- Joined
- Oct 5, 2009
- Messages
- 10,621
- Reaction score
- 2,104
- Location
- In your dreams...
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
No wonder you oppose libertarianism, if that's what you think it is. Strawman.
Did you just get one of those too?
No wonder you oppose libertarianism, if that's what you think it is. Strawman.
As of yet you haven't expressed any 'point' as you haven't said anything logically valid.
I never made that claim. What assertion, I never made any, I was asking you to explain why Hatuey's statement was wrong. Now you are assigning his statement to me because you couldn't make valid arguments about communism.
Somehow I feel more people died to German fascism though. As if shrugging off 'total deaths' to communism makes a case for looking over capitalism's transgressions in the first place.
Well 'Communism' 'Stalinism' and 'Maosim' are not massacres in any way they're political regimes or ideologies.
I apologize if you don't possess any.
The point is Hatuey's claim about Milton Friedman's influence on massacres across the world is completely unsubstantiated and implicitly ignores the opposing ideologies that influenced the leaders responsible for the most egregious human tragedies in the 20th century.
Correct, I am not making a point, I was wondering what the **** yours was.You asked what's wrong with it and defended it. I replied that there is no evidence for it and is dishonest on it's face. You have continued to evade it while failing to make any point of your own.
Don't worry, do I know them.I won't quote the death totals that resulted from the policies in China and the Soviet Union, I'm sure you know them.
Yes, abusing those nations that eventually went communist, and then continuing to do so.I'm not making a case for ignoring the abuses of capitalism.
Perhaps they arent attributed to, but substantiated by milton.I'm asking which ones Hatuey attributes to Milton Friedman and the Chicago school of economics.
Yeah, no ****. Hatuey never said free-market capitalism was a massacre; this statement is just more of your irrelevant semantics. Do you have a point you're trying to make?
Fascism? It's generally accepted that Stalin and Mao killed far more people than Hitler ever did.Why would an 'opposing ideology' even have to do anything with a discussion on milton friedman? Something tells me it's to deflect flak from the fact that capitalism, imperialism, and fascism are responsible for more death, atrocity, and slavery. By the way. I don't even care about milton friedman.
Conservative Jesus:
Correct, I am not making a point
Something tells me it's to deflect flak from the fact that capitalism, imperialism, and fascism are responsible for more death, atrocity, and slavery.
Why would an 'opposing ideology' even have to do anything with a discussion on milton friedman?
Don't worry, do I know them.
Perhaps they arent attributed to, but substantiated by milton.
Right, and you accuse me of not making sense.How is it irrelevant if you can't form a cogent sentence?
Capitalism, imperialism, and fascism, eh?Something tells me it's to deflect flak from the fact that capitalism, imperialism, and fascism are responsible for more death, atrocity, and slavery.
If Jesus Christ were alive today, would he be a liberal, conservative, or something else? Why?
Conservative Jesus:
actually, the funny thing is, that's actually Liberal Jesus
now if you want a Conservative fellow in the New Testament, then you are looking for the kind of guy noted for being more generous than others, but doing it personally as opposed to waiting on a government program to do it on his behalf. Such a person would have the kind of individual initiative and grit to not only seek out and take on the harder cases, but would likely be the kind of person to be personally very successful, and capable of supporting his private charitable work. He would join with other private individuals to take care of others, and utilize the profit motive where applicable to get them to do so.
Someone like this guy.
Satan bound? Really?I think Christ was beyond profit motive... please don't much it up with your Satan bound ideology.
Satan bound? Really?
This guy is clearly beyond reason, guys. Don't bother arguing with him.
Couldn't tell. Ever hear of Poe's Law?There happened to be a dash of comedy in my post. But please, relax.
Eye of the needle and the rich and all.
Couldn't tell. Ever hear of Poe's Law?
Gladly. No hard feelings.All is well, hang around. we'll get to know eachother.
No wonder you oppose libertarianism, if that's what you think it is. Strawman.
actually, the funny thing is, that's actually Liberal Jesus
now if you want a Conservative fellow in the New Testament, then you are looking for the kind of guy noted for being more generous than others, but doing it personally as opposed to waiting on a government program to do it on his behalf. Such a person would have the kind of individual initiative and grit to not only seek out and take on the harder cases, but would likely be the kind of person to be personally very successful, and capable of supporting his private charitable work. He would join with other private individuals to take care of others, and utilize the profit motive where applicable to get them to do so.
Someone like this guy.
No, it doesn't necessarily do so. Personally, I feel that the global distribution of wealth as it stands today is a tragic thing. And I try to alleviate the problem in my own small way.so the existence of massive poverty next to massive wealth is not justified by right wing Libertarianism?
It also violates God's commandment of Thou shalt not steal.No, it doesn't necessarily do so. Personally, I feel that the global distribution of wealth as it stands today is a tragic thing. And I try to alleviate the problem in my own small way.
But I cannot take from wealthy people who've earned their money honestly in order to fund a War on Poverty. It violates the non-aggression principle. :shrug:
It also violates God's commandment of Thou shalt not steal.
Please. Lets try and stay in the realm of intellectual honesty. Taxes afe not theft.
I agree 100%, Lizzie, except for the last part, your government actually is holding you at gunpoint, in every sense of the word.If taxation were applied to benefit each citizen equitably, your point might be valid. As it stands, taxation does not benefit everyone to the same extent. Taxation should pay common expenses of the governed (defense, education, commerce regulation, and other common benefits of government). The taxation system that we currently have takes from one for the benefit of another. That is theft, it's just that the government is taking the money from me to give to another rather than the other holding me at gunpoint.