Politics Liberals and economics

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

so you want to be taxed more and get free shit?
or
you want to keep more of your hard earned money?

I'm confused here...

The government isn't about free shit, unless you mean prison, war, and spying on us. Its only purpose is to keep you guys in power. So you should pay for it. Simple. Only the rich should be taxed, since you're the beneficiaries.
 
So now you're playing the sympathy card, after whining that your imaginary foes are only after "free shit." Make up your mind. Do you want a tough, exploitive world, or one of sympathy, without the 1% complaining that they work harder than the working class?
 
when did health care and education become "free shit" that should be withheld until we feel like people deserve it?

If you were stranded on a desert island alone, would you have those things?

If not, then they aren't any sort of Natural right.
 
We don't need police either. We should just have private security forces (if you can afford it). It could be fun.
 
So now you're playing the sympathy card, after whining that your imaginary foes are only after "free shit." Make up your mind. Do you want a tough, exploitive world, or one of sympathy, without the 1% complaining that they work harder than the working class?
Sympathy? LOL

I'm just calling you out for your idiotic assumptions and jokes. I' sorry my life doesn't fit your narrative of a wealthy trust fund kid.
 
so if its not a "natural right" its deemed "free shit". by your definition only air, sand and seawater are natural rights.

It's free shit if it costs someone (labor) and doesn't cost someone else (free shit).
 
We don't need police either. We should just have private security forces (if you can afford it). It could be fun.
Way to hyperbole the discussion... The ones that want pure anarchy are a small population of the world. Many conservatives understand there needs to be some forms of socialism. What they are against us being completely socialist.
 
Way to hyperbole the discussion... The ones that want pure anarchy are a small population of the world. Many conservatives understand there needs to be some forms of socialism. What they are against us being completely socialist.
I was responding to Denny's natural right comment.
 
So neither are weapons or clothing or tools or food

If you can find those things on the island, who's going to stop you from having them?

And you can find those things.
 
I've asked this before but I'll ask it again..mags will you accept medicare and social security benefits when you are eligible even if it hurts the economy?
 
I am sorry there Cliffy, but I can not understand at all why you made this jump. I think socialism and socialist policies are a disaster and extremely stifling to self motivated people. That
in turn, will harm those that depend on them for opportunity. I don't think there is a kick in the balls anywhere in this idea.
Well, there's a reason charities exist. Donate away until you feel like you're treating your fellow humans with respect.

The unfortunate side effect of things is that welfare breeds dependency which is not at all treating fellow humans with respect.
I get exactly what you are saying Denny, believe me. But I think people as a whole are too quick to label those in genuine need (too often because of corporate greed or indifference) as parasites, and label those who want to help them as Socialists. It's easier than doing the "right" (and usually difficult) thing. Blame the problem on the individual and we absolve ourselves of our moral and societal responsibilities. Stick any label you want on me. I am not a Socialist. And I am reluctant to call myself a Christian because I am too fallible for that lofty perch. But I believe in the teachings of Christ and have no doubt He would be appalled at how little we have learned in His absence. I have never bought into the "I've got mine, now screw you" worldview. Whether I like it or not (and I rarely do) I am my brother's keeper....
 
Way to hyperbole the discussion... The ones that want pure anarchy are a small population of the world. Many conservatives understand there needs to be some forms of socialism. What they are against us being completely socialist.

Way to hyperbole the discussion, Mags.

barfo
 
so infrastructure is a waste of time? Or are there corporations on this island?

Infrastructure doesn't know the difference between a rich and poor person.

I don't advocate anarchy. The right amount of minimal government is fine.

Government's best role is in providing infrastructure like roads or post office or printing money.

Government's worst role is playing robin hood (stealing from the rich to give to the poor).
 
I've asked this before but I'll ask it again..mags will you accept medicare and social security benefits when you are eligible even if it hurts the economy?
I won't, but I don't support forcing other to.
 
I get exactly what you are saying Denny, believe me. But I think people as a whole are too quick to label those in genuine need (too often because of corporate greed or indifference) as parasites, and label those who want to help them as Socialists. It's easier than doing the "right" (and usually difficult) thing. Blame the problem on the individual and we absolve ourselves of our moral and societal responsibilities. Stick any label you want on me. I am not a Socialist. And I am reluctant to call myself a Christian because I am too fallible for that lofty perch. But I believe in the teachings of Christ and have no doubt He would be appalled at how little we have learned in His absence. I have never bought into the "I've got mine, now screw you" worldview. Whether I like it or not (and I rarely do) I am my brother's keeper....

The problem is that the bigger government becomes and the more it takes, the less willing people are to do charity. "I'm paying enough, let the government do it."

The government is just awful at it.
 
Back
Top