# Violence

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Michael, Feb 24, 2012.

1. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
20,285
So why don't all the Statists move there and tell each other what you can and can not do? Why is it that the people who want to live with their personal Liberty in virtue and in peace, are the ones that are forced to leave? That doesn't make sense. We're the ones advocating personal responsibility and productivity. The nation was founded on these principals. Limited government and personal liberty.

Groups of free individuals can do ANYTHING the government can do - except initiate force against the Citizen. Schools, hospitals, roads, telecommunications, television, etc...

Just think, in Communist and other Statist societies the television shows are produced by the State and ONLY by the STATE. They're convinced that only the State should (and could) provide this service. And, to some degree, they right. Our populations are pretty ignorant while we're "free" and theirs are simply propagandized against - and so ignorant in another way.

So? What's the solution? More State regulation? Did you know in Australia a "Morning Show" was recently rebuked and threatened with a fine for breaking the regulation on how many climate skeptics can be interviewed. Because some bureaucrat somewhere decided there a certain amount and when that's reached - then no more. Yet, Australia is "free". Yeah, right. And the government passed the Carbon Tax which so far has only seen increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Now, I happen to think that yes, CO2 is something we should be concerned with. Sadly, the general public has been so dumbed down by the Public State run "Education" System most don't even know what carbon dioxide even is - let alone they exhale it!

See, this is the knock-on effect of Statism - ignorance. Instead of an educated virtuous society you end up with ignorant thieves more than happy to steal from their kids tomorrow if it means they get something for themselves today. Why do you think Communist and Socialist countries always go to shit? Why? Because you can only get so much milk out of your Domestic Cattle. Then you have to start importing International Cattle (this is the phase AU is in). Then that reaches it's limit - and then society goes to shit.

Last edited: Mar 6, 2012

3. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
I never said EVERY State system is JUST Michael.

So bringing up the Dictatorial State of China in this discussion is pointless.

Maybe because you have never explained convincingly of how your supposed system would be better Michael.

When the Lion Tamer can't get the Lions to jump through the hoops, we don't beat the Lions, we get a better Lion Tamer.

See, right there you make no sense.
You haven't convinced anyone that paying taxes is a form of VIOLENCE.

Indeed, every interaction I've ever had with the Government has been calm and peaceful and they've been there for me a number of times at no cost.

Again you fail.
And I own my house, land it sits on, the furnishings in it along with two cars and a nice boat.
I pay what I consider a fair amount of taxes and based on the condition of the Roads, Schools, Sanitation, Water Supply, Hospitals, Police, Fire, mail delivery along with the reliable food supply, energy supply, phones, internet and TV I've got no reason to complain that my taxes are wasted.

You can spout that BS all you want, you just can't sell it Michael.
I want good roads, schools, police, fire, etc etc and I am willing to pay for it, so no I don't consider it stealing. Since I make more than the average, I don't mind paying more either.

And on top of that, I donate quite a bit as well to help in the areas the government doesn't quite get to.

5. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
You, and your RP supporters, are clearly in the minority.
Maybe you need to get a bunch of other RP supporters, buy some island somewhere and create your own country where you will be happy and then you, as free people, can build and maintain your own schools, hospitals, roads, telecommunications, television, etc...

Of course you've NEVER explained how such a system would work without a Government and without taking in taxes.

But hey, it's your island somewhere, knock yourself out.

7. ### spidergoatLiddle' Dick TaterValued Senior Member

Messages:
53,966
So you want a government, just one that is stripped from any real power of enforcement. You want an voluntary conglomeration of well meaning but ultimately impotent individuals that you can easily ignore so you can do your own thing.

8. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
20,285
One more time.

ANY group of humans can provide the services the government provides. Why are you guys failing to understand this? The ONLY thing the government can do is initiate force against a Citizen. That's it.

So, roads, hospitals, schools, libraries, telecommunications, television, internet, ect..... is all available to be provided to us by companies. IF there's honest competition then we will get an affordable service at a cheap price.

What's so hard to get?

The government just bailed out the banks to the tune of TRILLIONS that you and your children and your children's children will be paying for - for decades. Do you not see the massive wars being waged and lost all over the f*cking planet? Look at Vietnam - I'm pretty sure most people now understand that was a bunch of bullshit. A million Vietnamese died and many millions more were poisoned and are still dying. How do you think that was payed for? Income tax. That's what Income Tax was designed to do - pay for war. In times of war an Income Tax is initiated and that's how it's paid for.

Secondly, why on the Goddesses' green Earth would you support a Central Bank that steals from you? Why? I really don't know what to say? Are you happy being a Debt Slave? Are you scared of individual responsibility? Well? Are you? You SAY you're worried about Big Corporations taking over? HELLO! Wake up, they've taken over. Jesus H Christ! The government just bailed out the big boys and left YOU with the bill. You really think they give two shits about you? Well I hate to break it to you but no, they don't. You're Cattle to them. To be milked.

Again, when the government sells a Bond to China (who owns 1.2 Trillion) so they can provide you with the "services" you just listed you like having - just what the F*ck do you think they sold to pay for that "service"? Huh? It's YOU, your labor. You childrens' labor. With interest. Maybe you think that's a good thing, I know I don't. It's immoral to sell your child's labor. Your child's future.

That is stealing - it is immoral.

Lastly, Arthur, try NOT paying your income tax bill - refuse to pay. Then you'll see what's meant by the statement that the Government can legally initiate force against you. Steve Jobs? Nope. But some brain dead bureaucrat whose daddy bought him a job in the Federal Government can send you to prison.

Lastly, what if we had different types of currencies? What if the State offered a currency? That's what they did in Europe (and many still do). That's probably what will happen in the case of Greece - if they don't want to become German Debt Slaves. Japan has it's own currency. Canada does. We can do business pretty well between ourselves. So? Why not MI has it's own currency? That'd at least be a start. Don't you want to be a little free? Why do you want to be tied to the USD? I personally moved a LOT of currency out of USD and into other currencies years ago and thank the Gods I did. If I moved it back again today it's be worth more than twice as much. Currency carry trading isn't my thing, I'm a medical researcher. That's my "thing". I teach as well. So, it's not like I'm a banker looking for a new way to make a buck. I'm telling you from experience YOU are trapped inside a currency and you are a Slave to the Federal Reserve. You're loosing your wealth being trapped in the USD. You get up, work all day all night to get a bit of USD. Paper. They just print it off and give it to their friends - and you lay down and take it.

I don't know what to say about that.

Income Tax is taking your private property - your labor and your money. It's a force directed against you. Whether you support it or not, you must acknowledge that logically that is immoral. Worse still, your money is inflated away. That's twice you're stolen from. And you wonder why you can never get ahead? Well, you're being stolen from day in and day out.

The rich will continue to get richer and the middle class will continue to get poorer (relatively Arthur, if that makes you feel better).

Last edited: Mar 7, 2012
9. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
You, and your RP supporters, are clearly in the minority.
Maybe you need to get a bunch of other RP supporters, buy some island somewhere and create your own country where you will be happy and then you, as free people, can build and maintain your own schools, hospitals, roads, telecommunications, television, etc...

Of course you've NEVER explained how such a system would work without a Government and without taking in taxes.

(oh and the banks were NOT bailed out with Trillions, it was billions, and it has all been paid back. The only TARP money outstanding is to an INSURANCE company, AIG and the Car Companies, do try to keep up (and AIG is on the way to paying back what it was loaned)

Last edited: Mar 7, 2012
10. ### AsguardKiss my dark sideValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,049
This is a load of bunkum, the society CHOSES to DEMAND these services from there government because we know that companies are a bunch of blood sucking paracites who care about making MONEY not patient care. Hense why the US has the worst health care of any developed nation. You are in the minority, and if you dont like that move to a desert island or africa and make your own society where you can suck the blood out of everyone who needs help. The rest of us will continue to demand high quality services from government who are the best at providing them.

11. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
20,285
This isn't the RP page. This is the: Is initiation of force against another human moral? page.

So, we needn't worry about pragmatic arguments as they are never resolved. The Chinese have a pragmatic argument for why Tibet is now China - they need the land. One could argue Tibetans never had life better then under the thumb of the Chinese. So long as they shut up and suck it up they get to stay out of prison and live under the auspices of The Party.

According to your logic, the fact they get a road more than makes up for their lost of Land and Liberty. I mean, they do get the road - and the bonus Han Bureaucrat ensuring it's proper use.

Oh, and if they don't like it, Asguard suggest they move to India and beg on the Street. How sweet of you guys. Such caring souls.

12. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
20,285
First of all, Steve Jobs liked to make money and you got a cheap super computer for $300. So, that argument doesn't hold water. The ONLY way you can make money is by meeting the demands of people. Unless you're the government - then you can puke up any old service and the public is forced to accept it. I can tell you now the services I've receive in AU are way more expensive and much less than those I received in the USA. Take the drivers licence. In AU it's$150 for 3 years. In MI it's $12 for 5 years. Same "service" provided. Explain that. They're the same service. Why are you being milked out of an extra$145 in AU for the same "service"?

Secondly, medicine is not a free market - it's a State run racket. In AU they use the medical technology made in Japan, the USA and Germany. Most medical technology you find in the Hospital in AU has NOT been provided for by the AU government - it has been purchased by the government, who bought it from a private company. Do you understand that? It's NOT produced by the AU government - because the government sucks at producing an actual medical service (like an MRI). What they are good at is taxing us. They tax and buy it from a company (probably a friend of a friend is the distributor) .... and then they're still not efficient or cost effective at even THAT. Which is why so many Australian suggest getting private health insurance. Regardless, it's MUCH cheaper and better in Japan. Hell, have you been to a GP in AU? They're a joke. Which means, at some level, government or no government its' down to the INDIVIDUAL to "practice" medicine appropriately. Sadly, medicine has become such a big money maker, that's the main reason people go into it. I already told you about the neurosurgeon who turns away patients that don't net him enough profit - he simply says he's not competent. Done. Only takes the big money makers like public service employees - where he can really suck the money out of the system. He drives a convertible Ferrari. Yes, he's an Australian.

The government cares and companies don't?
OK, so, why is ALL of the medical equipment NOT produced by the government. Come on. Tell me why.

Also, notice: When you say "The Governement cares...." Just what are you saying? The government is not a person. "IT" can't have feelings. You really think people go to work for the government specifically because "they care"? Get real. Try pay and benefits. Even nurses now-a-days are in medicine for a job. Most just want a stable job. You think bureaucratic "care" more than someone who had an idea on how to make an MRI used in medicine? Give me a break. I don't think you really believe that. I think you like the idea of "The Government" looking out for you because it makes you feel better. Just like people like the idea "God" will punish the wicked in the next life - because it makes them feel better.

Last edited: Mar 7, 2012
13. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
It's a HUGE difference Michael.

In fact it sinks your whole argument.

As long as the poor and middle class move upward relative to where they were the system is working reasonably well.

Unless you have a problem with individuals accumulating a lot of wealth as a strong incentive to innovate.

Do you?

Because if you do, then clearly you think programs like the X prizes shouldn't work.

But they do.

http://www.xprize.org/

Last edited: Mar 7, 2012
14. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
Because this is simply a FEE loaded tax structure.

You know, what you have been advocating.

15. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
Businesses make medical equipment in order to make money.

The government doesn't make medical equipment because it's not a business.

Duh.

16. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
Never said you couldn't go to jail for not paying your income tax, but so?

Getting arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced to spend time in a cell is not violence and force is only used if you resist.

In any case, since you are convinced you are right and have yet to listen to a single explanation of why you aren't, and continue to spout the same set of misinformation, I'll leave you with this little piece from Wiki about you and your Tax adverse buds:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tax_protester

17. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
Re; AIG as the major financial institution left that owes back TARP funds and the BS that MBS are worthless:

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is done offloading the billions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities it took on in return for a hefty loan to American International Group in September 2008.

Tuesday afternoon the central bank said it sold assets with a face value of $6 billion to Credit Suisse in a competitive process ... The New York Fed touted the$2.8 billion net gain that will be delivered to U.S. taxpayers.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevesc...ng-aig-bailout-portfolio-touts-2-8b-net-gain/

And another 6 Billion

http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveschaefer/2012/03/05/aig-to-pare-stake-in-aia-to-repay-uncle-sam/

And with the stock trading at over $30, the Treasury is in the black as far as it's equity stake in AIG is concerned (they will have to sell off over time to avoid driving the stock price down though) 18. ### PsycheRegistered Senior Member Messages: 135 Your initial claim was that statism is not enforced through violence. I proposed a simple test for this assertion and your response was to evade the point. I have no reason but to assume that this is a concession on your part. Not only have you recognized that the state is enforced through violence by refusing give me a straight answer, but you have implicitly suggested that you approve of the use of violence against me. Would you like to clarify this stance? That is only if you do not factor in what is not represented in the graphs... In a society raised and educated by abusers, the first order of business of the ruling class is too make sure that by the time anybody reaches maturity they are made to be incapable of seeing the abuse. Thus the abusers define for you what is a crime and what is not a crime. Ergo; theft of the ruling class is called taxation, it's kidnappings are called arrests, it's forced indoctrination of the young is called education, and beatings of parents on their young are called discipline etc. For this reason most people are incapable of seeing the violence of the state. In evolutionary terms it is a good survival strategy to edit the violence of rulers out of consciousness as those children who point it out are likely to be killed, abandoned, or in modern times drugged into compliance. So stastics like this will always mislead people to believe that government is there to protect them and not to prey on them. However, if we think about crime statistics objectively than arrests for non-violent crimes in comparison to the crimes committed by the government through taxation we can see that the rule of law, where it really counts, is indeed tilted on a ninety degree axis. This isn't to say that all people who are employed by the government are deranged or bad. There are many careers where you can't have any chance of success or of making a positive impact on the life of others unless you do it through compliance with government. But that doesn't change the fact that government jobs are funded through theft. It is the nature of the society we were born into. A society where the police and military are the physical abusers and the media and the politicians are the verbal abusers. Together, they successfully prevent most people from ever thinking clearly about the world, keeping them trapped in a projected fantasy so that they never have to confront what goes unexamined in their unconscious. So long as you allow abusers to define criminal behavior for you your experience of reality will be fundamentally corrupted. First you said that I created the government. Then you backtracked and admitted that it has nothing to do with me. Now you are saying that I own it. Which is it? None of which would be a problem if they prosecuted crime consistently (see above). Of course, if they did that they would have to throw themselves in jail. I do not own strangers with guns. I own myself. Do you have any documented evidence that I own the government? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You are merely assuming the validity of your position on faith. Using circular logic. The fact that I exist does not entitle any other human being to abuse me even if they think that it does because I live in proximity to them. I know that government is an abuser because it refuses to use peaceful non-aggressive policies to interact with me. No. It is not the responsibility of the abused person to leave a given area if he is being abused. His first order of business is to point out the hypocrisy and immorality of his abusers. You just want me to go away or shut up. Again, assuming the validity of your beliefs on faith without offering justification. Your position boils down to "because I said so." No child is obligated to obey abusers just because he happened to be born in the same area as them. The fact that abusers believe that they have the right to force their ridiculous superstitions onto him does not mean that they actually have that right. But adoucette. You are the one who wants to have the beliefs of your tribe forced on me. It's not the other way around. I just want to be left in peace. So in that sense it is about me. I spent thirteen years being abused by teachers and peers in state schools. What justification do I have to say it was abuse? Well, I was forced to be their and didn't want to be. And forced relationships are abusive relationships. My parents were raised and indoctrinated by the state as well, and so was everyone who stood by and did nothing. There was no escape. I'm standing up for the child I once was who had no voice at the time to point out the immorality and hypocrisy of the people calling themselves government. I am under no obligation to obey abusers, or consider them legitimate. I have found that the non-aggression principle is vastly superior to central planning as a solution to the problem of ethics and of social organization. So that is what I advocate. Libertarians with far better education and know how than I have tried and failed spectacularly over the years to reduce the size of government. And if the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, than to try to use the state to reduce the state is a form of spiritual suicide. Personally, I strive not to be insane (though admittedly I have a lot of work ahead of me Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ) Like print my own currency? http://sovereignthink.wordpress.com...-federal-competition-silver-death-sentencing/ Your assertion was that "we create the government. we can change it.". I refuted this by pointing out that I never created any governments, and used first person terminology to point out the insanity of using "we" to refer to the activity of strangers with guns as if I'm somehow part of their group. Your rebuttals were little more than limp wrist-ed platitudes. The videos are salutary. For anyone who might be intrigued by some of the stuff I say but turned off by others. If they are so inclined I like to link to videos that explain the perspective of liberty in a way I cannot given my mind has so much healing and growth to go through before it is liberated or even sane. The reason I'm debating you because you are a very smart and well educated person with the opposite beliefs of me. It helps me to refine my understanding to put it to the test. If left to my own devices I tend to become an echo chamber to myself and I lose the plot. I'm not ready to associate with like minded people because I'm figuring out what my own mind is. And I can't really do that if I surround myself with people who agree with me. This isn't sufficient to address the point of this thread which is does government equal violence or not? It is sufficient to my purposes to demonstrate instances of violence perpetrated by government. Regardless of any context with regards to it's virtue and necessity. And although from my perspective these two threads are mutually exclusive, from yours that is not necessarily the case. Keep in mind however that the primary discussion is about violence. The secondary one is about virtue and necessity. Another admission that government is violence, and another apology for the abuser, saying it is my responsibility to change. It is not. it is only my responsibility to point out the immorality and hypocrisy of the abuser. You act as though your position is not subject to falsifiability. Any time I falsify your statements you simply divert attention elsewhere. This is dishonest. Well, I thank you then. Perhaps we are making progress. You don't seem to be able to process any of the arguments I'm putting forth. Also, you are acting as though your beliefs are not subject to rational scrutiny. That even from a theoretical standpoint, there is nothing that could be said that would falsify them. Is this a fair diagnosis? I'm sorry, but all I'm getting on this end is condescension, not argument. This is just more verbal abuse backed up with no argument. Proximity to an abuser is not sufficient cause for moral or legal obligation to obey them. The "people" don't decide anything. They have been trained not to be able to think, and hence they are intellectually defenseless against the predations of the government. More verbal abuse. If I did that I would be giving moral sanction to abusers. I'd be saying that they have every right to behave as they behave. They do not. Glad to know. The next time a police officer attempts to talk to me I will just keep walking. He's not an abuser after all. He will understand that I'm free to move as I please. "Get lost" is the last refuge of a man who has no argument. See above. Just because the vast majority of Christians disagree with atheism does not mean that Christianity is the default rational and consistent perspective that every one should defer to or exile themselves. I already explained that belief in the state is distributed at exactly the ratio one would expect given that most everyone is processed through it's education camps. I certainly never consented to going. I am arguing from first principles. You are arguing from the bully pulpit. The people who set up the government have been dead for hundreds of years. No dead person could set up any contract that is binding on the unborn in perpetuity. Besides. Rules are made for the ruled, not for the rulers. I'd have no problem with rules so long as they apply equally to everyone. As far as the states "rules" go, they are arbitrary commandments backed up with death threats. Not worthy of respect or of the label "rules". Last edited: Mar 9, 2012 19. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member Messages: 20,285 When you hear the big POPPing sound of the 1 Trillion dollar Student Debt Bubble followed by an enormous POP as the Bond Bubble explodes - think of that as a "I told you so" Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Secondly, it's not the responsibility of the government to centrally plan our economy, and the more they interfere, the worse things are going to be in the end. As it stands now, they're just sacrificing the baby-boomers. Oh well, maybe they deserve it for their insolence and stupidity? Along with their grandkids future production. Again, using Mary's income tax (which was immoral to begin with) to prop up John's gambling habit via the Banking cartel is not moral. Inflating her savings is stealing and is also immoral. I understand you don't agree stealing is immoral, why I'm not sure, but I assure you it most certainly is immoral. Lastly, this thread is about the morality of initiating force against a Citizen. I stand by my statement it is immoral. It doesn't matter if "it's for the greater good" in YOUR opinion (or Asguard's, spidergoat's, Tiassa's or iceaura's for that matter). Majority opinion doesn't change the fact that initiation force against a person and taking what is theirs' is indeed immoral. Slavery was immoral then as much as it is now - even if only a handful of people understood that. A group of men on an island suddenly decide to rape a female that washed ashore - are acting immorally. Once you understand that initiation of force against an innocent person IS immoral, then you can clearly see these various actions for what they truly are. Example: Farmer owns some land, raises a crop. You come along and forcefully take a portion of this produce. That is stealing. The is immoral. Worse still, you pour salt in the punch to the nose by inflating his currency. Doubly immoral. The ONLY argument I've even heard is the pragmatic argument: AKA; you were born into this society, so, you have to do your part - whether you want to or not - because we think it's for the greater good! Example: Man owns a cotton plantation and several African Slaves. You say it's for the good of the nation we keep them working as slaves. We need the cotton for clothing. People will go without, freeze and die. I say, why don't you come up with a system where you get your cotton picked without the need for slavery? On a purely voluntary bases. You say: That thars crazy talkin Michael! Did you know 90% of US children are scolded and/or beaten at some point in their childhood history? One wonders why Citizens can't understand the difference between voluntary peaceful actions and involuntary forced action? Maybe it has to do with the violence perpetrated on them as children? Me, I was never spanked, not one time - ever. I was always spoken to rationally and reasoned with. It seemed natural for my mother to speak with me like this. While my parents did divorce, my mother was never once violent towards me. Perhaps this is why I can clearly see the immorality of initiation of force whereas others can not? Maybe your brains' are wired incorrectly? I'm not sure? I do know that as soon as you initiation violence, you've lost the moral high ground and moreover, you've lost the rational argument. You decided, I'm going to take it. Done. This is IMO no way to organize human interactions. Last edited: Mar 10, 2012 20. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member Messages: 7,829 No concession because your idea of a test required me to break the law. Sorry, I'm not going to get a ticket to prove your ideas are silly. Of course, thinking about it, there are many televised cases of this test available and the police don't use violence even when the person flees. In most cases the police follow until they can be pulled over and then the driver is simply arrested and taken to jail. Of course again none of this is true. The highest income earners pay by far the most tax. The bottom quintile of income earners get money from the tax system. Arrests are of course not the same as kidnapping since we have Habeus Corpus and bail. There is no state forced indoctrination of the young as both home and private schooling is allowed, so one doesn't need to go to a public school. If you went to a public school and consider that abuse because you didn't want to be there, that was your parent's decision to impose that on you, not the states. And while the state allows parents to determine the method of upbringing of their children, they don't encourage abuse and not all parents spank their young, and indeed, if abuse is suspected then the state can and will get involved to stop it. 0 for 4, got any other arguments you want to trot out to be shot down? Nah, taxation isn't violence as has been pointed out. Schooling is up to the parents, Arrests are predominately for violence against others or for stealing property, and the state doesn't willingly allow you to abuse your kids, so NO, none of those should show up in the crime stats. You just don't like them because they didn't support your "most crimes are between consenting adults" BS. This is the exact same argument that Michael has not been able to make convincingly. Good luck because he's been at it awhile and hasn't yet made a rational argument for why a PROGRESSIVE taxation system, where those with the most income pay the most taxes, is violence. Ah, here it comes. Of course, we're the SHEEPLE, but YOU (who managed to not drink the kool-aid) know the truth. LOL Same exact BS that ALL Conspiracy Theories start with. If you are going to continue with this, "I've seen the light, the rest of you are morons" approach, take it to the Conspiracy Threads because that's exactly what you are claiming. BS, I said govt was created by the consent of the people. Laying it's foundations on such principles and organizing it's powers in such form, as to them seems most likely to ensure their safety and happiness. And the laws that they created that they agreed to adhere to is indeed handed down from generation to generation, and as your generation reaches maturity, you (and if enough others think like you) can indeed change the government to a form that you think is most likely to provide these same benefits. To claim as you do, that you had no say in this is silly. If you aren't 18, you can still argue your point in public. If you are 18 or over you can vote to change the system or ever run for office yourself and work form within the system to change it. I've been entirely consistent on this point, no backtracking at all. Why yes, the document is the Constitution of the US and your state. It generally starts with "We the People" The government changes over time, but continues to exist because the vast majority of the people support it. Then our government has means to be changed and so you can stay and try to change it to your liking (as you are doing with your very feeble attempt on this board), or you can leave and find a place that meets your standards. Your pick. And isn't it neat that you live in a country that allows you to state this issue and to try to convince others that you are right? BUT Until you get enough others to agree with you, and change the laws, then you can a) obey the existing laws while trying to convince others they should be changed b) disobey the laws and if arrested for doing so, take your case to the court system c) leave and find a place that is more to your liking. Your pick Last edited: Mar 10, 2012 21. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member Messages: 7,829 Guess we'll see Michael. http://news.consumerreports.org/mon...ready-outpaced-national-credit-card-debt.html Except we already showed that your contrived John/Mary situation was not the way the tax system actually works. The highest income earners (which would be John) pay by far, the most taxes, the lowest income earners, like Mary, actually get a net payback from the tax system. So NO, the bottom is NOT supporting the top, you have it totally backwards. And again you create a distorted example. We don't take what is theirs, the tax system takes a portion of your INCOME, not what you have, and it does it progressively so that if you don't make much you don't pay anything and as you make more and more over what is needed to live on, you give a larger percent of your INCOME to pay for the general infrastructure of the country that provides the means for you to make that income. And yet taxes don't qualify as violence. So your logic fails. Not even close Michael. Spanking out, talking in: Most parents opt to talk with misbehaving kids http://www2.med.umich.edu/prmc/media/newsroom/details.cfm?ID=1556 Ah, always returning to the I'm RIGHT, you all are SHEEPLE, that is the start of all Conspiracy Theories. Knew it wouldn't take long for you to claim that you are morally superior to the rest of us. 22. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member Messages: 20,285 We're seeing it in Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, England and in the USA as well. What we should say is, we'll see more of it and it'll be worse. Mary makes$35K a year. Thanks to John's buddies at the bank, John (who ALSO makes \$35K a year) he owns 5 houses. He should be going bust as house prices return to a reasonable affordable level - so that Mary can enter the market. But, that's not what's happening. Mary's loosing income from tax BUT WORSE she's also subsidizing John's bad investment by her forced participation in USD. When the Federal Reserve bails out the Banks, it's people like Mary who are left to live in her car while John gets to keep his 5 homes.

That's stealing.
That's not moral.

Example: Suppose you are a farmer. Your wealth is your produce. When you sell it, someone gives you a currency. Suppose, in this example, that is a peace of real copper. Well, that's YOUR'S. It's not anyone else's. It's yours. You grew the produce. You traded it for copper. That's your copper. Be it a coin, or, otherwise.

If you personally, or through some thugs, take this farmers copper (store of his production) that is stealing.

I'd agree if it were a company, as companies are not people. But, if you initiate force against a Citizen, then, yes that's IMO a violent act. But, if you think forcing someone to give up their money by pointing a gun at their head isn't violent - well, that's your choice. Most people who have been mugged, probably feel otherwise :shrug:

It IS initiation of force against another person, and that is immoral.
I think many parents spank, even if they say on a survey they don't think it's appropriate. I asked a colleague of mine (he has two kids) if he thought spanking was appropriate and he said no. I said: You never hit your kids? He said: Well, to be honest, sometimes. But I feel bad afterwards, I just loose my temper.

I'm not saying I personally am superior. Actually, there's no such thing as a "superior" person. I will say that perhaps I have a different attitude because I was never spanked. Or, at least I'll entertain that this MAY be a possibility.

You don't think raising children to be ultra conservative religiously doesn't have an affect on the way they see the world? I do. It completely changes the paradigm through which they try to make sense of incoming information. Tornado rolls over the house. God was unhappy. Mad even. Gee, I better start sacrificing more goats!

That's no conspiracy, that's my pontificating that perhaps spanking alters brain chemistry as well. Instead of rationality winning the day, might does. Might makes right is what a child learns when the parent spanks. Worse still, children are often spanked for making mistakes - like grabbing some candy set and hand level at the grocery store. As if that's not going to attract a hand. Or just plain doing something that's an accident. Smack! I see it all the time in white trash neighborhoods (as I grew up in one, I personally know the mentality therein).

Two other trends I worry about, since we're here.
1) placing kids in day-supervision wards. I read that children who spend 20 hours or more a week in "day care" have similar symptoms of children whose parents outright abandon them.
2) I can not believe (well I can) the numbers of doctors who are prescribing medications to young children. Diagnosing perfectly normal children with all sorts of "behavior" disorders. It's f*cking shocking the numbers of children on brain altering medication. And, this WILL have a long term effect.

23. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
20,285
I thought I better re-state that middle point.

Companies can pay tax. Companies are not people, so, yeah, they can pay some tax. People OTOH are... people! So, they should not be forced to pay income tax.