Topic: Libertarians Are Sociopaths - page 6. (Read 11738 times)

I'm not saying there will be no violence, but without States coercively funded through taxation, who pays for war?


I'm sorry, are there no starving and uneducated people in this Statist world of ours?


Has the existence of States prevented them from doing so?


People are not perfectly informed by State regulatory agencies today. Why do you think that a monopoly regulatory agency works better than a competitive one?

P.S. I'm pretty sure you know and understand that your system is fundamentally flawed, which is why you feel the need to demonize the caricature of ours.

You guys just keep getting more and more unhinged.

Now I'm to take it there will be no war in your libertopia? The one where people are starving and uneducated because we expected charities to provide for every underpaid, uninsured worker in America when they can't even keep people now from going hungry? Where every business will be socially and environmentally responsible no matter how great they can profit from doing the opposite? Where every consumer will be perfectly informed about everything they buy despite the fact that they have no time to do so now, let alone when they're working 80 hours a week for less than minimum wage.


*note: for the purposes of this discussion, "those who do not see the value in it" and "those who cannot afford it" are apparently exactly the same thing.

Of course, the family that won't be able to afford private education will never be able to afford to have a parent stay home and homeschool their kids. The EVIL EUGENICS FACTORY FUNDED BY COERCION AND MURDER (P.S. FUCK HOMEWORK) looks to be their only choice.

I can't believe you spend so much time arguing with people on the internet. I mean, it's about as stupid as jacking off with a belt around your neck and is waaaay less productive.

You seemingly advocate for everyone owning a gun and protecting themselves in the aforementioned thread.

Your participation didn't help the situation. Care to point out where I advocate for tribal warfare?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/websteading-49179

This retarded thread.

[Citation needed]

Hint: you're attributing positions to me which I do not hold.

In another thread, he was arguing with me and seemed to be all for tribal warfare. It's self governance, after all.

Are you denying tribal warfare in many Sub-Sarah African countries? That's the only assertion I have made. I am asking for any evidence that  representation without taxation" = immoral. I did not make that claim.

You'll probably get further in life if you do your own research to support your conclusions.

I still don't see how "representation without taxation" = immoral. Sub-Sahara African nations are surely war-torn by tribal conflicts. Let's talk about non-extreme areas of Earth, please. Howsabout Northern or Southern African countries? Any examples there where people live peacefully but don't pay taxes to support their country? If not, then on any continent?

I feel I've seen a similar Ted talk. Was it one of these?

http://www.ted.com/talks/ngozi_okonjo_iweala_on_doing_business_in_africa.html

http://www.ted.com/talks/ngozi_okonjo_iweala_on_aid_versus_trade.html

http://www.ted.com/talks/george_ayittey_on_cheetahs_vs_hippos.html

What randomness are you babbling about? I didn't mention a war zone or Hitler.

The lecture I heard basically pointed out that if Bono in particular goes around pointing out how fucked up Aftrica is. And when the only pictures we see are starving, pitiful looking, victimized people. Then, no company is going to want to invest an Africa. Why on earth would they? You expect them to do their own research to find out that things really aren't so bad? When every "expert" in whole world is telling everyone these people can't possibly take care of themselves.

That means the only money flows in through aid. Which is usually given directly to the government. Which is supposed to represent the people. But what good is representing the people, when if you piss off the aid givers, nobody gets anything. So governments help the aid givers feel good about themselves. And they steal whatever they can when their not looking. Who cares! They're not stealing from the people. There're stealing from foreign governments and rich folks like Bono.

The lecture was from a native born African advocate for Africa. She wanted Bono to show the things that were working. And to encourage foreign business to start trading with local business. That way corrupt governments couldn't steal everything before it got to the people. And curiously she advocated Africans paying taxes so they would have a stake in the government.

Yeah, they always use extreme examples like war-zones and Hitler. Gimme a break. Now you compare democracies with places like Somalia. Fail.

I heard a brilliant lecture about this concept and its relationship to African governments and foreign aid. It basically pointed out that many African countries have representative government without taxation. The government and its salaries are paid with foreign aid. As such, the government tends to answer to foreigners rather the people it was supposed to represent.

Whuuuhhhh!?!?

So is representation without taxation, if you think about it.

It worked fine before public funded education took over the religious imperative to educate children.  Still would, if the government would get out of the way.  Public education isn't about education, it's about social indoctrination.  Always has been, and the early proponents were pretty open about that.  They were, predominately, pro-eugenics fascists; before those were "bad".  They honestly believed that the lower classes needed to be 'indoctrinated' and acclimatized to the industrial factory work. 


They can and will, if that is what is left to them.  Some will fail, obviously; or be failed by their parents.  There is nought that public education is going to do to stop such trend, if the US is in long term decline.  For that matter, they have been trying to do exactly that since truancy laws were introduced to the US; and moreso since the Department of Education was established, and have always failed.  Try as they (and you) might, with the best of intentions, you cannot educate those who do not see value in it.  I attended a private school my entire childhood, at great expense to my parents, because of the sorry state of publicly funded education; yet the private schools are still modeled after the public institutions.  They end up that way because of efficiency.  My children are homeschooled, mostly by my wife who has a BS in Biology.  They make me look ignorant.  The major difference is that they don't spend hours each day in educational theater, surrounded by peers who do not wish to participate in the soul-crushing day-prison.  Ever wonder how a well behaved child can be a discipline nightmare at school?  It's often a direct result of the educational environment itself.


Good for you, but don't delude yourself about their education.  Your efforts would be fruitless if not for their own efforts and the desires of their parents.  The average homeschooled child spends only 2-3 hours each day actually working on intentionally educational work.  So if you think about it, the truly successful students who are institutionally educated (public or private) are being homeschooled by their involved parents anyway.  It's just under the direction of the institution.

What "force" are you talking about? Fines? Bankruptcy? If someone makes an honest mistake and fails to pay taxes, they are rarely jailed. Fraud on the other hand hurts people and should be punished severely.

My mom raised me to not use force except in self defense. Not even to raise tax money. Did yours?

Taxation without representation is immoral. In a Representative Republic, we make laws that require taxes for funding in order to keep society progressive. If you don't pay taxes, then you are expecting to live in a society that provides for your safety and health and offer nothing in return. My momma didn't raise me that way. Did yours?