and at the same time have the greatest wealth disparity but it's capitalism not socialism we need more socialism!
The problem is we don't give enough authority to government we don't let them redistribute enough wealth!
You talk about public education but did nationalizing education make it better or worse? Are students today educated equally across the board or is there good school and bad schools rich schools and poor schools? Hey it's all government funded why isn't it all equal? Doesn't government take from the whole and distribute as needed?
Quote:Funny we have more social programs and more of socialist government than ever before and at the same time have the greatest wealth disparity but it's capitalism not socialism we need more socialism!
The problem is we don't give enough authority to government we don't let them redistribute enough wealth!
Wrong, for the last 30 years we've had Reaganomics (STOP TAXING RICH PEOPLE, GET RID OF TRADE BARRIERS, STOP THE WELFARE QUEENS, LOWER STATE COLLEGE FUNDING SO TUITION RATES SOAR!) and that's the root of the problem.
The problem isn't the socialist aspects of the governance, you'll get that regardless, the problem is the hardcore morons that keep voting for Reaganomics.
You're like a heroin fiend that doesn't understand why all of your teeth are falling out and you can hardly move, you think that all you need is to just get a lot more of what you've been doing and everything will be fine when in reality what's needed is a complete reversal of the idiocy pervading the right-wing corporatist push of the last 30+ years.
Quote:You talk about public education but did nationalizing education make it better or worse? Are students today educated equally across the board or is there good school and bad schools rich schools and poor schools? Hey it's all government funded why isn't it all equal? Doesn't government take from the whole and distribute as needed?
Something that could be solved by nationalizing the education system and taking away the differences in funding from region to region.
You really don't know how any of the world works, do you?
Quote:Wrong, for the last 30 years we've had Reaganomics (STOP TAXING RICH PEOPLE, GET RID OF TRADE BARRIERS, STOP THE WELFARE QUEENS, LOWER STATE COLLEGE FUNDING SO TUITION RATES SOAR!) and that's the root of the problem.
The problem isn't the socialist aspects of the governance, you'll get that regardless, the problem is the hardcore morons that keep voting for Reaganomics.
You're like a heroin fiend that doesn't understand why all of your teeth are falling out and you can hardly move, you think that all you need is to just get a lot more of what you've been doing and everything will be fine when in reality what's needed is a complete reversal of the idiocy pervading the right-wing corporatist push of the last 30+ years.
You've had 4 presidents and 7 terms since Reagan and yet it's his policies that has ruined the economy lol.
Quote:Something that could be solved by nationalizing the education system and taking away the differences in funding from region to region.
You really don't know how any of the world works, do you?
So your advocating equal distribution for all the schools regardless region.
Quote:You've had 4 presidents and 7 terms since Reagan and yet it's his policies that has ruined the economy lol.
Who turned the ship? We still have historically low tax rates compared to the 40+ years that preceded him as well as financial regulation, trade, and labor policy that would have him grinning ear to ear in his coffin.
It doesn't matter who occupies the white house if it's really just another wolf in sheep's clothing, so to speak.
Quote:So your advocating equal distribution for all the schools regardless region.
If you want to complain about schools not being equal you can't blame it on the federal government, they don't control funding or curriculum.
How do you propose to level the playing field if it's going to all ride on local property taxes?
Quote:Who turned the ship? We still have historically low tax rates compared to the 40+ years that preceded him as well as financial regulation, trade, and labor policy that would have him grinning ear to ear in his coffin.
It doesn't matter who occupies the white house if it's really just another wolf in sheep's clothing, so to speak.
If you want to complain about schools not being equal you can't blame it on the federal government, they don't control funding or curriculum.
How do you propose to level the playing field if it's going to all ride on local property taxes?
Cause the era prior to Reagan was an economic paradise we should strive for.
Rand capitalism and Marxist communism don't work for the same reason:
People don't behave the way either of those philosophies expect them to.
Both models are beautiful on their surface, and fatally flawed because they make basic assumptions about human beings that aren't true.
Quote:Rand capitalism and Marxist communism don't work for the same reason:
People don't behave the way either of those philosophies expect them to.
Both models are beautiful on their surface, and fatally flawed because they make basic assumptions about human beings that aren't true.
Agreed there is no system that works on a broad scale. That's why I advocate making any form of government as close to local as possible.
Quote:Cause the era prior to Reagan was an economic paradise we should strive for.
Maybe you should go back and do some studying up on it, but it was during that 40+ years from the end of the great depression until Reagan's "revolution" that the USA built the largest and wealthiest middle class the world has ever seen.
Quote:Rand capitalism and Marxist communism don't work for the same reason:
People don't behave the way either of those philosophies expect them to.
Both models are beautiful on their surface, and fatally flawed because they make basic assumptions about human beings that aren't true.
So true.
And a big reason we can expect the same nonsense and failure to have a decent system in the last 45 years, give or take a few stretches here and there.
Liberalism has benefits. Reaganomics has benefits. Taken to the extremes both fail.
And taking it to extremes is exactly what we choose to do and accept. We treat politics as team sports. Good guys vs. bad guys. And that's it.
No republican can admit ANYTHING Obama submits is anything other than appalling. No democrat can admit that the entitlement systems are flat out broken. No one can take a middle ground. No one dares to. Gutless on both sides, for the most part. Everyone has their hand out or they get their neck chopped (poor choice of words, sorry.)
Personally I feel both liberalism and conservatism are mockeries of their own terms. I know I used to feel conservative, then realized that that party had abandoned my principles on soooooo many issues I couldn't stand them. And the people the tend to draw.