Pskapompos: Nobody has a natural right to the land, and private property is a contract with the great collective that you will not use it to harm the citizenry. Saving wealth is great, hoarding wealth you couldnt use anyway is harmful to the citizenry at large.
Nobody has a natural right to the land, and private property is a contract with the great collective that you will not use it to harm the citizenry. Saving wealth is great, hoarding wealth you couldnt use anyway is harmful to the citizenry at large.
Ayn Rand would've loved you. You're so Bertram Scudder.
Pskapompos:Did you just try and make the argument that social democracy isnt what made America the so-called "greatest nation in the world?"
What made America the so-called greatest nation was laissez-faire government. When that was raped and pillaged by the progressive mountebanks, then what made America great was Bretton Woods, which was only possible because America was the only country amoral enough to nuke civilians, and terrify the world into giving it control all of the gold.
The modern American social democracy is built on international thuggery and domestic bankruptcy.
There was a time when Americans probably had some foundation for arrogance, but with politicians who steal elections, governments that disobey constitutions, torture, invasion of privacy, being the world's largest debtor, and unable to win a skirmish against some goat herders in arid mountains, America has largely become a big fat joke of itself.
And you sir, epitomize the false liberal delusion that you're on top. All the world needs is another morally and ethically bankrupt ambulance chaser educated through theft and coercion. It's the American dream...
PS, it's nice to see *difficult* posters get some run now. You've all done a wonderful job showing this guy's ideas for what they are. And that's educational for the hundreds of lurkers.
If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North
Pskapompos:I think that private property is a contract with the people
Only, contracts, by defintion, presuppose private property.
Pskapompos:To hoard your wealth while others starve is a breach of contract and is a crime
Define "hoarding". By the way, you're wrong. When I hoard, prices drop and others can afford more.
Pskapompos:Serving oneself at the behest of all others violates peoples basic right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and is a crime.
Of course, and to better this, we need coercion to better this and restore liberty, am I right?
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
First, I said that we were so called the greatest country on earth.
But by hoarding I dont mean saving. Saving is fundamentally the first thing you should do with your money. It was explained to me as 'paying yourself first.'
But just like you can spend to a point of detriment, you can save to the point of detriment.
At a certain point, your wealth becomes nothing more than a symbol. You could not spend it, and saving it really isnt making a difference; you have enough for hard times. Above that point your money is practically worthless. At that point its called hoarding. And it could be used for much greater purposes.
Adam E Zandarski
Ho-hum. Another wannabe-dictator.
Silly thing: you don't get to rule over others and tell them that you know best how to deal with their property. You have no right to do that. Which means: this board is not the place for you. Go find somewhere with other wannabe-dicatators.
Pskapompos: Above that point your money is practically worthless
What if I gain utility from merely possessing wealth?
Pskapompos: First, I said that we were so called the greatest country on earth. But by hoarding I dont mean saving. Saving is fundamentally the first thing you should do with your money. It was explained to me as 'paying yourself first.' But just like you can spend to a point of detriment, you can save to the point of detriment. At a certain point, your wealth becomes nothing more than a symbol. You could not spend it, and saving it really isnt making a difference; you have enough for hard times. Above that point your money is practically worthless. At that point its called hoarding. And it could be used for much greater purposes.
You and others just pull this out of your ass. You cannot prove it cannot demonstrate it cannot even define it coherently.
Pskapompos:First, I said that we were so called the greatest country on earth.
Oh, you mean America? Nope, not the greatest country.
Pskapompos: But by hoarding I dont mean saving. Saving is fundamentally the first thing you should do with your money. It was explained to me as 'paying yourself first.' But just like you can spend to a point of detriment, you can save to the point of detriment.
If it is detrimental to that person's ends, than why do they do it?
Pskapompos:At a certain point, your wealth becomes nothing more than a symbol. You could not spend it, and saving it really isnt making a difference; you have enough for hard times. Above that point your money is practically worthless. At that point its called hoarding. And it could be used for much greater purposes.
If money becomes worthless when it is hoarded, than why would people hoard it. Keep in mind that value is subjective.
Schools are labour camps.
Juma: To be fair it can be true though. I'm sure a lot of people, if not the majority, felt a sense of national pride when a man landed on the moon. And of course there are plenty of technology advancements thanks to NASA: http://techtran.msfc.nasa.gov/at_home.html
To be fair it can be true though. I'm sure a lot of people, if not the majority, felt a sense of national pride when a man landed on the moon. And of course there are plenty of technology advancements thanks to NASA:
http://techtran.msfc.nasa.gov/at_home.html
And who knows what technological advancements were not made since the money was wasted on NASA instead...
At most, 5% of the population would need to stop complying to bring down the government.
Alright Knight of Blaablaa. You call yourself a knight; in other words a feudal overlord. I call myself a harvester of souls. Whos the wannabe dictator here? Where in my comment did I say anything about ruling over other people.
You disagree with me that fine. Thats healthy. But dont belittle me. Grow up
And now youll probably ban me again...loser
Let me ask a question; do people always engage in actions that are for their own good? You may have convinced yourself that anyone who wants us to work together is an autocrat. If I ask you to chip in, Im stifling your rights. Is it not clear to you that I believe in the democratic method and republican governance? But its much easier to dismiss something that may make you question yourself by directing labels at the messenger.
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
And please refer to the beginning of this post and realize it was YOU who laid a sneak attack upon me. Im only here to defend myself. So please, prove who the dictator is and ban me agian for doing nothing more than expressing my opinion. Please do that.
Pskapompos: And please refer to the beginning of this post and realize it was YOU who laid a sneak attack upon me. Im only here to defend myself. So please, prove who the dictator is and ban me agian for doing nothing more than expressing my opinion. Please do that.
Serious question: Can you see the difference between banning someone from a private forum and asserting the right to use coercive force over someone?
Within the context of what you are proposing, you aren't "asking" you are demanding, which means you (Not you as in the individual, but you as in hypothetical governance) put a gun to someone elses head. This isn't cooperation, brotherhood, love, this is violence, pure and simple. Also, people have a strong tendancy to do what THEY think is best for themselves, and the definition of that is purely subjective. Humanity couldn't survive if we always acted against our ends. Whether the government is democratic or republican doesn't negate that violence against innocent people is involved.
Youve got me all wrong Juan. I never justified taxes, I said they exist and the best way to structure them is progressively. Ill never defend police brutality! Im saying that here in the real world, where there are taxes, I support making them reflective of the value of the money involved. If the police cant work within the letter of the law, than they should go to jail as well.
Anti drug war, anti federal reserve, anti empire. How is that pro tyranny?
Yes, and towards the end of Rome people thought it was best for them to hide in manors and accept the protection of the wealthy landowners. They thought it was best for them to burn books and hate-on science. They thought it was best to kill innocent jews for being jewish, and to burn women for knowing math.
People do what they think is best for themselves. They can suffer from false information (as would be the case above) but you haven't yet shown an example where someone deliberately acted against what they believed was best for themselves.
Pskapompos: on taxes: "...the best way to structure them is progressively. Im saying that here in the real world, where there are taxes..."
on taxes: "...the best way to structure them is progressively. Im saying that here in the real world, where there are taxes..."
So if I use your premise, "the real world", in which your argument is based I come across this following question/scenario: So, your saying in "the real world" your progressive taxes are in place? And since they are place in this so called "real world" of yours, then why would you need to structure them? Isn't that redundant?
"I used to see a mountain as a mountain.. Thereafter.. when I saw a mountain; lo! it was not a mountain.. yet now of final tranquillity: I see a mountain just as a mountain as I used to.." - Master Yuan; molon labe
Pskapompos:Youve got me all wrong Juan. I never justified taxes, I said they exist and the best way to structure them is progressively. Ill never defend police brutality! Im saying that here in the real world, where there are taxes, I support making them reflective of the value of the money involved.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap