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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 14 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Rights and Self-Defence (Read 3705 times)
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 51344
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #40 - May 28th, 2019 at 10:53am
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.

You can't see it because of your perspective. Probably you are on the libertarian spectrum closer to the anarchist end, so you tend to be leery, dismissive, or afraid of, any sort of community based action that involves telling government to do something that will have a good effect throughout the community, like using local property taxes to fund local schools or hiring some police...

If you focus entirely on the pure philosophy and throw up a barrier in your mind that says all taxation is theft and any government action is wrong, you will be blinded by your ideology from recognizing that governments can be put to good uses to produce good practical results that are largely beneficial.
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 12559
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #41 - May 28th, 2019 at 11:04am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 10:53am:
afraid of, any sort of community based action that involves telling government to do something that will have a good effect throughout the community, like using local property taxes to fund local schools or hiring some police...

If you focus entirely on the pure philosophy and throw up a barrier in your mind that says all taxation is theft and any government action is wrong../.

Jeff, this is exactly how the tax-and-spend progressives think:

If a program benefits some people, everyone must pay for it, whether they like it or not.

This isn't obvious to you?

"When more of the people's sustenance is exacted through the form of taxation than is necessary to meet the just obligations of government and expenses of its economical administration, such exaction becomes ruthless extortion and a violation of the fundamental principles of free government." - Grover Cleveland
  

Governments will always devise ways to deprive an honest man of his money or property, and claim that it's legal.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 9491
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #42 - May 28th, 2019 at 11:10am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 11:04am:
Jeff, this is exactly how the tax-and-spend progressives think -

If a program benefits some people, everyone must pay for it, whether they like it or not.

This isn't obvious to you?


Yep.  The term "General Welfare" means that everyone benefits.  Redistributing money to some citizens isn't in the general welfare, it's in the specific interest of some citizens and against the interest of others.

The police don't protect some people and not others.  The military don't protect some people and not others.  Roads are for everyone.  Those are the general welfare.

Preventing blind people from driving, for example, is directly related to safety.  Programs that redistribute money based on income, gender, age or other such traits aren't the general interest
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 51344
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #43 - May 28th, 2019 at 11:14am
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 11:04am:
Jeff, this is exactly how the tax-and-spend progressives think:

If a program benefits some people, everyone must pay for it, whether they like it or not.

This isn't obvious to you?

"When more of the people's sustenance is exacted through the form of taxation than is necessary to meet the just obligations of government and expenses of its economical administration, such exaction becomes ruthless extortion and a violation of the fundamental principles of free government." - Grover Cleveland
Well yes, and Cleveland thought public education was a "just obligation of government", just as I do.

He may have thought having a Federal Department of Education was a good idea too, but I doubt it...

You have to stop thinking that any use of tax money at all is illegitimate.

The premise has been presented on this forum that private schooling could offer educational opportunities to al children, and it could, but it doesn't ans it won't until people in general become less self-interested and more generous and community minded so that even in the ghetto (and I include Appalachian ghettos in that), private schools will spring up to offer good basic educations to any child in the ghetto who can afford it and wants one.
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 12559
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #44 - May 28th, 2019 at 12:03pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 11:14am:
...[Grover] Cleveland thought public education was a "just obligation of government", just as I do.
Citation needed.


Jeff wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 11:14am:
You have to stop thinking that any use of tax money at all is illegitimate.

I don't think that all use of tax money is illegitimate.

Public Education only benefits those who choose use it.  Public Education is no benefit to someone who chooses to home-school or private school their child.

But government still forces them to pay for the neighbor child's "public" education.

Public education is just another outdated social program that should have died on the vine along with the New Deal.

Should the government. . . . . NO DAMMIT!!    Angry
  

Governments will always devise ways to deprive an honest man of his money or property, and claim that it's legal.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 51344
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #45 - May 28th, 2019 at 2:39pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 12:03pm:
Citation needed.


What do you think Cleveland meant by "the just obligations of government"?

Of course Cleveland was speaking in broad terms of government at the federal level, but even assuming he was speaking of government in general, do you imagine from anything Cleveland did or said that he would have thought a federal Dept. of Education was required to fulfill an obligation of the federal government to se to it that everyone was educated? Or anything Cleveland did or said that would indicate he thought or felt that locally funded local schools to provide basic education to all children were not an obligation of local government?


  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 51344
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #46 - May 28th, 2019 at 2:45pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 12:03pm:
Public Education only benefits those who choose use it.  Public Education is no benefit to someone who chooses to home-school or private school their child.

But government still forces them to pay for the neighbor child's "public" education.

Yes, a system that gives parents an education voucher for the full value of the money that would have been spent on their child's education, that they can use to send their child to any school they choose or even to defray the cost of home schooling, while at the same time removing that money from the applicable public school budget is sorely needed.

If you think that a local community is wrong to decide to use property tax revenue to school all the children of the community because some payers of property tax have no children, do you also think it's wrong that property owners who never directly use the local judicial system should have to pay for it?

Of course, you want every government service to operate as a "business".

That's a very bad idea on many levels.
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 12559
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #47 - May 28th, 2019 at 5:30pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 2:39pm:
What do you think Cleveland meant by "the just obligations of government"?

Defense of the Nation, secure the blessings of liberty, and protect the rights of the citizens.

Did I leave anything out?

Did Cleveland say that it was the job of government to provide schooling?

Show me where he said that.   Thanks.     Smiley
  

Governments will always devise ways to deprive an honest man of his money or property, and claim that it's legal.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 9491
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #48 - May 28th, 2019 at 7:28pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 12:03pm:
Citation needed.


I don't think that all use of tax money is illegitimate.

Public Education only benefits those who choose use it.  Public Education is no benefit to someone who chooses to home-school or private school their child.

But government still forces them to pay for the neighbor child's "public" education.

Public education is just another outdated social program that should have died on the vine along with the New Deal.

Should the government. . . . . NO DAMMIT!!    Angry


Public schools are also based on age and your right to use them cuts off.  And to your point, you make a choice to use them or not.

No one chooses to be a victim of a crime and the police are there for anyone who calls them.  To compare the two is absurd
  

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

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 51344
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Rights and Self-Defence
Reply #49 - May 28th, 2019 at 7:36pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on May 28th, 2019 at 11:10am:
Yep.  The term "General Welfare" means that everyone benefits.  Redistributing money to some citizens isn't in the general welfare, it's in the specific interest of some citizens and against the interest of others.

The police don't protect some people and not others.  The military don't protect some people and not others.  Roads are for everyone.  Those are the general welfare.

Preventing blind people from driving, for example, is directly related to safety.  Programs that redistribute money based on income, gender, age or other such traits aren't the general interest
+1
  

"Free hate speech"
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 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