Topic: Maximum role of Government? - page 12. (Read 28705 times)

Quote from: ascent on July 13, 2011, 09:37:01 PM

If citizens can overcome a private security company, why can they not overcome a coal plant company?

I think the deafening silence of his answer is testimony to the rhetorical nature of the question. Clearly he tacitly admits the persuasiveness of your logic, and chooses to deflect said admission by insisting on the importance of other statements he has made, which incidentally, are typically devoid of any sound explanation of his ideology.

Firstly, The idiot can't even keep my arguments straight. I never said anything about 'Citizens overcoming a private security company' Second, I've already explained all I intend to.

I don't think you can keep your position straight.

You said in another argument with JA that citizens united (through funding of a defense company) would be more than capable of overcoming a crime organization (which is just a security company whose actions you don't agree with) because even a large, powerful organization with lots of guns cannot match a public body.

You then did a complete 180 degree turn in this thread and claimed that citizens united would never have the power to overcome the influence of a coal burning power company.

So which is it? Do citizens have power over big business or does big business have power over citizens?

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: ascent on July 13, 2011, 09:37:01 PM

If citizens can overcome a private security company, why can they not overcome a coal plant company?

I think the deafening silence of his answer is testimony to the rhetorical nature of the question. Clearly he tacitly admits the persuasiveness of your logic, and chooses to deflect said admission by insisting on the importance of other statements he has made, which incidentally, are typically devoid of any sound explanation of his ideology.

Firstly, The idiot can't even keep my arguments straight. I never said anything about 'Citizens overcoming a private security company' Second, I've already explained all I intend to.

Government model: Pay power company. Pay government to keep power company in line. Pay lobbyist to keep government in line
AnCap model: Pay power company. Pay standards agency to keep power company in line. Other standards agencies keep yours in line via competition.

It's pretty clear which one would be cheaper.

AyeYo

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 103

If citizens can overcome a private security company, why can they not overcome a coal plant company?

I think the deafening silence of his answer is testimony to the rhetorical nature of the question. Clearly he tacitly admits the persuasiveness of your logic, and chooses to deflect said admission by insisting on the importance of other statements he has made, which incidentally, are typically devoid of any sound explanation of his ideology.

I feel like I'm arguing with a preschooler that keeps retorting with, "I know you are, but what am I!?"

ascent

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

If citizens can overcome a private security company, why can they not overcome a coal plant company?

I think the deafening silence of his answer is testimony to the rhetorical nature of the question. Clearly he tacitly admits the persuasiveness of your logic, and chooses to deflect said admission by insisting on the importance of other statements he has made, which incidentally, are typically devoid of any sound explanation of his ideology.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: myrkul on July 13, 2011, 09:10:02 PM

Quote from: AyeYo on July 13, 2011, 09:07:59 PM

Quote from: myrkul on July 13, 2011, 09:10:02 PM

I already told you. If you don't have the reading comprehension, or the math ability to figure out that paying for three services instead of two is more expensive, I can't help you.

LOL

I'll let you figure out why that's such a dumb statement.

You mean you'll finally shut the hell up? Wonders never cease.

I'm going to ask my question again, because it's still not being answered. I'll even repost the explanation from my previous post about how to give a good answer.

Fuck. You lied.

Do you want me to post it again? Ok, I will. Copy/pasta is easy.

I thought you were going to let me figure out why that was a dumb statement? When does that happen, exactly?

AyeYo

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 103

Quote from: AyeYo on July 13, 2011, 09:07:59 PM

Quote from: myrkul on July 13, 2011, 09:07:01 PM

I already told you. If you don't have the reading comprehension, or the math ability to figure out that paying for three services instead of two is more expensive, I can't help you.

LOL

I'll let you figure out why that's such a dumb statement.

You mean you'll finally shut the hell up? Wonders never cease.

I'm going to ask my question again, because it's still not being answered. I'll even repost the explanation from my previous post about how to give a good answer.

Fuck. You lied.

Do you want me to post it again? Ok, I will. Copy/pasta is easy.

What do housing and food have to do with anything? Even if they're relevant, why do housing and food spending prevent them from overcoming the power of a coal plant, but do not prevent them from overcoming the power of a security firm? Do citizens not have to eat and have rooves over their heads if fighting against a security firm?

Here is my question for the third time. I think you quite misunderstand it. Please read it very carefully. We're comparing two separate (yet functionally identical) situtations, one of which you've said will have an opposite outcome of the other. I'd like to know your reasoning for that.

If citizens can overcome a private security company, why can they not overcome a coal plant company?

ascent

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

But not proving that the system we have is any better. (or do you propose a different system entirely? I was never too sure on that.)

The system we have in place is far from perfect. You'll get no argument from me there. However, given the choice between your system, our current system, or a system that goes in the opposite direction as yours, I'd lean towards the latter two. But let's just say I opt to stay with the current system. It would then appear that I am under less pressure to argue the merits of my system than yours. The point being, that in order for you to affect the radical changes you desire, the burden falls upon you to make a cogent case for those changes.

You are being asked to make a compelling argument for the changes you desire, and admitting flaws in your proposed system and choosing not to address them will not work.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: AyeYo on July 13, 2011, 09:07:59 PM

I already told you. If you don't have the reading comprehension, or the math ability to figure out that paying for three services instead of two is more expensive, I can't help you.

LOL

I'll let you figure out why that's such a dumb statement.

You mean you'll finally shut the hell up? Wonders never cease.

I'm going to ask my question again, because it's still not being answered. I'll even repost the explanation from my previous post about how to give a good answer.

Fuck. You lied.

AyeYo

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 103

Quote from: ascent on July 13, 2011, 09:04:54 PM

I already told you. If you don't have the reading comprehension, or the math ability to figure out that paying for three services instead of two is more expensive, I can't help you.

LOL

I'll let you figure out why that's such a dumb statement.

You mean you'll finally shut the hell up? Wonders never cease.

I'm going to ask my question again, because it's still not being answered. I'll even repost the explanation from my previous post about how to give a good answer.

What do housing and food have to do with anything? Even if they're relevant, why do housing and food spending prevent them from overcoming the power of a coal plant, but do not prevent them from overcoming the power of a security firm? Do citizens not have to eat and have rooves over their heads if fighting against a security firm?

Here is my question for the third time. I think you quite misunderstand it. Please read it very carefully. We're comparing two separate (yet functionally identical) situtations, one of which you've said will have an opposite outcome of the other. I'd like to know your reasoning for that.

If citizens can overcome a private security company, why can they not overcome a coal plant company?

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: myrkul on July 13, 2011, 04:57:48 PM

Showing possible flaws in my suggestion does not back up your claims that a monopoly is better. Try harder.

Why should I try harder? Your statement seems to be acknowledging possible flaws in your system already.

But not proving that the system we have is any better. (or do you propose a different system entirely? I was never too sure on that.)

ascent

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

Quote from: myrkul on July 13, 2011, 04:57:48 PM

Showing possible flaws in my suggestion does not back up your claims that a monopoly is better. Try harder.

Why should I try harder? Your statement seems to be acknowledging possible flaws in your system already.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

I already told you. If you don't have the reading comprehension, or the math ability to figure out that paying for three services instead of two is more expensive, I can't help you.

LOL

I'll let you figure out why that's such a dumb statement.

You mean you'll finally shut the hell up? Wonders never cease.

AyeYo

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 103