Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 52 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions (Read 7293 times)
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Reply #80 - Jan 12th, 2019 at 2:20pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 12th, 2019 at 2:19pm:
I'm wrong a lot.


I addressed that in the post you quoted
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43752
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Reply #81 - Jan 12th, 2019 at 2:38pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jan 12th, 2019 at 2:20pm:
I addressed that in the post you quoted
Thanks!
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5753
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Reply #82 - Jan 12th, 2019 at 8:35pm
Print Post  
Kaz wrote today sometime:
Quote:
Change your nature.



Oh, Kaz.

You should know that won't happen.  Haven't you ever read the parable of the scorpion and the frog?

A scorpion asks a frog to carry it across a river. The frog hesitates, afraid of being stung, but the scorpion argues that if it did so, they would both drown. Considering this, the frog agrees, but midway across the river the scorpion does indeed sting the frog, dooming them both. When the frog asks the scorpion why, the scorpion replies that it was in its nature to do so.

I will always be the scorpion and you will always be my frog.  The difference is that I will sting you several times before you finally go down again.  The "Kaz and I" debacle exemplifies that perfectly. 

Another difference is that I will not go down with you.  I will float lazily on my back, enjoying the company of the jelly fish, hornets, gila monsters, vipers and other stingers as we turn to less easy prey.

Another difference is that you as the proverbial frog will simply hold your breath until you are driven to resurface and the cycle will begin again.
  

Snarky no more!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 43752
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Reply #83 - Jan 12th, 2019 at 8:49pm
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 12th, 2019 at 8:35pm:
Haven't you ever read the parable of the scorpion and the frog?
It's just your nature to be evil. Fine. Don't expect good treatment from civilized people.
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 10041
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Reply #84 - Jan 12th, 2019 at 11:37pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Jan 12th, 2019 at 8:49pm:
It's just your nature to be evil. Fine. Don't expect good treatment from civilized people.


Personally I don't. I never have.

Oddly I get plenty of great treatment from fellow uncivilised people, though. You know, the ones who aren't whomping their bompers to the tune of how morally great they are and how everyone else is evil. Hmm.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Reply #85 - Jan 13th, 2019 at 8:29am
Print Post  
Little Big Man wrote on Jan 12th, 2019 at 8:35pm:
Kaz wrote today sometime:

Oh, Kaz.

You should know that won't happen


I just laughed at you.  That was my point, Holmes.  You aren't going to change your nature.  That seriously flew over your head too?  Seriously?  That wasn't obvious enough to you?  Is anything?

Burnsred:  OMG, I asked kaz how I could keep him here and he said change my nature.  He actually thinks I'm going to change my nature!  That's what he meant!

No wonder you're a below average student as teachers are.  Let's face it.  You're not very smart.  Us meaning you since there really was never any doubt.  You're a teacher who acts like one of your third grade students and thinks being annoying like an eight year old who wants attention is an actual skill.

That's classic, you didn't get it.  Unbelievable
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Reply #86 - Jan 13th, 2019 at 8:37am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jan 12th, 2019 at 11:37pm:
Personally I don't. I never have.

Oddly I get plenty of great treatment from fellow uncivilised people, though. You know, the ones who aren't whomping their bompers to the tune of how morally great they are and how everyone else is evil. Hmm.


I don't fit in either group.  I keep calling you stupid because you can't comprehend simple English.  But I don't run around calling anyone evil, either.

What's frustrating to me about you is that you're the only one I really see any hope with in terms of having some content and perspective and the potential to sustain a conversation on the site.  I like SkyChief too, but he's more a transactional poster.  He comments and moves on.

But it just gets tired having to address you responding to points I didn't make over and over and over.  I find it difficult to believe you're unable to read my posts.  So I come to the conclusion you're doing it intentionally.  I'm not sure why, having a cogent conversation seems to be more interesting to me.  Apparently not to you though since you chose not to do it.

Side note, the one group I do call evil are Democrats.  Part of that is they are the ones who call me (and everyone else) evil.  But it's more than that.  As long as I call them wrong and they call me evil, they will take that deal.  It's necessary to put them on the same plane.  So if they call you evil, you must call them evil or they already won
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 10041
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Reply #87 - Jan 13th, 2019 at 12:55pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jan 13th, 2019 at 8:37am:
But it just gets tired having to address you responding to points I didn't make over and over and over.  I find it difficult to believe you're unable to read my posts.  So I come to the conclusion you're doing it intentionally.  I'm not sure why, having a cogent conversation seems to be more interesting to me.  Apparently not to you though since you chose not to do it.


If you feel this way it's because you've been unwilling to lay out the basics when it comes down to the minutiae. You don't think taxes are theft. You believe in eminent domain. But why? What do you have that's analogous to the NAP?

What is your starting assumption? What is the unified field theory of Kaz's philosophy from which all positions follow?

I have to have a different set of basics for every poster on the forum because libertarianism does not exist. It has its starting point, the NAP, but of those that believe in it, no one is willing to take on the minutiae and be consistent. Even Rothbard said defensive force must be proportionate. Well shit, if someone hits me with a force of 20 PSI, I can't hit them harder than that? I can't nerve pinch anyone, something considered to be incredibly least-force-necessary where I come from, because they didn't just do that to me (if they had, it would sort of preclude me doing it defensively). It also means that no, you can't attack someone who simply seems to be about to attack you, because even though Rothbard specifically says you can in other places, if defensive force must be proportionate, defending against what has not happened yet reduces permissible defensive force down to zero, because it must be proportionate with nothing.

Where do private courts get their power to make arrests? I can't arrest anyone.

Some of the more intelligent posters have actually admitted in some cases, well, that's a contradiction.

http://www.libertariansforum.com/cgi-bin/freedom/YaBB.pl?num=1460537671

Stevea admitted it here. I don't want an admission of contradiction. I want what appears to be a contradiction resolved.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Little Big Man
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 5753
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Reply #88 - Jan 13th, 2019 at 1:13pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Jan 13th, 2019 at 8:29am:
I just laughed at you.  That was my point, Holmes.  You aren't going to change your nature.  That seriously flew over your head too?  Seriously?  That wasn't obvious enough to you?  Is anything?

Burnsred:  OMG, I asked kaz how I could keep him here and he said change my nature.  He actually thinks I'm going to change my nature!  That's what he meant!

No wonder you're a below average student as teachers are.  Let's face it.  You're not very smart.  Us meaning you since there really was never any doubt.  You're a teacher who acts like one of your third grade students and thinks being annoying like an eight year old who wants attention is an actual skill.

That's classic, you didn't get it.  Unbelievable


I didn't get it, you're right about that.  Good one!

Were you also pranking me when you pretended to think that "Kaz and I are in the pool," should be "Kaz and me are in the pool?"  If so, you got me even better with that one.  I totally believed you were that ignorant.

EDIT:

Upon reflection, I realize how diabolically clever that one was.  You rightly guessed that, as a teacher, I could not let your incorrect grammar lesson go by.  But . . . you also knew that I've been trying to agree with you as much as possible so that you won't leave the board (until February when I administer the coup de grâce).  You had me going.

Well played, Sir!


  

Snarky no more!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 7988
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Reply #89 - Jan 13th, 2019 at 4:23pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Jan 13th, 2019 at 12:55pm:
If you feel this way it's because you've been unwilling to lay out the basics when it comes down to the minutiae. You don't think taxes are theft


Poorly stated.  I have said that all taxes for wealth redistribution are theft.   Beyond that, some are theft and some are not depending what they are used for.  But if we eliminated the wealth redistribution, that would be a great start

The Opposition wrote on Jan 13th, 2019 at 12:55pm:
You believe in eminent domain. But why?
  Because I don't think my liberty is maximized by living my entire life within a half mile of where I was born

The Opposition wrote on Jan 13th, 2019 at 12:55pm:
What do you have that's analogous to the NAP?


I don't really know what that means, but if you're asking my standard, it's that government should only be able to do things that only government can do.  Meaning when there can be only one, and the definition of that is government.

Land ownership, the military, the police, civil and criminal courts, roads, management of limited resources and things that must be recognized by the community or my liberty would be reduced rather than increased, those are the only things government should do.  And in those limited cases, government should be able to use force both to implement those policies and pay for them.  That should be about the only force anyone is allowed to initiate either privately or publicly.  I would agree with LAP, Limited Aggression Principle.

The Opposition wrote on Jan 13th, 2019 at 12:55pm:
What is your starting assumption? What is the unified field theory of Kaz's philosophy from which all positions follow?

I have to have a different set of basics for every poster on the forum because libertarianism does not exist. It has its starting point, the NAP, but of those that believe in it, no one is willing to take on the minutiae and be consistent. Even Rothbard said defensive force must be proportionate. Well shit, if someone hits me with a force of 20 PSI, I can't hit them harder than that? I can't nerve pinch anyone, something considered to be incredibly least-force-necessary where I come from, because they didn't just do that to me (if they had, it would sort of preclude me doing it defensively). It also means that no, you can't attack someone who simply seems to be about to attack you, because even though Rothbard specifically says you can in other places, if defensive force must be proportionate, defending against what has not happened yet reduces permissible defensive force down to zero, because it must be proportionate with nothing.[quote author=5E626F55457A7A6579637E6365640A0 link=1546573087/87#87 date=1547402105]

OK, then I guess I got your question because I just answered this.

[quote author=5E626F55457A7A6579637E6365640A0 link=1546573087/87#87 date=1547402105]
Where do private courts get their power to make arrests? I can't arrest anyone.

Some of the more intelligent posters have actually admitted in some cases, well, that's a contradiction.

http://www.libertariansforum.com/cgi-bin/freedom/YaBB.pl?num=1460537671

Stevea admitted it here. I don't want an admission of contradiction. I want what appears to be a contradiction resolved.


I don't believe in private courts.  They would never work.  Unless you just mean mediation.  Parties rarely agree to binding mediation, which is pretty much why private courts won't work
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 52
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › The Thread for Jeff to Answer Questions
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy