[split] Frankie goes to Obamaworld (again)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-12-2013, 09:56 AM
RE: [split] Frankie goes to Obamaworld (again)
(19-12-2013 09:32 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(19-12-2013 09:01 AM)frankksj Wrote:  you

Who are you talking to?

It cannot be shallwechat71, who made one post, and thus cannot "keep" "repeatedly" doing anything.

Is this one of those things where you can't tell people apart again?

No, it's one of those problems where you cannot understand English again. I have explained it VERY clearly. There are 2 distinct, separate groups. Ask a simple question:


Does one person or group have the right to use force to coerce another person or group into doing something against their will? YES OR NO.


All the YES's are on one side of the debate, all the NO's on the other side. Those are 2 very distinct groups, with really no middle ground or gray area, and they will have 2 radically different world views. The YES's see the role of government as using to force to coerce the minority into complying with the will of the majority, namely democracy, and probably 95% fall into this category. The NO's see the role of government as stopping everybody from using force against another, thus defending minorities from the tyranny of the majority, namely a republic.

I'm one of the small minority of classic liberals who is in the 'NO' side. When one of 'YOU' advocate initiating force, and I'm trying to explain why I think my 'NO' side is better, I will sometimes refer to 'YOU' to refer to the 95% who are on the YES side. I've explained this many times, you don't seem to get it. You balk at suggesting there's such a clear, distinct line. But, repeatedly I've challenged to identify one single issue we disagree on that does NOT boil down to initiating force, and you've never been able to come up with one. Perhaps to avoid confusion, instead of just 'you' I should say 'you coercionists'. Would that make it clearer for 'you coercionists' to understand?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2013, 05:58 PM (This post was last modified: 20-12-2013 06:11 PM by sporehux.)
RE: [split] Frankie goes to Obamaworld (again)
So where does this $3 million dollars per person come from without printing more money.
Your logic is biased toward the conclusion you have postulated.

This pidgeon holing your trying to do with "force or don't force" is nonsensical.

If people, community as a whole vote that incest is wrong it should be forcibly discouraged.
Homos don't create mutant offspring and so there is no reason to force them to stop being gay.

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2013, 06:26 PM
RE: [split] Frankie goes to Obamaworld (again)
(20-12-2013 05:58 PM)sporehux Wrote:  So where does this $3 million dollars per person come from without printing more money.

So, in your mind, the ONLY way to get money is to counterfeit (print) it? Say somebody could invest $500/month in companies (stocks), which the companies use to build factories and invent products so that the investment grows and eventually becomes worth $3 million. That concept is SOO foreign to you that you assume if somebody gets $3 million they MUST have gotten it by printing it? Perhaps you should consult with a financial planner. If you put $500/month into an investment, and you get the historical average annual return of around 7%, you WILL have millions in your investment account when you retire WITHOUT having to counterfeit. Imagine that!

(20-12-2013 05:58 PM)sporehux Wrote:  Your logic is biased toward the conclusion you have postulated.

It's not my logic. Open a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, choose insert function, and there's a built-in called 'future value of money' (FV), which produces the same values I did. Calculating FV and ROI is not MY logic. It's pretty common sense.

(20-12-2013 05:58 PM)sporehux Wrote:  This pidgeon holing your trying to do with "force or don't force" is nonsensical.

Says the one using force. If someone pulled a gun on you in a back alley, would it be 'nonsensical' to differentiate between the one initiating force vs. the one being subjected to it? Only the guy with the gun sees the distinction to be nonsensical.

(20-12-2013 05:58 PM)sporehux Wrote:  If people, community as a whole vote that incest is wrong it should be forcibly discouraged. Homos don't create mutant offspring and so there is no reason to force them to stop being gay.

Uh, in case you didn't notice, during the last 2012 Presidential election, only 1 of the candidates opposed a ban on gay marriage, and it was the homophobic, right-wing, Christian conservative libertarian Ron Paul. Even Obama was still opposed to gay marriage, and don't forget Clinton passed DADT.

When you claim the moral high ground and look down with condemnation at how the right-wing Republicans who are so intolerant and still want to see gays oppressed, remember that this is how Libertarians looked at the Democrats just a few years ago when they were on the same side of the issue as Republicans. So when you see the right-wing's position on gays, remember it's just a time-shift mirror showing what the left looked like not very long ago. And if you had a mirror to look forward in time, I'm sure in the future lots of the oppressive things the left is doing today will similarly be seen with contempt.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2013, 07:02 PM
RE: [split] Frankie goes to Obamaworld (again)
The point is, you are taking a grey dynamic area and are painting it black and white along with colors of past sins and future enlightenment.

And you sill haven't accounted for that 3 million per person, investments and share prices don't increase by woo power.

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2013, 07:35 PM
RE: [split] Frankie goes to Obamaworld (again)
(20-12-2013 07:02 PM)sporehux Wrote:  The point is, you are taking a grey dynamic area and are painting it black and white along with colors of past sins and future enlightenment.

No, it's not a gray area. I've yet to meet one person who is not squarely on one side of the issue or the other. The issue is:

Does one person or group have the right to initiate force against another?

That's a yes or no question. Non-libertarians well try to claim it's a gray area by saying 'well it depends on the circumstances'. If the goal is to get someone to do 'x', then yes it's ok to use force. But if the goal is to get someone to do 'y', then no it's not ok. However, that answer simply reaffirms that they do believe they have the right to initiate force, they just choose not to initiate it on every issue. If they genuinely believed that no human had the right to use force against another, they could never say it's ok in some circumstances. If you don't have the right to do something, it's not okay under ANY circumstances. Besides, this whole thing is really silly because when you ask the non-libertarians WHO decides what is and is not an acceptable situation to initiate force, the answer always comes back to 'it's at the discretion of the party that's initiating the force', meaning of course they do believe humans have the right to use force against other humans to coerce them into doing something.

Remember cjlr kept saying it wasn't a black and white issue, and I challenged him repeatedly to name one issue he disagreed with libertarians on that did NOT boil down to an obvious, black & white case of him wanting to use force or threats of violence against others. He was never able to. Can you think of one? If not this talk of it being a gray issue is just a silly distraction.

(20-12-2013 07:02 PM)sporehux Wrote:  And you sill haven't accounted for that 3 million per person, investments and share prices don't increase by woo power.

I don't even know what you're saying. In your last post you said that if somebody invested $500/month in the stock market and after 40 years he had $3 million in his investment account he must have printed the money, since you couldn't believe investments actually compound like that. Now, you're talking about 'woo power'??? Dude, this isn't a big mystery. Investing works. Ask Warren Buffet if he got his $50 billion by saving and investing, or by printing money or 'woo power'.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2013, 07:49 PM
RE: [split] Frankie goes to Obamaworld (again)
Frank, do you think the free market needs a moral system in order not to take advantage of the poor? can the free market mixed with poor ethics create a dystopia of sorts? how would you tackle it if it was the case?

“The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is because vampires are allergic to bullshit.” ― Richard Pryor
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: