Jump to content

The Best President We Never Had


Castanza
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The correlations in this video are amazing to today.

 

 

Great video, but:  "though shall not steal and though shall not murder. Almost everybody agrees with that".

 

He is vastly overestimating humanity.  Based on voting results and the last 6000 years of human history, almost no one agrees with that.

 

Sure they agree that you shouldn't steal or murder, but it's fine when the government (or king or whatever) does it.  The only problem with Hitler is that he targeted certain groups.  Look at Stalin, he's not demonized and he killed many times more people.  It's ok though, because he was the head of a government and he killed everyone without discrimination.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The correlations in this video are amazing to today.

 

 

Great video, but:  "though shall not steal and though shall not murder. Almost everybody agrees with that".

 

He is vastly overestimating humanity.  Based on voting results and the last 6000 years of human history, almost no one agrees with that.

 

Sure they agree that you shouldn't steal or murder, but it's fine when the government (or king or whatever) does it.  The only problem with Hitler is that he targeted certain groups.  Look at Stalin, he's not demonized and he killed many times more people.  It's ok though, because he was the head of a government and he killed everyone without discrimination.

 

I think what he was getting at was that people know what is wrong regardless if they choose to engage in it. Talking the talk and walking the walk are two different things. But yeah in general I agree with your point of view. I think it should be illegal for politicians to use the work "free" when talking about things like healthcare and education. They should have to say "Tax payer funded" or more blatant "we will take more of your hard earned income." Otherwise it's false advertising. The effect of this would be nothing. But at least it would force them to say their true desires instead of sugar coating it. Your Hitler and Stalin is a good example of legality /= morality yet ideas can often be pushed under that guise as history would show us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The correlations in this video are amazing to today.

 

 

Great video, but:  "though shall not steal and though shall not murder. Almost everybody agrees with that".

 

He is vastly overestimating humanity.  Based on voting results and the last 6000 years of human history, almost no one agrees with that.

 

Sure they agree that you shouldn't steal or murder, but it's fine when the government (or king or whatever) does it.  The only problem with Hitler is that he targeted certain groups.  Look at Stalin, he's not demonized and he killed many times more people.  It's ok though, because he was the head of a government and he killed everyone without discrimination.

 

I think what he was getting at was that people know what is wrong regardless if they choose to engage in it. Talking the talk and walking the walk are two different things. But yeah in general I agree with your point of view. I think it should be illegal for politicians to use the work "free" when talking about things like healthcare and education. They should have to say "Tax payer funded" or more blatant "we will take more of your hard earned income." Otherwise it's false advertising. The effect of this would be nothing. But at least it would force them to say their true desires instead of sugar coating it. Your Hitler and Stalin is a good example of legality /= morality yet ideas can often be pushed under that guise as history would show us.

 

I agree, but I'm not sure how much it would help.  Politicians like Sanders and Warren are blatantly saying that they intend to take more from the rich and people support them.  They are literally telling people that they intend to use the threat of overwhelming force to steal more money from people who have a lot and use it to give other people "free" stuff, and people support them.  Humans are for the most part not moral creatures by any reasonable definition you can come up with.  They are greedy, envious, violent beings who want something for nothing just as long as they don't have to physically get blood on their own hands.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The correlations in this video are amazing to today.

 

 

Great video, but:  "though shall not steal and though shall not murder. Almost everybody agrees with that".

 

He is vastly overestimating humanity.  Based on voting results and the last 6000 years of human history, almost no one agrees with that.

 

Sure they agree that you shouldn't steal or murder, but it's fine when the government (or king or whatever) does it.  The only problem with Hitler is that he targeted certain groups.  Look at Stalin, he's not demonized and he killed many times more people.  It's ok though, because he was the head of a government and he killed everyone without discrimination.

 

I think what he was getting at was that people know what is wrong regardless if they choose to engage in it. Talking the talk and walking the walk are two different things. But yeah in general I agree with your point of view. I think it should be illegal for politicians to use the work "free" when talking about things like healthcare and education. They should have to say "Tax payer funded" or more blatant "we will take more of your hard earned income." Otherwise it's false advertising. The effect of this would be nothing. But at least it would force them to say their true desires instead of sugar coating it. Your Hitler and Stalin is a good example of legality /= morality yet ideas can often be pushed under that guise as history would show us.

 

I agree, but I'm not sure how much it would help.  Politicians like Sanders and Warren are blatantly saying that they intend to take more from the rich and people support them.  They are literally telling people that they intend to use the threat of overwhelming force to steal more money from people who have a lot and use it to give other people "free" stuff, and people support them.  Humans are for the most part not moral creatures by any reasonable definition you can come up with.  They are greedy, envious, violent beings who want something for nothing just as long as they don't have to physically get blood on their own hands.

 

Don't forget De Blasio "Tax the Hell out of em!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The correlations in this video are amazing to today.

 

 

Great video, but:  "though shall not steal and though shall not murder. Almost everybody agrees with that".

 

He is vastly overestimating humanity.  Based on voting results and the last 6000 years of human history, almost no one agrees with that.

 

Sure they agree that you shouldn't steal or murder, but it's fine when the government (or king or whatever) does it.  The only problem with Hitler is that he targeted certain groups.  Look at Stalin, he's not demonized and he killed many times more people.  It's ok though, because he was the head of a government and he killed everyone without discrimination.

 

I think what he was getting at was that people know what is wrong regardless if they choose to engage in it. Talking the talk and walking the walk are two different things. But yeah in general I agree with your point of view. I think it should be illegal for politicians to use the work "free" when talking about things like healthcare and education. They should have to say "Tax payer funded" or more blatant "we will take more of your hard earned income." Otherwise it's false advertising. The effect of this would be nothing. But at least it would force them to say their true desires instead of sugar coating it. Your Hitler and Stalin is a good example of legality /= morality yet ideas can often be pushed under that guise as history would show us.

 

I agree, but I'm not sure how much it would help.  Politicians like Sanders and Warren are blatantly saying that they intend to take more from the rich and people support them.  They are literally telling people that they intend to use the threat of overwhelming force to steal more money from people who have a lot and use it to give other people "free" stuff, and people support them.  Humans are for the most part not moral creatures by any reasonable definition you can come up with.  They are greedy, envious, violent beings who want something for nothing just as long as they don't have to physically get blood on their own hands.

 

Don't forget De Blasio "Tax the Hell out of em!"

 

:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, but I'm not sure how much it would help.  Politicians like Sanders and Warren are blatantly saying that they intend to take more from the rich and people support them.  They are literally telling people that they intend to use the threat of overwhelming force to steal more money from people who have a lot and use it to give other people "free" stuff, and people support them. Humans are for the most part not moral creatures by any reasonable definition you can come up with.  They are greedy, envious, violent beings who want something for nothing just as long as they don't have to physically get blood on their own hands.

 

Threat of overwhelming force? Oh, you mean federal laws which are voted on by democratically-elected representatives and enforced by a pseudo-democratically-elected President.

 

Fine to disagree with someone's policies or plans, but you are mischaracterizing them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, but I'm not sure how much it would help.  Politicians like Sanders and Warren are blatantly saying that they intend to take more from the rich and people support them.  They are literally telling people that they intend to use the threat of overwhelming force to steal more money from people who have a lot and use it to give other people "free" stuff, and people support them. Humans are for the most part not moral creatures by any reasonable definition you can come up with.  They are greedy, envious, violent beings who want something for nothing just as long as they don't have to physically get blood on their own hands.

 

Threat of overwhelming force? Oh, you mean federal laws which are voted on by democratically-elected representatives and enforced by a pseudo-democratically-elected President.

 

Yes.

 

Fine to disagree with someone's policies or plans, but you are mischaracterizing them.

 

Lies we tell ourselves in order to do bad things to get what we want.  If a million people voted to kill you would it not be murder?  If 100 million people vote to steal from you it is still theft.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, but I'm not sure how much it would help.  Politicians like Sanders and Warren are blatantly saying that they intend to take more from the rich and people support them.  They are literally telling people that they intend to use the threat of overwhelming force to steal more money from people who have a lot and use it to give other people "free" stuff, and people support them. Humans are for the most part not moral creatures by any reasonable definition you can come up with.  They are greedy, envious, violent beings who want something for nothing just as long as they don't have to physically get blood on their own hands.

 

Threat of overwhelming force? Oh, you mean federal laws which are voted on by democratically-elected representatives and enforced by a pseudo-democratically-elected President.

 

Fine to disagree with someone's policies or plans, but you are mischaracterizing them.

 

Half of the democratic candidates vowed to use Executive Orders to enact gun control, climate change laws, and wage hikes. You really think they wouldn't use one for healthcare or free college tuition?

 

Elizabeth Warren said she would use EO's to help women of color by punishing companies that don't meet her standards of pay and gender/race diversity.

 

Governments only tools is force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine to disagree with someone's policies or plans, but you are mischaracterizing them.

 

Lies we tell ourselves in order to do bad things to get what we want.  If a million people voted to kill you would it not be murder?  If 100 million people vote to steal from you it is still theft.

 

This is black-and-white thinking and it is why libertarian theory will always fail in reality.

 

We are not talking about murder (and you realize certain states have the death penalty, right?). And we're not even talking about theft. Taxes are part of how this country provides services to its citizens. Some argue it's part of a social contract. Or you can argue that it's not theft because you are aware of it - no job can legally not file taxes. It's not like the IRS is mugging you, unexpectedly. You know what you're signing up for. And we're all free to (1) elect representatives or possibly a President to get rid of taxes, or (2) renounce our citizenship and move to panama.

 

The point is that it isn't black-and-white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine to disagree with someone's policies or plans, but you are mischaracterizing them.

 

Lies we tell ourselves in order to do bad things to get what we want.  If a million people voted to kill you would it not be murder?  If 100 million people vote to steal from you it is still theft.

This is black-and-white thinking and it is why libertarian theory will always fail in reality.

 

We are not talking about murder (and you realize certain states have the death penalty, right?). And we're not even talking about theft. Taxes are part of how this country provides services to its citizens. Some argue it's part of a social contract. Or you can argue that it's not theft because you are aware of it - no job can legally not file taxes. It's not like the IRS is mugging you, unexpectedly. You know what you're signing up for. And we're all free to (1) elect representatives or possibly a President to get rid of taxes, or (2) renounce our citizenship and move to panama.

 

The point is that it isn't black-and-white.

 

Your understanding of libertarian values is quite ignorant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine to disagree with someone's policies or plans, but you are mischaracterizing them.

 

Lies we tell ourselves in order to do bad things to get what we want.  If a million people voted to kill you would it not be murder?  If 100 million people vote to steal from you it is still theft.

 

This is black-and-white thinking and it is why libertarian theory will always fail in reality.

 

We are not talking about murder (and you realize certain states have the death penalty, right?). And we're not even talking about theft. Taxes are part of how this country provides services to its citizens. Some argue it's part of a social contract. Or you can argue that it's not theft because you are aware of it - no job can legally not file taxes. It's not like the IRS is mugging you, unexpectedly. You know what you're signing up for. And we're all free to (1) elect representatives or possibly a President to get rid of taxes, or (2) renounce our citizenship and move to panama.

 

The point is that it isn't black-and-white.

 

I'm against the death penalty.

 

I have to ask you, when the mob forces all businesses in a neighborhood to pay them for "protection" and expects an envelope every week, is that not theft?  How is it different from taxation.  Many have claimed the mafia keeps the streets safer than the police do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is the mafia ultimately accountable to?

 

Who are the police ultimately accountable to?

 

There’s a big difference.

 

The police are the armed enforcers for the gang that steals from me.  No difference I can see. The police are accountable to the government and the government is accountable to no one. If you think the government and its armed enforcers are accountable to you, you are deluding yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taxes are absolute theft. I cant think of one thing the government provides me that I "need". I have private schools(better than public), my own healthcare plan(better than the Obamacare options), shitty roads with potholes and constant traffic, no use for the police as I live in a nice area with reasonable people who are very pro 2nd amendment; so what am I throwing away nearly six figures for? Subsidized utilities?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't realize the US government was taxing every human being on earth. Makes our budget problem even more precarious :D

 

Seriously, and this is a general question, but what is stopping you and everyone else from selling all their US-based assets, quitting their US-based jobs, renouncing their US citizenship, and moving to live the glorious life in a tax-free country?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should read the book: How Shall I Tax Thee by Kristen Tate. Does a good job of highlighting the absurdity of taxes and just how out of control they are.

 

LC what's stopping you from moving to a country that offers all the things you want (free education, free healthcare, increased welfare, etc.)? That is a illogical argument to make and I'm positive you called others out on this forum for making similar arguments regarding your views.

 

Taxation is theft and the constitution clearly outlines the limits and purpose of taxation. It also clearly outlines the limit of the government to continually establish new offices which ultimately steal more of the peoples wealth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taxes are absolute theft. I cant think of one thing the government provides me that I "need". I have private schools(better than public), my own healthcare plan(better than the Obamacare options), shitty roads with potholes and constant traffic, no use for the police as I live in a nice area with reasonable people who are very pro 2nd amendment; so what am I throwing away nearly six figures for? Subsidized utilities?

 

 

I agree, but it isn't even about need.  It doesn't matter.  If someone takes your money against your will, then they gives you something you need, it is still theft.  The taking of what's yours against your will is theft regardless of what happens next.  Some things are simply black and white. Theft and murder are two of those things.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LC what's stopping you from moving to a country that offers all the things you want (free education, free healthcare, increased welfare, etc.)? That is a illogical argument to make and I'm positive you called others out on this forum for making similar arguments regarding your views.

 

It's not an illogical argument, it illustrates my point. I think the only time I've called someone out for a similar argument is when Greg calls me a silver spooned baby (which I appreciate and find humor in, thanks Greg ;)  ), but I think it's a different argument. Maybe if I answer your question it'll be more clear:

 

We don't move to Panama in part because the society and culture of the US is preferable. And part of that society and culture exists because of the taxes we pay. Things like rule of law, reasonable consumer protections, human rights which are protected by a freely elected government, social safety nets... I mean, remember the bumper sticker line "Freedom ain't free?" Well it costs money too, and paying a reasonable amount of taxes for it is much preferable rather than with lives in the middle east.

 

Now since you answered my question with only a question, I'll still answer yours. Even though you haven't provided a response to mine.

 

The reason I'm not moving to to a country with all the things you suggest I want, is because that's not really what I want. I support a baseline standard of services which we generally already have. I think the education and welfare programs we currently have are probably as good as we're going to get. I would support a single payer healthcare system as I think it makes sense. And if someone wants to pay more for better private services or better schooling, they should be able to.

 

I think the US and Canada are generally similar and in fact I have lived in Canada and plan on living there again. Canada falls a little more left-of-center but really not so extreme if you think about it. There are some things I'm not a fan of in Canada but overall I'd be perfectly happy living there.

 

In the US, frankly if we reformed our existing systems of education and healthcare, and simplified and actually enforced our tax code and legal system, I think we'd get the majority of the way there. 

 

I'm generally a moderate in almost all aspects of life (exceptions to sex, drugs, rock-n-roll and of course wine) but this forum and in particular this sub-forum skew so strongly conservative and libertarian that moderate voices are easily portrayed as extreme.

 

Some things the private sector simple do not get right. Just look around for examples. In those cases government services are preferable. And those services cost money. (Just as in other cases government services just don't work and private services are preferable). How to pay for those services is a good question so thanks for the book rec in that respect. But the fact that those services need to be paid for seems relatively obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"and in particular this sub-forum skew so strongly conservative and libertarian that moderate voices are easily portrayed as extreme."

 

Moderate voices????

 

Oh yeah! Unconditional fan boys of Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, AOC and what other crazy (again to use the expression from Stanley Druckenmiller)?

 

Cardboard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"and in particular this sub-forum skew so strongly conservative and libertarian that moderate voices are easily portrayed as extreme."

 

Moderate voices????

 

Oh yeah! Unconditional fan boys of Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, AOC and what other crazy (again to use the expression from Stanley Druckenmiller)?

 

Cardboard

 

A great tool of the extreme left is to paint everyone else as extremists and themselves as the reasonable moderates.  Listen to the Rogan interview with Bernie Sanders and notice how many times he says things like "none of this is extreme" or "most people agree with this", etc...  When you have the press on your side you can get away with this, at least with people who aren't paying much attention.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A great tool of the extreme left is to paint everyone else as extremists and themselves as the reasonable moderates.

Did I paint anyone as an extremist? I said this website skews right/conservative. Do you disagree?

 

And would you be characterizing me as the "extreme left"? I guess that would make you the anarcho-economic reasonable moderate?  ;D

 

notice how many times he says things like "none of this is extreme" or "most people agree with this",

A politician using rhetoric? Color me surprised!

What I don't understand is why you insinuate that only the "extreme left" does this?

 

The exact same language has been used since the days of Jefferson.

 

Hell, turn on a Colgate toothpaste or pet food commercial:

 

"Four out of five dentists/vets agree, so buy my product!"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...