Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-02-2013, 07:22 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
"Many capitalist countries are and have been dictatorships, and many of
these are nice and cozy friends of the capitalist west. Do you read
history? Read news papers? Live on planet earth?"

Capitalism has nothing to do with statism. When you blend capitalism with statism, you get a bastardized form of capitalism that is no longer capitalism. This is because the sociopaths in the state collude with the sociopaths in the market in order to enrich themselves on the backs of the proletariat. This cannot happen without the state.

And yes, I read a lot of history. No, I don't read newspapers and yes, I live on Erf. I've been to the moon a few times but that was in my younger days when drugs were a lot cheaper.

Thanks for asking.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bbeljefe's post
26-02-2013, 08:00 PM
Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(26-02-2013 07:05 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Aww man, I&I is back, I was kind of hoping you found a hobby, or died or something. Please name a dictatorship that has not interfered with free-market economics, just one.

You act as if capitalists want nothing to do with government when history shows otherwise. Capitalists always have interfered in government policies and need to do so to maintain power. Name one example of a country where the capitalists haven't interfered with government.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2013, 08:11 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(26-02-2013 08:00 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(26-02-2013 07:05 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Aww man, I&I is back, I was kind of hoping you found a hobby, or died or something. Please name a dictatorship that has not interfered with free-market economics, just one.

You act as if capitalists want nothing to do with government when history shows otherwise. Capitalists always have interfered in government policies and need to do so to maintain power. Name one example of a country where the capitalists haven't interfered with government.
I made no such claim, however you did make yours and now that you've been called out you are desperately trying to deflect. Back your shit up or concede and shut up.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2013, 08:22 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS

Fuck this shit, I give up.

I'm becoming a fucking comedian. That way the government will want to kill me for telling the truth, and I can become a hippie anarchist.

If all else fails, I'm glad I lived in a country where people saw scotch and handguns as "rights", so I'll have the "right" to have a drink and blow my fucking head off.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2013, 09:36 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
"Name one example of a country where the capitalists haven't interfered with government."

Strawman much? No one has argued that capitalists haven't leveraged the guns of the state in their favor. You vilify the capitalists for bribing the people who call themselves government but I wonder, why do you give the latter a free pass? Have they not betrayed you more than the capitalist? After all, the capitalist hasn't stood in front of a podium, begging for your vote and promising your protection in return.

So I'll pass the question right back to you, exactly as you have worded it. And then, I want you to tell me how you can justify handing over your life to sociopaths in suits.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2013, 09:45 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(26-02-2013 06:57 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(26-02-2013 06:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  The state is necessary to rein in the excesses of capitalism.
The problems are with that are "Who decides what is excess?", "How did those people get appointed to determine the what is excessive?", "How do you keep these appointed people honest?". Historically we haven't been so good at answering these questions to the peoples satisfaction.
What we have is better than no restraint. What we have has checks and balances.

If you are waiting for perfect, good luck with that.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2013, 09:46 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(26-02-2013 07:17 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  "The state is necessary to rein in the excesses of capitalism."

Oh, it's you again. How you doing today Ambiguous Assertions Guy? Undecided

Well, Ridiculous Unrealistic Guy, what was ambiguous?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2013, 10:19 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
"excesses of capitalism"




The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2013, 10:28 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(26-02-2013 10:19 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  "excesses of capitalism"





Hmmm, pollution, dangerous products, unsafe workplaces, slave wages just for starters,

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2013, 10:50 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
"Hmmm, pollution, dangerous products, unsafe workplaces, slave wages just for starters,"

The state doesn't protect people from those things. It proscribes behavior and then issues fines after the fact. I don't need the state to write some words on paper in order that I'm able to sue a company that does me harm. What I do need is a system of law courts that isn't rigged in favor of the attorneys who run it and that is affordable for me to access.

Not to mention, the state is the largest single polluter. Who protects us from its pollution? In the case of dangerous products, Underwriters Laboratories protects more people from them than any other organization. It does so by inspecting and approving them before they go to retail. It's voluntary and it's private. The state doesn't protect people from slave labor, it enforces a minimum wage that ensures the poor won't be able to find employment.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: