Bitcoin Forum
December 05, 2016, 08:47:26 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Libertarians Are Sociopaths  (Read 10427 times)
BombaUcigasa
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414



View Profile
October 22, 2011, 05:32:22 PM
 #41

I think part of the reason why people focus on Atlas is because it's easier than arguing against libertarians that are a lot more knowledgeable and patient.

Atlas is a hilarious sociopath. You're just a regular one. And I've spent a ton of moments I'll never get back arguing with you anyway.
So by this definition, you are a communist? Ok...
1480970846
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480970846

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480970846
Reply with quote  #2

1480970846
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
rainingbitcoins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
October 22, 2011, 05:37:13 PM
 #42

You know what else those mentioned private industries have in common? The poor can't afford to use them. We already have very nearly the worst social mobility in the First World, and you guys are chomping at the bit to make it even worse.

I don't see why poor people could not afford some education.  Surely not as good an education as the one a child of a rich family could afford, but still they could get some.  And they would certainly be some good people who would be happy to provide free education, just by generosity.

So we've got the charities that can't adequately feed people now paying out for the lack of social safety nets, sub-minimum wage earners, health care for tens of millions of people who can't afford insurance, and education for tens of millions, as well.

This is what you call a (redacted) fairy tale.
I.Goldstein
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
October 22, 2011, 05:43:29 PM
 #43

No charity, no person can keep up with a government destroying wealth through inefficiency and inflating the cost-of-living. Less than 10% of money going into services reaches the people.

There is nothing wrong with charity.
rainingbitcoins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
October 22, 2011, 05:44:58 PM
 #44

Are you Atlas?
BombaUcigasa
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414



View Profile
October 22, 2011, 06:16:44 PM
 #45

No charity, no person can keep up with a government destroying wealth through inefficiency and inflating the cost-of-living. Less than 10% of money going into services reaches the people.
In my country, 25% of the working force is in the government institutions (aka, not producing any economic value but they are being paid from taxes made on the private sector (2% income, 16% profits, 24% VAT)). Sup?
I.Goldstein
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
October 22, 2011, 06:24:04 PM
 #46

No charity, no person can keep up with a government destroying wealth through inefficiency and inflating the cost-of-living. Less than 10% of money going into services reaches the people.
24% VAT

I hope you like your overpriced cost-of-living.
rainingbitcoins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224


View Profile
October 22, 2011, 06:25:42 PM
 #47

Answer my question, Atlas.

e: based on my interactions with you in that other thread, there is no way in hell you're not Atlas
TiagoTiago
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


Firstbits.com/1fg4i                :Ƀ


View Profile
October 22, 2011, 07:15:38 PM
 #48

Unions have never been the problem. The government provisions, monopolies and subsidies they are given are the problem.
Somtimes they are; somtimes unions do what is best for the unions even when that isn't what is best for the workers; in that aspect, they quite similar to the way many governments (and subpartitions of them) behave towards their people.

(I dont always get new reply notifications, pls send a pm when you think it has happened)

Wanna gimme some BTC for any or no reason? 1FmvtS66LFh6ycrXDwKRQTexGJw4UWiqDX Smiley

The more you believe in Bitcoin, and the more you show you do to other people, the faster the real value will soar!

Do you like mmmBananas?!
TiagoTiago
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


Firstbits.com/1fg4i                :Ƀ


View Profile
October 22, 2011, 07:16:15 PM
 #49

...

I wasn't the OP. I just responded to a thread and the first dozen replies got cut off and some mod put me as the OP for some reason.

...

If you're the author of the first post in the thread now, you should be able to edit the thread tittle, perhaps prepending "Re:" to the title would be enough to make it clear it wasn't you that started this.

(I dont always get new reply notifications, pls send a pm when you think it has happened)

Wanna gimme some BTC for any or no reason? 1FmvtS66LFh6ycrXDwKRQTexGJw4UWiqDX Smiley

The more you believe in Bitcoin, and the more you show you do to other people, the faster the real value will soar!

Do you like mmmBananas?!
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
October 22, 2011, 08:40:53 PM
 #50

Answer my question, Atlas.

e: based on my interactions with you in that other thread, there is no way in hell you're not Atlas

I doubt it.  Atlas was a hardcore objectivist.  Ayn Rand's root premise regarding charity was that it always did more harm than good, and that (as an atheist) she believed that the Judeo-Christian tradition of aiding the poor was BS.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
October 22, 2011, 08:45:06 PM
 #51

Ayn Rand's root premise regarding charity was that it always did more harm than good...

I'm not an objectivist but I don't think that's accurate.

"There is nothing wrong in helping other people, if and when they are worthy of the help and you can afford to help them." -Ayn Rand
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
October 22, 2011, 09:01:52 PM
 #52

Ayn Rand's root premise regarding charity was that it always did more harm than good...

I'm not an objectivist but I don't think that's accurate.

"There is nothing wrong in helping other people, if and when they are worthy of the help and you can afford to help them." -Ayn Rand

I believe that she softened later in life, and this quote came from this period.  If you have ever read her magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged and recognized it for what it really is, a philosophy book wrapped up as a work of fiction, it's pretty obvious that she didn't feel this way when the book was written.  The main character has many famous lines, not the least of which, involves John Galt telling another character to lead a moral life by never letting the word "give" cross her lips.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
NghtRppr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
October 22, 2011, 09:27:52 PM
 #53

I believe that she softened later in life, and this quote came from this period.

No, the book and the quote were both published in her 50's.
I.Goldstein
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
October 22, 2011, 09:33:49 PM
 #54

Most people don't even bother to understand Rand's position once they begin to argue against it. If she were alive today, she wouldn't even be bothered with the word used against her because it would have no backing.
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
October 22, 2011, 09:44:51 PM
 #55

who is atlas ? and can i know him ?

atlas is the screenname of a teenaged forum member, who recently changed his screenname due to gaining a rep that was attracting constant attacks from a subset of the forum membership.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
BitcoinMint.US
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 267



View Profile
October 23, 2011, 12:13:49 AM
 #56

Ron Swanson.
doobadoo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


View Profile
October 23, 2011, 12:21:46 AM
 #57

There's nothing in the principles of libertarianism that makes it incompatible with charity. What it is incompatible with is forcing others to empty their pockets to the needy at gunpoint. If you can acknowledge that distinction then we will be getting somewhere.

If ONLY it went to the needy i wouldn't feel so bad about the system.  But it gets gobbled up mostly by underworked bureaucrats with lavish pay and pension, and overpriced or unnecessary crony contractors.  Don't get me started on the various wars too!  That is what we have more and more in the US.  IF it were only the needy 'feeding' off the rest, and i mean truly needy, taxes would probably only need to be a few percent.   Again if only the gov't people really were being honest and efficient, but they can't as its not the nature of the position they have in society.

"It is, quite honestly, the biggest challenge to central banking since Andrew Jackson." -evoorhees
grondilu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134


View Profile
October 23, 2011, 08:25:41 AM
 #58

There's nothing in the principles of libertarianism that makes it incompatible with charity. What it is incompatible with is forcing others to empty their pockets to the needy at gunpoint. If you can acknowledge that distinction then we will be getting somewhere.

If ONLY it went to the needy i wouldn't feel so bad about the system.  But it gets gobbled up mostly by underworked bureaucrats with lavish pay and pension, and overpriced or unnecessary crony contractors.

+1

In France there has been a study recently, about the amount of tax money used to pay people in charge of organizing distribution of public help to homeless people.  Once we divided the total amount by the number of those homeless people, it was almost enough to pay them an hotel room.  Every night.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
October 23, 2011, 11:29:39 AM
 #59

There's nothing in the principles of libertarianism that makes it incompatible with charity. What it is incompatible with is forcing others to empty their pockets to the needy at gunpoint. If you can acknowledge that distinction then we will be getting somewhere.

If ONLY it went to the needy i wouldn't feel so bad about the system.  But it gets gobbled up mostly by underworked bureaucrats with lavish pay and pension, and overpriced or unnecessary crony contractors.

+1

In France there has been a study recently, about the amount of tax money used to pay people in charge of organizing distribution of public help to homeless people.  Once we divided the total amount by the number of those homeless people, it was almost enough to pay them an hotel room.  Every night.

Most people aren't homeless simply for a lack of quarters, there are a lot of other things wrong with them. I doubt that study. Can you cite it?

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
I.Goldstein
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
October 23, 2011, 02:19:31 PM
 #60

There's nothing in the principles of libertarianism that makes it incompatible with charity. What it is incompatible with is forcing others to empty their pockets to the needy at gunpoint. If you can acknowledge that distinction then we will be getting somewhere.

If ONLY it went to the needy i wouldn't feel so bad about the system.  But it gets gobbled up mostly by underworked bureaucrats with lavish pay and pension, and overpriced or unnecessary crony contractors.

+1

In France there has been a study recently, about the amount of tax money used to pay people in charge of organizing distribution of public help to homeless people.  Once we divided the total amount by the number of those homeless people, it was almost enough to pay them an hotel room.  Every night.

Behold the inefficiency of government.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!