Pages:
Author

Topic: OccupyLA on 10/1 !! We will be there in Bitcoin Attire! Financial Revolution! - page 2. (Read 7996 times)

newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
Not really. It's more like, "I choose not to steal from or hurt you, and I hope you will afford me the same courtesy."

Or to put it in your terminology, "I won't fuck with you, please don't fuck with me."

Hoping someone won't steal from you and asking them to please not fuck with you doesn't seem to be working out for the bitcoin community very well, so far.
kjj
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1026
What about the freedom to not drink contaminated drinking water, the freedom to not die from easily treatable conditions because you were born to a poor family, the freedom of social mobility through access to a quality education, and the freedom to live a life where you can be reasonably sure you won't starve?

The reason you are not able to say no is because you also benefit from public infrastructure that was created and maintained by tax dollars.  Unless you're saying you would be just as successful as you are now if you had been born to a poor family in Somalia, your arguments for freedom just boil down to a an argument for "fuck everyone who wasn't as lucky as me".

But this is getting way off topic.

These "rights" already exist.  Anyone that wants to is free to find or create their own source of clean water, and to treat their easily treatable medical conditions.  They are also free to pay other people to do those things for them.  But that isn't good enough for you.  What you are really want is the "right" to have men with guns force other people to pay for these things, against their will.

Your arguments just boil down to an argument for "fuck everyone that doesn't have a bunch of armed men backing them up".
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1023
Democracy is the original 51% attack
your arguments for freedom just boil down to a an argument for "fuck everyone who wasn't as lucky as me".


Not really. It's more like, "I choose not to steal from or hurt you, and I hope you will afford me the same courtesy."

Or to put it in your terminology, "I won't fuck with you, please don't fuck with me."

Amazing that it's such a radical position  Roll Eyes

donator
Activity: 798
Merit: 500
I think this whole thread is getting off topic, and I'll be the first to admit I am not helping.
Sorry, maybe we should stick to business more.

If this is a protest, what are you actually protesting? Or is it just a big bitcoin rally?
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
I think this whole thread is getting off topic, and I'll be the first to admit I am not helping.
Sorry, maybe we should stick to business more.
newbie
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
I think it is rather clear for those who spend the time to think about it.

Libertarians are happy to leave other people with the freedom to say "no" I don't want to participate in XX activity.

Statists,  want to take away my freedom to say "no",  I don't want to participate in XX activity.

I'm happy to allow Atlas to do whatever he wants as long as I don't have to participate.

Unfortunately,  Atlas would advocate that force and violence be used against me to compel me participate in whatever government plan he is advocating.

Because of people who share Atlas' world view, I don't have the "freedom" to say "no",  I won't participate with social security,  medicare,  public schools,  socialized medicine, etc.

I think it is clear who is advocating freedom,  and who is advocating compulsion.

Bitcoin tips the balance of power in favor of those who value freedom.
That is why so many libertarian types are attracted to Bitcoin.  (Myself included)
What about the freedom to not drink contaminated drinking water, the freedom to not die from easily treatable conditions because you were born to a poor family, the freedom of social mobility through access to a quality education, and the freedom to live a life where you can be reasonably sure you won't starve?

The reason you are not able to say no is because you also benefit from public infrastructure that was created and maintained by tax dollars.  Unless you're saying you would be just as successful as you are now if you had been born to a poor family in Somalia, your arguments for freedom just boil down to a an argument for "fuck everyone who wasn't as lucky as me".

But this is getting way off topic.
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100

I dont want to play the what if game about something that will never happen. Majority is not going to vote to take 50% of income, if they do then that isnt exactly in line with the implications of our forefathers, ie MF*ing tea party.


Wake up dude. Already happened. Add up corporate + payroll + sales + personal income + property + fees and tariffs + capital gains + inheritance + state + local + all the other taxes and you'll find more than half of the average person's wealth is being stolen by the government. This doesn't even need to include the perpetual inflation tax of money printing, or the multiplying effect that many of these taxes are taken at each stage of production.

It wasn't a "what if" scenario - it was a "why do you love a country that does this to you" scenario.
lol,
The country hasnt done it to us forever, it is a corrupt occupation that is "doing" it.
90 years may seem long to you, but to someone who has studied history their whole life it is a drop in the bucket.
Notice how I mention Forefathers a lot. I understand that there are combinations of taxes that even exceed 50%, but it is still less here because those taxes are everywhere. plus most people or almost no people experience all or most of those taxes. and some of the things you stated are the same tax twice.

What country do you suggest I love if not my own? Do you forfeit your car when it needs a new spark plug??? do you commit suicide when you have a cold? It is a fine country, with a fixable problem.

*also, if it is the country doing it to me, then it is me doing it to myself because I am part of this country, so that statement that the country has done something is pretty hollow.
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1023
Democracy is the original 51% attack

I dont want to play the what if game about something that will never happen. Majority is not going to vote to take 50% of income, if they do then that isnt exactly in line with the implications of our forefathers, ie MF*ing tea party.


Wake up dude. Already happened. Add up corporate + payroll + sales + personal income + property + fees and tariffs + capital gains + inheritance + state + local + all the other taxes and you'll find more than half of the average person's wealth is being stolen by the government. This doesn't even need to include the perpetual inflation tax of money printing, or the multiplying effect that many of these taxes are taken at each stage of production.

It wasn't a "what if" scenario - it was a "why do you love a country that does this to you" scenario.
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
The rules are only necessary to thwart natural tendencies, after that they are restrictive.
Like I said ^^^

Natural tendency is to love your country and fight for it. Thus the person who illegally immigrates here might have patriotic feelings about home and attack their temporary residence,. I.E. Wolrd trade center bombing 1993, or the plenty of other examples.

There is a constitution in this country, if it goes against that then it shouldn't be allowed. And if you disagree with that, then you should go through the trouble of starting your own country, might I suggest Imperializing a neighboring country.

I dont want to play the what if game about something that will never happen. Majority is not going to vote to take 50% of income, if they do then that isnt exactly in line with the implications of our forefathers, ie MF*ing tea party.

Your argument is on its last legs when you get to the what ifs lol.
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1023
Democracy is the original 51% attack

Your "private property" is still still on American soil, so if the general American consensus is we don't want you harboring people from other countries we don't want you keeping more than 50% of your income, we can stop you, it is called a majority in a democracy. There has to be some rules to secure liberty for posterity.


Do you still stand by your statement after my above edit?
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
Im not saying all mexicans at all, it would be retarded to think i implied that. I mean 1% or less to be clear. The average mexican is a hard working, morally strong people. Im talking about groups you probably dont even know about.
And yes if drugs were legal than who cares about the heroin.
But because they are illegal, there are a lot of problems that go along with heroin smuggling.
I understand that the root of the problems lie with the laws themselves. Im not denying that.
Your "private property" is still still on American soil, so if the general American consensus is we don't want you harboring people from other countries, we can stop you, it is called a majority in a democracy. There has to be some rules to secure liberty for posterity.
The rules are really only necessary to thwart destructive human natures, any more than that and they are restrictive.
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1023
Democracy is the original 51% attack

Actually, there are both "positive" and "negative" concepts of liberty.  Negative liberty is the absence of constraints.  Positive liberty is the ability to acquire one's needs and wants.  To guarantee negative liberty, you merely need to not interfere with others.  This is the common libertarian view of liberty.  To guarantee positive liberty, society must often intervene in some manner to alleviate the limitations placed on people for one reason or another.  For example, you can't reach your full potential if you are ill and cannot afford medical care.   I believe that we need to consider both positive and negative concepts of liberty and work as a society to increase both.  However, I don't believe in coercive means of increasing positive liberty as this only decreases negative liberty.  We need to become a more charitable society, but this has to happen at the grassroots level and not be forcibly imposed by a central authority.  Forced wealth redistribution only pisses people off and makes them less charitable and less productive.  It is not the way forward.  For more on positive versus negative liberty, see here: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/


Well said.
hero member
Activity: 726
Merit: 500
I'm not sure how you find my posts to be 'anti-freedom', though?  That just sounds like some like some bullshit you made up.
The definition of freedom is in the eye of the beholder.

Because you have openly challenged a lot of their libertarian views, you are now deemed by 'them' as being an 'enemy' to their 'freedom'. Many other cults display similar tendencies when non believers criticise their beliefs.

A reasonable definition of freedom is: not using coercion, theft, fraud, or violence to advance one's goals. It's unfortunate that advocating such a message elicits the label of "cult."

Seems to me that it might be more reasonable to use the cult label when describing people who worship flags, badges, and the scripture of legislatures as moral truth. Put the average libertarian next to the average police office, soldier, IRS agent, Congressman, or "Supreme Court" justice. Observe their codes of conduct, their rituals, and the the meaning they derive from symbols, authority figures, and protocol. Observe who tells you how to act, dress, speak, and obey. Observe who demands conformity and obedience.

Which side exhibits traits of individualism, and which of collectivism? Which side should more properly be described as the cult?

Actually, there are both "positive" and "negative" concepts of liberty.  Negative liberty is the absence of constraints.  Positive liberty is the ability to acquire one's needs and wants.  To guarantee negative liberty, you merely need to not interfere with others.  This is the common libertarian view of liberty.  To guarantee positive liberty, society must often intervene in some manner to alleviate the limitations placed on people for one reason or another.  For example, you can't reach your full potential if you are ill and cannot afford medical care.   I believe that we need to consider both positive and negative concepts of liberty and work as a society to increase both.  However, I don't believe in coercive means of increasing positive liberty as this only decreases negative liberty.  We need to become a more charitable society, but this has to happen at the grassroots level and not be forcibly imposed by a central authority.  Forced wealth redistribution only pisses people off and makes them less charitable and less productive.  It is not the way forward.  For more on positive versus negative liberty, see here: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty-positive-negative/
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1023
Democracy is the original 51% attack
There are a bunch of groups, and i mean a whole bunch, that use American society everyday to try and progress their cause of destroying america from the inside out. Their are plenty of races that love America and live here already, but the bottom line is mexican activist groups need to be slapped down by the hand of god, or my strap. They openly advocate all sorts of bullshit on our streets, they are illegal criminals from another country, they bring in heroin, arms, meth, prostitution, etc., and when we catch them infultrating our country, we give them a sack lunch and an air conditioned ride back to the start line to try again. Most countries execute on site for that kind of thing.

Anyone who wants something else for this country other than the original purpose, will need to experience some violence to put them in their place, or we can repatriate them to their father land of choice.

Im done ranting, I realized that it is not my job to convince people who cannot be convinced. You cannot teach calculus to someone not capable. It is more likely my job to eliminate enemies of my land, its just kinda scary and difficult these days, and not very many people are actual American's so they wouldnt understand.

So America is your land, is it? All of it? Even that part of the land which is my private property? If I want to hire a Mexican at my private business, or rent him an apartment on my private property, are you going to tell me I can't do so, until he files the right paperwork with your preferred bureaucratic office and gets their permission?

What if he wants to do some heroin with me? Who are you to tell us what we can do with our own bodies? And maybe he has a lady friend who likes selling sex services... what sort of tyrant are you to infringe on her liberties? And here you go ranting about your guns, but you are upset that an immigrant might have a gun? Are you one of those people who thinks private individuals must register their firearms with the government? How very un-Second Amendment of you.

You sound awfully statist, quite frankly. In fact, anyone who really cared about liberty, instead of some silly homogeneous nationalism, might perceive you as the very type of person who is "destroying America from the inside out."

Here's a tip - stop worrying about the Mexicans. Start worrying about the government itself. Don't like Mexicans getting free healthcare? Me neither - but the problem isn't the Mexican, it's the free health care. Don't like that the Mexicans are selling drugs? Me neither, the gas stations should be allowed to sell them - but absurd prohibitionist laws have forced drug sales into a violent underground. Don't like that Mexicans are taking up your school resources? Me neither... how about we end public schools? Or do you support that kind of socialism?

Do you salute the flag, or do you salute liberty? The former gains power only at the expense of the latter... so think hard on this question.
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
He also said i am psycho,
I have spent my whole life here. If you threaten me,  my home, or my country, I might come off as "psycho".
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
Had some guy email me privately because he uses a lot of cock/pussy terminology so he most assuredly didnt want to make himself out as a juvenile here.
He thinks Im racist, lol. I have friends that are black,brown, yellow, everything. If it were SOME englanders doing what SOME mexicans are doing id say kill them too.
Also, I gave him my neighborhood to see if he comes. He
1. assumes i am old lol
2. assumes i am someone who does their talking through the net lol
3. assumes i wont break each finger off and tickle his face with them lol.


oh here is his IP if anyone is with me and gets bored.
Rochester, NY, UNITED STATES or Williamsport, PA 74.43.53.20
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
There are a bunch of groups, and i mean a whole bunch, that use American society everyday to try and progress their cause of destroying america from the inside out. Their are plenty of races that love America and live here already, but the bottom line is mexican activist groups need to be slapped down by the hand of god, or my strap. They openly advocate all sorts of bullshit on our streets, they are illegal criminals from another country, they bring in heroin, arms, meth, prostitution, etc., and when we catch them infultrating our country, we give them a sack lunch and an air conditioned ride back to the start line to try again. Most countries execute on site for that kind of thing.

Anyone who wants something else for this country other than the original purpose, will need to experience some violence to put them in their place, or we can repatriate them to their father land of choice.

Im done ranting, I realized that it is not my job to convince people who cannot be convinced. You cannot teach calculus to someone not capable. It is more likely my job to eliminate enemies of my land, its just kinda scary and difficult these days, and not very many people are actual American's so they wouldnt understand.
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
Yah the thing is,
That we arent going to solve our libertarian country's infection by other groups without some type of violence. If they are not scared to try and fuck us, what would stop them?
legendary
Activity: 1008
Merit: 1023
Democracy is the original 51% attack

THAT IS WHAT I ADVOCATE NOW. Smoke those that oppose, whoever is left wins.


Wow that's the very opposite of libertarian. Hope you're joking.
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
Violence is part of how america was formed, and for situations in this dire of need, our forefathers specifically stated we are to solve the problem through violence against the corrupt.

THAT IS WHAT I ADVOCATE NOW. Smoke those that oppose, whoever is left wins.

Little Mad this morning*
Pages:
Jump to: