The USA Political Thread

[lennco]

Here you can spout your USA political views.

Rules:
1. Keep it clean
2. No fighting
3. Respect the views of others.
4. US Political views, No Religious views
5. Have fun

:wave:

 

[Theo Goodman]

Regardless if so called liberals or conservatives supported "X"
All that stuff sounds good, but it was all funded by thieft. If a thief feeds his family by using stolen property is that good?

Verb asks:

WIth all respect, who asked me if I wanted "all that stuff"?

Theo, I don't know if it's a language issue or what, but wtf are you talking about? What violence and coercion? To meet what wants?

Goverment is based on violence and coercion. Taxes are collected under the threat of violence or coercion, ie taking away of direct freedom. The wants I am refering to are the wants that DU mentioned.
I said that nobody asked me if I want the goverment to do X, but they used the threat of force to take money from me and then use this stolen money on things I never asked them for, DU said that some people want these things, I say , ok they can want them but as long as the resourced are collected under the gise of violence then you are not dealing with the root issue at hand.

 

[JB Lions]

This has to do with that Sovereign citizen stuff you posted earlier, doesn't it.

I actually find this pretty interesting. You're born, and you're under the laws, pay taxes (when older) etc, don't really have much say. Where can you be totally free. Maybe

https://www.google.com/search?q=buy an island free of law&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&channel=sb

But doesn't work.

Some have tried:

http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/bizarre/start-your-own-country-in-international-waters.html

Back in the day, when man first started walking the earth. Who's is it? It was whoever takes it. Let's say you could buy some space, island, set it up etc. It would be very easy for somebody, government, to go old school on you and just take it.

My friend and I got into a conversation about this awhile back. About some guy that got a ticket for fishing or something and didn't want to pay it, citing Natural Law. I am a man, I walk the Earth, I was hungry, so I got some fish. But he needed a license. He didn't have one, and got a ticket and had to pay a fine. The Natural law angle didn't work in court. If there were no restrictions in place, what would happen? Somebody would take advantage and drain the river of fish. We have to find some way to live together, society. You might not like some of the things, but you also reap some of the benefits. This is what I was talking about:

Do you feel there is a better way? If so, what?

 

[DU]

Goverment is based on violence and coercion. Taxes are collected under the threat of violence or coercion, ie taking away of direct freedom. The wants I am refering to are the wants that DU mentioned.
I said that nobody asked me if I want the goverment to do X, but they used the threat of force to take money from me and then use this stolen money on things I never asked them for, DU said that some people want these things, I say , ok they can want them but as long as the resourced are collected under the gise of violence then you are not dealing with the root issue at hand.

That wasn't my point. My point was that people always complain about things others get from taxes but they always want to take.

Best example that comes to mind (other than previously cited):

A large portion of the middle class hates the poor welfare system. They get food stamps and money. It's my money, no fair.
A large portion of the middle class loves the mortgage interest deduction. I'm working hard, contributing. It's just a deduction, not a hand out. I deserve it because I'm buying a home.

One is an expense (bad) and one is a reduction in income (not bad). Net impact on the overall budget is similar.

 

[Theo Goodman]

So you feel that pretty much that governments are thieves and tax paying people are getting stolen from? Is that just in the U.S. or do you feel that way when you pay taxes in Germany as well?

This:

"So really it all comes down to stealing from people by using the threat of violence and then using the theifted resources in ways that the people that were stolen from disapprove of"

What threat of violence?

Do you feel there is a better option out there? Things just pay for themselves? What exactly?

First of all this thread is about the USA, but if you want to open the thread up to talk internationaly that is fine. Yes, in Germany too.

-What threat of violence?-
Why do you pay taxes?


Now I see the Sovereign man "stuff" What "stuff" did I post about Sovereign man?
He has good arguments and I support him. It is not my tactical way but I still agree with him.

Do you feel there is a better way? If so, what?
I assume this means "do you have a proven better way that can be backed up by wiki sources that works perfectly" No I do not. What we have now was not put under such scrutiny either.

However I think that we should base things on the non-aggression principle








"Things just pay for themselves?"
This is the concept that nothing can be done without goverment, nothing will be paid, no roads, hospitals or internet. I disagree.

Has there ever been a state that has acted in benevolence?

 

[Theo Goodman]

That wasn't my point. My point was that people always complain about things others get from taxes but they always want to take.

Best example that comes to mind (other than previously cited):

A large portion of the middle class hates the poor welfare system. They get food stamps and money. It's my money, no fair.
A large portion of the middle class loves the mortgage interest deduction. I'm working hard, contributing. It's just a deduction, not a hand out. I deserve it because I'm buying a home.

One is an expense (bad) and one is a reduction in income (not bad). Net impact on the overall budget is similar.

Ah ok , well I can agree with you then.

 

[DU]

Ah ok , well I can agree with you then.

This is the wrong forum to act all nice. I'm afraid I cannot allow this.

 

[JB Lions]

First of all this thread is about the USA, but if you want to open the thread up to talk internationaly that is fine. Yes, in Germany too.

-What threat of violence?-
Why do you pay taxes?


Now I see the Sovereign man "stuff" What "stuff" did I post about Sovereign man?
He has good arguments and I support him. It is not my tactical way but I still agree with him.

Do you feel there is a better way? If so, what?
I assume this means "do you have a proven better way that can be backed up by wiki sources that works perfectly" No I do not. What we have now was not put under such scrutiny either.

However I think that we should base things on the non-aggression principle








"Things just pay for themselves?"
This is the concept that nothing can be done without goverment, nothing will be paid, no roads, hospitals or internet. I disagree.

Has there ever been a state that has acted in benevolence?

There was some guy you mentioned a couple of times and linked too, can't find it. Who was it? I remember he was talking the same Natural Law/Sovereign citizen stuff. Even your Nap link is in the same realm.

To your questions, I pay taxes because it's the law. It's part of the deal of living in society. Don't remember threats of violence but of arrest.

You have a problem with how things are done now, I ask you is there a better way, any thoughts and you say No, you don't. Well, that's part of the problem. Come up with something. You say what we have now "was not put under such scrutiny either" Are you kidding me? Constant scrutiny from the beginning. It's why it's always changing.

I ask "Things just pay for themselves?" I was asking you for alternatives. You said you don't think government is the only way, but then don't say what the other way is. So what is the other way? Roads, interstates etc, gets built by who? Paid for by who?

In the past when we talked about this, one of you ways was Anarchism and you linked to this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_in_Spain

 

[RogueWriter]

The two worst were Buchanan (D) and Harding (R), but I'm guessing you somehow think Obama is worse than Bush. That's pretty funny.

it's pretty easy to make inept statements about inept guidance. . . What normal person uses "derailed" anyway?

Buchanan and Harding pssshhhhtttt. Rank amateurs in screwing things up compared to Carter and Obama. The redeeming feature about Carter is simply that he was almost too nice to be President.

 

[RogueWriter]

I think the government needs to provide free cars to everyone. Free cars are a right. I live in a rural area, if I don't have access to a car, I can't get to the grocery store where I get my free potato chips and soda with my SNAP card, nor can I get to a machine to pull cash out of my welfare card for use in the tanning salon ( hey, I may be poor, but I have needs, and getting a tan makes me feel good about myself, I am much more likely to get a job someday if I am allowed to spend your money giving myself a tan ) .

Therefore, I am asking Obama to push through congress the Affordable Car Act, where people like Theo have to give me a car ( preferably an F-150, though a Charger would do in a pinch ) for free.

Cars are a right!

( Oh, and can we do something about car insurance, because, well, I can't afford to actually PAY for my own insurance, we could call it the Affordable Insurance Directive, or AID, because that sounds clever. )

Just imagine a world where I can get free healthcare, free food, free cars, free car insurance, free tans, all from other people's hard work. Why, that would almost make me want to get a job in a ye

 

[GILSAN]

This is the wrong forum to act all nice. I'm afraid I cannot allow this.

Dammit.... can't believe I'm agreeing with you

 

[DU]

Just imagine a world where I can get free healthcare

No such thing as free; however, I would rather live in a world where people could afford to get basic medical health care because collectively we viewed that as something worthwhile.

I know someone who has a chronic - can barely walk with a cane and sitting hurts - back condition. He was forced to quit his job and his wife recently divorced him. He lost his health insurance that he got through her. He recently just paid over $10,000 for a procedure that didn't work (that was about 1/2 of all the money he has in the world which is due to run out in .....do the math)

WTF is he supposed to do he asked me? He can't get a job because his back is shot. He can't afford to get it fixed because he doesn't have a job.

You'll be proud of me. I called a spade a spade and told him he was a lazy fuck and should get a job like the rest of us - two if he had to. He even had the gall to claim the primary cause of his back problems from working a job where he hauled shit load of pallets every day for years. I told him to stop being a pussy.

 

[Theo Goodman]

There was some guy you mentioned a couple of times and linked too, can't find it. Who was it? I remember he was talking the same Natural Law/Sovereign citizen stuff. Even your Nap link is in the same realm.

To your questions, I pay taxes because it's the law. It's part of the deal of living in society. Don't remember threats of violence but of arrest.

You have a problem with how things are done now, I ask you is there a better way, any thoughts and you say No, you don't. Well, that's part of the problem. Come up with something. You say what we have now "was not put under such scrutiny either" Are you kidding me? Constant scrutiny from the beginning. It's why it's always changing.

I ask "Things just pay for themselves?" I was asking you for alternatives. You said you don't think government is the only way, but then don't say what the other way is. So what is the other way? Roads, interstates etc, gets built by who? Paid for by who?

In the past when we talked about this, one of you ways was Anarchism and you linked to this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_in_Spain

- I pay taxes because it's the law. It's part of the deal of living in society. Don't remember threats of violence but of arrest-

Nobody signed any contract that says that "the goverment" can steal money from us. I didnt make any deal with anyone, nobody asked me.

Who arrests you? Police, armed police. Armed with leathal and non-leathal weapon, deemed legal to use. The occupational army of the state. The threat of violence is violence, or at least coersion. The only reason anyone feely pay taxes is because of the threat of loss of freedom (a form of violence) or physical violence or death if it comes down to it. This is an example of the threat of violence that we have enternalized.

- remember he was talking the same Natural Law/Sovereign citizen stuff.-
I will find the video I think that you are talking about, maybe this one? It is less than 5min and a good listen.

-You have a problem with how things are done now, I ask you is there a better way, any thoughts and you say No, you don't. Well, that's part of the problem. Come up with something. You say what we have now "was not put under such scrutiny either" Are you kidding me? Constant scrutiny from the beginning. It's why it's always changing.-

I have stated many things that are better ways, and examples. I simply mean that there is no cookie cutter solution. Basing things on NAP, building businesses, communities and economies based onvoluntary involvment. Questioning the statist indocernation that is happening at public schools and figureing out alternatives. There are many things, what is that you want exactly? Would you like a way that you can get involoved?

What we have now was not looked at like"hey where in history did we have that, did it work?" kind of scrutity.



-I ask "Things just pay for themselves?" I was asking you for alternatives. You said you don't think government is the only way, but then don't say what the other way is. So what is the other way? Roads, interstates etc, gets built by who? Paid for by who?-

The other way? Without govemernt, we live without goverment, that is the other way, we do not need goverment.

As in the meme,
Who builds roads now? The goverment? NO, private companies build the roads.
Who pays for the roads now? The goverment? NO, we pay for the roads.
Who would build the roads? Private companies
Who would pay for the roads? We would

same structure for interstates, ect.

If you would like to see an experiment that I am taking part in you can head over to:
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldcrypto...decentralise_the_world_and_make_world_crypto/

World Crypto Network is going the direction of a "DAO" which is a
Distributed Autonomous Organisation
Using cryptography and blockchain technology to provide checks and balances in a transparent way
So that if people donate or sponsor projects they can see exactly how the resources are used. (among other things)

Feel free to comment there if you want.
http://www.worldcryptonetwork.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/WorldCryptoNetwork


ohyea, I was asked about history, and where there was anarchism ect, yes spain is one example, there was some progress there. Also Ireland and Iceland have a history of it as well as Africa (and no I do not mean somilia)

 

[GILSAN]

What I can't understand is; why didn't the US implement universal health care like we have had in Europe for a very long time. What the hell does the US government do with all the money from dozens and dozens of taxes they suck off the people.

Why didn't they have a good look at an efficient system in some European countries and essentially copy and adapt it? That way you know that your taxes go towards one of the most important necessities in life especially when you get older; health care.

As for the lazy bums that some of us don't defend, there could be a simple solution for them. All those able bodied men and women who have become experts in being lazy and milking the system, should be made to do community or other types of work in exchange for the food stamps, or SNAP cards or whatever you call it.

That way they can become productive members of society, instead of just milking the system while irritating a lot of hard working people.

 

[Theo Goodman]

maybe because you would have to tax even more, even though it doesnt directly go to health care just look at ave. VAT in europe, insane.

 

[DU]

maybe because you would have to tax even more, even though it doesnt directly go to health care just look at ave. VAT in europe, insane.

Current per capita spending in US > Europe already so that argument's a wash

 

[verbster]

-You have a problem with how things are done now, I ask you is there a better way, any thoughts and you say No, you don't. Well, that's part of the problem. Come up with something. You say what we have now "was not put under such scrutiny either" Are you kidding me? Constant scrutiny from the beginning. It's why it's always changing.-

I have stated many things that are better ways, and examples. I simply mean that there is no cookie cutter solution. Basing things on NAP, building businesses, communities and economies based onvoluntary involvment. Questioning the statist indocernation that is happening at public schools and figureing out alternatives. There are many things, what is that you want exactly? Would you like a way that you can get involoved?

What we have now was not looked at like"hey where in history did we have that, did it work?" kind of scrutity.



-I ask "Things just pay for themselves?" I was asking you for alternatives. You said you don't think government is the only way, but then don't say what the other way is. So what is the other way? Roads, interstates etc, gets built by who? Paid for by who?-

The other way? Without govemernt, we live without goverment, that is the other way, we do not need goverment.

As in the meme,
Who builds roads now? The goverment? NO, private companies build the roads.
Who pays for the roads now? The goverment? NO, we pay for the roads.
Who would build the roads? Private companies
Who would pay for the roads? We would

same structure for interstates, ect.

This seems like deja vu. You aren't looking at the big picture, which is very complex and expensive. at $3 million per mile for just a two-lane road, who is going to pay for 100 miles of road between two small towns in Arizona desert? Who determines what roads get built? Who determines road safety to keep people safe? Who enforces road safety and who pays for it. Who makes and puts up signs? Who plows hundreds of miles of snow on the roads? Who pays for it? Who builds bridges in a way that doesn't pollute the streams and rivers? Who builds Dams and pays for them. And this isn't even close to what gets done with federal assistance. Who determines how you get property? Who keeps records of all of this so someone doesn't steal your land? Who stops someone from stealing food you have to grow to survive? And so it goes until the basics are reached...who allows you to live in peace? Who stops a gang from burning a store, trashing your house or raping your daughter?

It all goes back to instincts and nature. We are social animals. We gather for protection and to help each other survive. And as soon as we gather enough people, we must have some way to communicate our ideas and make decisions based on what's best for the majority. And that's the beginning of government. Without that sort of democracy, you get might makes right government, where the government rules because they have the thugs and firepower to force people to do what they want. You can look at the world today and see this.

 

[Theo Goodman]

This seems like deja vu. You aren't looking at the big picture, which is very complex and expensive. at $3 million per mile for just a two-lane road, who is going to pay for 100 miles of road between two small towns in Arizona desert? Who determines what roads get built? Who determines road safety to keep people safe? Who enforces road safety and who pays for it. Who makes and puts up signs? Who plows hundreds of miles of snow on the roads? Who pays for it? Who builds bridges in a way that doesn't pollute the streams and rivers? Who builds Dams and pays for them. And this isn't even close to what gets done with federal assistance. Who determines how you get property? Who keeps records of all of this so someone doesn't steal your land? Who stops someone from stealing food you have to grow to survive? And so it goes until the basics are reached...who allows you to live in peace? Who stops a gang from burning a store, trashing your house or raping your daughter?

It all goes back to instincts and nature. We are social animals. We gather for protection and to help each other survive. And as soon as we gather enough people, we must have some way to communicate our ideas and make decisions based on what's best for the majority. And that's the beginning of government. Without that sort of democracy, you get might makes right government, where the government rules because they have the thugs and firepower to force people to do what they want. You can look at the world today and see this.

Wow you have done the epic "but who will build the roads" argument. This is a typiclal argument you can even google it, maybe a good niche site would be butwhowillbuildtheroads.com



who is going to pay for 100 miles of road between two small towns in Arizona desert?
The same people that pay for it now, except if it is not needed it wont get built.

Who determines what roads get built?
supply and demand, free market (not like we have now)


Who determines road safety to keep people safe?
Companies wont want to risk a bad repuation by building or maintaining unsafe roads

Who enforces road safety and who pays for it. Who pays for it now?
We pay for it,not "the goverment" this would not change. If these roads could be run the same way as the first NJ turnpikes, which were built by - private companies-


Who makes and puts up signs? Who does this now?
Private companies as is the case now. Who pays for this now? We do , we would.

Who builds bridges in a way that doesn't pollute the streams and rivers?
Who does this now? Goverment? NO, prvate companies do it. Who pays for it ? The govement? NO we pay for it.


Who determines how you get property?
The owners of property would transact.

Who keeps records of all of this so someone doesn't steal your land?
You could use blockchain technology to create public records that can easily be accessed by all.

Who stops someone from stealing food you have to grow to survive?
Would depend on were you live, but of course you would have to defend yourself when it comes down to it. This is true today, it takes 5-10 min for the cops to come. I dont need that long to steal your food.

who allows you to live in peace?
HAHAH this is the best! "allows" NOBODY , there is no permission people just lived in peace with no licence and no permission and zero allowance.


Who stops a gang from burning a store, trashing your house or raping your daughter?
When it comes down to it you are always the first line of defense. If you are trying to say that there would be more violence and crime -without- goverment I disagree. There is more modivation and benefit from working with people rather than agasinst them in this model.

It all goes back to instincts and nature. We are social animals. We gather for protection and to help each other survive. And as soon as we gather enough people, we must have some way to communicate our ideas

As long as you joined this grouping with free will, then go for it! You would then freely agree on a protocoll to live under.
It also goes back to the concept that people are generaly stupid and need to be regulated, I disagree. Regulation is the problem.


and make decisions based on what's best for the majority.
That is not true, not all "democracy" has to be trannyical majority rule.


you get might makes right government

No I disagree , this is the typical "warloard" argument.


You can look at the world today and see this.
You mean somilia or where do you mean?

I can show you might makes right - USA the goverment has the might it is right.


Mr. Murphy makes some good points about the whole "warlord argument"

"For the warlord objection to work, the statist would need to argue that a given community would remain lawful under a government, but that the same community would break down into continuous warfare if all legal and military services were privatized. The popular case of Somalia, therefore, helps neither side.http://mises.org/daily/1855#_edn1 It is true that Rothbardians should be somewhat disturbed that the respect for non-aggression is apparently too rare in Somalia to foster the spontaneous emergence of a totally free market community. But by the same token, the respect for “the law” was also too weak to allow the original Somali government to maintain order."

And we need to think about were do these gangs get their power currently? How would that be different?

"Let us also keep in mind that currently, mob groups (1) do not extract anywhere near as much money, nor kill as many people, as any government in a typical day’s work, and (2) they derive their current strength from government prohibitions (on gambling, drugs, prostitution, loan-sharking, etc.) and hence are not representative at all of an anarchist world."
source: http://mises.org/daily/1855

Adam Koseh does a good job in this video about the classic questions "but who will build the roads?"

 

[eyedomainous]

Slapping the "lazy" label on welfare recipients is actually the easy, lazy, way out. The issue is a bit more complicated than that. But 'conservative thinking', and 'lazy thinking', are often one in the same.

I know its a bit of work, but try and Connect The Dots... with some of the recent subjects in this thread.

Lincoln, and Gen. Sherman, -who had thousands of newly freed slaves following his army around, saw in 1865, that some form of compensation would be in order if they wanted to avoid major problems with millions of "war refugees" roaming the country side.

Long story short, they leased 400,000 acres of land to the free slaves. (Note: Leasing was the Freedmen's idea. After nearly 300 years of slavery, they refused to be given the land).

"a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John's River in Florida, including Georgia's Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast". ... "on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro is free and must be dealt with as such."​

40,000 freedmen had settled on the land, and a Governor was in place, by June of 1865. However, Lincoln was assassinated a few months earlier, and Andrew Johnson, a southern sympathizer, took office. He gave the land to his plantation owner pals, who argued that no longer being able to rape slaves and sell the children made them the injured party... claiming the Federal gov deprived them of their right to do what they will with their property.

Here is where the 'generational' poverty, and welfare state, began. And many have yet to climb out of it.

So the "Lazy Thinking" award goes to conservatives, who are not as smart today as liberals were in 1865.

Bottom line, the fact that the descendants of slaves make-up the largest %, per capita, of people on welfare says more about the morally bankrupt , lazy politics, of American conservatives... than anything else.

As for the lazy bums that some of us don't defend, there could be a simple solution for them. All those able bodied men and women who have become experts in being lazy and milking the system, should be made to do community or other types of work in exchange for the food stamps, or SNAP cards or whatever you call it.

That way they can become productive members of society, instead of just milking the system while irritating a lot of hard working people.

 

[verbster]

Wow you have done the epic "but who will build the roads" argument. This is a typiclal argument you can even google it, maybe a good niche site would be butwhowillbuildtheroads.com

No, who will build the roads is easy. I'm asking who decides what roads to build? How is "demand" measured or determined, and how is the "money" collected from "the same people who pay now" to pay for anything that is mysteriously designated as "needed."

And on another, even more basic level, I'm trying to figure out how you explain things like what kind of currency will be used in the land of no government, since there will be no more government money printed.

Maybe the easiest way to prove your point is to simply show an example of any urban/suburban population of 10,000 or more that meets your concept of "no government" because, as is, your no-government fantasy seems more like a super wealthy get to do whatever they want with no controls at all type of world.

 

[Theo Goodman]

No, who will build the roads is easy. I'm asking who decides what roads to build? How is "demand" measured or determined, and how is the "money" collected from "the same people who pay now" to pay for anything that is mysteriously designated as "needed."

And on another, even more basic level, I'm trying to figure out how you explain things like what kind of currency will be used in the land of no government, since there will be no more government money printed.

Maybe the easiest way to prove your point is to simply show an example of any urban/suburban population of 10,000 or more that meets your concept of "no government" because, as is, your no-government fantasy seems more like a super wealthy get to do whatever they want with no controls at all type of world.

who decides what roads to build? Supply and demand, free market decides, every sithuation would be slightly different.

How is "demand" measured or determined? By the free market, when things are needed people are perfectly capable of organizing such endevors themselves, it is amazing.
how is the "money" ollected from "the same people who pay now"? In a lot more decentral way than now. It would be different depending on the exact sithuation.

what kind of currency will be used in the land of no government?
As always currency is a generaly accepted means of payment that is fungible

mysteriously designated as "needed."
That is how it works now, things are mysteriouly designated as needed without consent.
Free market would decide what is needed.

what kind of currency will be used in the land of no government, since there will be no more government money printed.
Your comment assumed that it was first goverment and second currency but that is not at all how it happened in history. Currency is simply a generaly accepted means of payment that is fungible, it is also good if it is a store of value and easy to store. These requirements for currency do not need a goverment. Gold, Silver coinage, Local Currenices, Bitcoin, Or possibly promisary notes from some kind of bank. NP$ is a currency, created without any goverment.

Maybe the easiest way to prove your point is to simply show an example of any urban/suburban population of 10,000 or more that meets your concept of "no government" because, as is, your no-government fantasy seems more like a super wealthy get to do whatever they want with no controls at all type of world.

This is what I mean with the uneven scrutiny compared to what we have now. Before what we have now exsitsed did people go around and say "show me a population of about 10,000 where that works". No they did not. What urban center in the world has ever repaid the ammount of debt the US goverment has collected, per capita, scaled ect?

You are assuming that non-wealthy would be WORSE off under what I describe, I beg to differ.

This seems like deja vu. The repeating theme of how great regulation and goverment is, how it saves us from ourselves, and how the poor would be lost without goverment. Amazing.