Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Rights and Self-Defence
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 14 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Rights and Self-Defence (Read 3334 times)
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 47665
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #30 - May 27th, 2019 at 7:32pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 24th, 2019 at 10:26pm:
Public School is also transfer of wealth.

Ideally, a transfer of knowledge will occur, and that's a good thing.

A simple transfer of wealth by government is the subsidy payments to Tesla to help make Teslas saleable.
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 47665
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #31 - May 27th, 2019 at 7:34pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 24th, 2019 at 10:39pm:
“If taxation without consent is not robbery, then any band of robbers have only to declare themselves a government, and all their robberies are legalized.”  - Lysander Spooner

Smiley
The Sack will tell you Spooner was wrong because consent is impossible, but consent is a critical element in legal taxation...

One that the Sack is incapable of understanding because his anarchist ideology is blinding him. Cry
« Last Edit: May 28th, 2019 at 10:47am by Jeff »  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 11234
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #32 - May 28th, 2019 at 9:07am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on May 27th, 2019 at 7:29pm:
You should address that to me, then explain why it is that you can't see the difference between paying policemen paying for other peoples' children to have free education and transferring wealth to Boeing. Probably it's because you are such a dweeb. Kiss


There's a difference. They're different things.

What I don't see is a legitimate ethical reason that taking money from someone involuntarily to make Tesla richer is not okay and taking money from that same person to make someone else's kids richer is fine.

But you win, as always. Ridicule, ridicule, ridicule.

Libertarians only have one argument because you only need one argument. No one can refute you, which is why you and Kaz (the only real libertarians on the site) give each other a wide berth.
  

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: 8005
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #33 - May 28th, 2019 at 9:11am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 9:07am:
There's a difference. They're different things.

What I don't see is a legitimate ethical reason that taking money from someone involuntarily to make Tesla richer is not okay and taking money from that same person to make someone else's kids richer is fine.

But you win, as always. Ridicule, ridicule, ridicule.

Libertarians only have one argument because you only need one argument. No one can refute you, which is why you and Kaz (the only real libertarians on the site) give each other a wide berth.


Opposition:  Libertarians insult people.  So people who insult people are the real libertarians.

Talk about a logical fallacy.

Actually, libertarians believe in minimizing government to maximize liberty.  Which is why Chief is a libertarian and Jeff isn't.  Government conquering us does not maximize our liberty
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 11234
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #34 - May 28th, 2019 at 9:22am
Print Post  
kaz wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 9:11am:
Opposition: Only libertarians insult to win every argument.  So people who insult people are the real libertarians.


Fixed that for you. Please don't complain about me misquoting you when the entirety of that quote is something I supposedly said or implied (when I didn't).

No other group of people only has one argument - ridicule - because they would never be able to get away with that.

kaz wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 9:11am:
Actually, libertarians believe in minimizing government to maximize liberty.  Which is why Chief is a libertarian and Jeff isn't.  Government conquering us does not maximize our liberty


Tell me again how some right of someone existing to prevent me from doing anything and everything except going to work, coming home, sleeping, and going to work again is maximising liberty.

If I want a tiger, that's violating someone's rights because it's risking them.

If I want a chicken, same. Here's a quote from someone you've admitted was a libertarian.

SkyChief wrote on Oct 7th, 2018 at 5:18pm:
I sense a lot of frustration here.

My gun poses no threat to you or any of my neighbors.

It is locked, and its ammunition is stored in a separate, secure location.

Your chicken is a potential risk to the neighbors.  Someone's pet fox might want to eat it.  Chickens are notorious for being host to Salmonella bacteria, avian influenza virus (AI), Fowl Pox,  Necrotic Enteritis, et al....       Yuck!! 

Guns = SAFE   Smiley  Smiley

Chickens =  DEATH & DISEASES  Sad  Smiley


I defy you to find something I can do that risks you less than me owning a single chicken.
  

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: 8005
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #35 - May 28th, 2019 at 9:32am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 9:22am:
Fixed that for you. Please don't complain about me misquoting you when the entirety of that quote is something I supposedly said or implied (when I didn't)


Agreed.  My objection to changing quotes is if you make it appear I said something I didn't, which you didn't do



The Opposition wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 9:22am:
No other group of people only has one argument - ridicule - because they would never be able to get away with that.


OMG, you obviously don't live in the United States since you're completely unaware of the Democrat party. They do nothing but batter their opposition into submission


The Opposition wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 9:22am:
Tell me again how some right of someone existing to prevent me from doing anything and everything except going to work, coming home, sleeping, and going to work again is maximising liberty.

If I want a tiger, that's violating someone's rights because it's risking them.

If I want a chicken, same. Here's a quote from someone you've admitted was a libertarian.


I defy you to find something I can do that risks you less than me owning a single chicken.


I've addressed the tiger specifically and Chief meant that tongue in cheek.  You know that because duh.  The guy opposes government vaccinations, think about it
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 11234
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #36 - May 28th, 2019 at 9:50am
Print Post  
kaz wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 9:32am:
I've addressed the tiger specifically and Chief meant that tongue in cheek.  You know that because duh.  The guy opposes government vaccinations, think about it


He's since admitted he wasn't kidding.

It doesn't matter if he was anyway because that's not how logic works. You prove something and it stays proven, even if you were kidding.

Eight billion masters. Each with every single negative right he discovers 100% legitimate, no debate possible. I can't do anything. This does not maximise liberty. A government forcing people to accept only a few rights, and apply them to everyone equally, does maximise liberty.

I've had plenty of conversations with Democrats, and those left of Democrats, even heated ones, and they're usually civil.
  

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: 8005
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #37 - May 28th, 2019 at 10:09am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 9:50am:
He's since admitted he wasn't kidding.

It doesn't matter if he was anyway because that's not how logic works. You prove something and it stays proven, even if you were kidding.

Eight billion masters. Each with every single negative right he discovers 100% legitimate, no debate possible. I can't do anything. This does not maximise liberty. A government forcing people to accept only a few rights, and apply them to everyone equally, does maximise liberty.


The chief said he believes government can ban chickens?  You have to show me that one

The Opposition wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 9:50am:
I've had plenty of conversations with Democrats, and those left of Democrats, even heated ones, and they're usually civil.


Sure, they're civil if you agree with them.  "Heated" about what exactly?  You told them you're a Trump supporting capitalist who thinks we should have a wall and they said cool and broke bread with you?
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 11808
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #38 - May 28th, 2019 at 10:24am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 9:50am:
He's since admitted he wasn't kidding.
It was tongue-in-cheek, but the principle was sincere.

I meant to demonstrate that people fear guns because they're scary-looking, so they want government to take my gun away.

People typically don't fear chickens, but the irony is that live chickens are a much greater threat to their well-being than my Mini-14 which is locked in a gun safe.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 8005
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #39 - May 28th, 2019 at 10:29am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 10:24am:
It was tongue-in-cheek, but the principle was sincere.

I meant to demonstrate that people fear guns because they're scary-looking, so they want government to take my gun away.

People typically don't fear chickens, but the irony is that live chickens are a much greater threat to their well-being than my Mini-14 which is locked in a gun safe.


I would say for libertarians, chickens are fine, but you're responsible for your actions.  If you give your neighbors salmonella, they can sue you for damages if they can prove it.  Same with guns.  If you go out and start shooting randomly, you're responsible for the damage caused
  

Contest winner:  I predicted Kaz' meltdown
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 14
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Rights and Self-Defence
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy