Would a "europeanized" America be a good or bad thing?

[Janaic]

when is the last time you went to a emergency room?

Emergency rooms are a joke. My leg was split open, to the point where I got over 20 staples and a shit ton of stitches and I sat there bleeding all over the place, while fuck heads with the flu got treated.

ER's are a joke, next time I'll take a shot of Jack Daniels and sew myself up.

 

[LazyHippy]

I think imagesandwwords and others have said anything I could add... but if America get's more Europeanised I can see it turning out more like Italy than Norway, sadly.

 

[guerilla]

Guerilla: point of clarification: Are you railing against ALL taxation as being theft? Or merely taxation that is spent on welfare, health and education?

What do you think Harvey?

I thought I had made a solid philosophical argument, but I see the soft marxists are going to pretend they never read it, and that in their minds, confiscating the wealth of the producers, the more your produce, the more you should be stolen from, is somehow socially justified.

So Harvey, do you agree with me that taxes are theft?

 

[pat J]

Is taxes theft? Is criminalizing pedophilia/murder/drugs fascism? Yes and yes.

But I'd say that's pretty irrelevant. Some things are necessary for a society to work properly. Simply put: the end justifies the means. So deal with it and stop crying.

 

[guerilla]

Is taxes theft?

"Are taxes theft"

Is criminalizing pedophilia/murder/drugs fascism?

There is a difference between criminalizing aggression (murder), and criminalizing personal choices (drugs). Sad you can't even distinguish between those two.

But I'd say that's pretty irrelevant.

Of course you would. Not only do you not have a philosophy or principle guiding you, you make absolutely no coherent, rational sense.

Some things are necessary for a society to work properly.

Like this moronic statement. A society can only function with abuse of personal liberty and theft. Oh genius.

Simply put: the end justifies the means.

Yes, I believe Hitler, Stalin and Mao all subscribed to this ideology. Good job Pat. You're a fucking monster.

But then that's no surprise, because those are your socialist luminaries. Those are the heroes of the "common good", "state power", "country first", "dictatorship of the proletariat".

So deal with it and stop crying.

There will come a day when the looters like you, the petty little jealous people who would rather steal than carry the weight of your own "social ideas", are going to meet the fist of the productive, and the message will be "no more".

 

[pax]

Happens all the time. My brother in law works in an Emergency room. By law if its life threatening situation they have to treat you.

They stitch you up and send you on your way with a prescription for drugs that cost you an arm and a leg because you have no pharmaceutical benefits scheme.

They move you out as quick as you were rushed in because you have no insurance.

Fuck that.

 

[HarveyJ]

What do you think Harvey?

I thought I had made a solid philosophical argument, but I see the soft marxists are going to pretend they never read it, and that in their minds, confiscating the wealth of the producers, the more your produce, the more you should be stolen from, is somehow socially justified.

So Harvey, do you agree with me that taxes are theft?

No, actually, I don't. But not for the reasons one would assume.
That said, I live in a country where government money isn't usually squandered on massively unnecessary things, and what government money is spent on socialised projects, are often shown to have a lot of positive flow on effects.

However, for those that persist in the idea that taxation = theft, then I submit to you: Good luck getting the free market to pay for roads, mass transit systems, public landscape & beautification projects, primary & secondary education, basic environmental standards (I'm not talking about electric cars here... I'm talking about acceptable levels of lead in the water supply (as in close zero)), and major R&D projects.
The government pays for a hell of a lot of services that people seem to just ignore that you really could not do without nowadays, as well as having been the major backer of some of the most important scientific advancements in the last century. Particularly in theoretical sciences that lead on to something useful.
Cases in point: Nearly all computer tech as we know it would not exist without tax payer funded research directed towards IBM in the 50s & DEC in the 70s.
Medicinal penicillin certainly wouldn't.

 

[Rusky]

They stitch you up and send you on your way with a prescription for drugs that cost you an arm and a leg because you have no pharmaceutical benefits scheme.

They move you out as quick as you were rushed in because you have no insurance.

Fuck that.

I'm not sure what country does a better job in an intensive care unit. Emergency rooms are not really intended to be a slow environment. Its a shame people use it for purposes that are minor like a headache or a flu. That's why there always full. I used to work for a hospital in the financial department. Insurance or No Insurance people will go through. I've seen people with large bills, 50k and up. The hospital I worked for usually gave a very big discount if people didn't have insurance and then set up a interest free payment plan. I know its not perfect, but Im not willing to let government screw up my health care. Just like they screwed social security, our schools, Fannie, should I go on. What makes people think they're going to do a better job. I say leave that responsibility in our hands, and get those blood sucking attorneys of Doctors asses. Like John Edwards; that prick made over $152 million from junk science lawsuits. Imagine how much medical care that could have bought.

 

[Rusky]

"Are taxes theft"

Thats how you tear a new one without lubrication.

 

[guerilla]

No, actually, I don't. But not for the reasons one would assume.
That said, I live in a country where government money isn't usually squandered on massively unnecessary things, and what government money is spent on socialised projects, are often shown to have a lot of positive flow on effects.

So the ends justify the means. But you answered incorrectly then. It's still theft, you're just willing to tolerate and encourage stealing from others, because you believe there are benefits to stealing.

It doesn't make it not theft.

However, for those that persist in the idea that taxation = theft, then I submit to you: Good luck getting the free market to pay for roads, mass transit systems, public landscape & beautification projects, primary & secondary education, basic environmental standards (I'm not talking about electric cars here... I'm talking about acceptable levels of lead in the water supply (as in close zero)), and major R&D projects.

Absolute nonsense. In the free market, there is no incentive to kill your customers.

The government pays for a hell of a lot of services that people seem to just ignore that you really could not do without nowadays, as well as having been the major backer of some of the most important scientific advancements in the last century. Particularly in theoretical sciences that lead on to something useful.

The government pays NOTHING. People pay. Under threat of violence or imprisonment. Leonardo Da Vinci and Pythagoras didn't work under government subsidy.

Cases in point: Nearly all computer tech as we know it would not exist without tax payer funded research directed towards IBM in the 50s & DEC in the 70s.
Medicinal penicillin certainly wouldn't.

How you can say this with a straight face is beyond me. I don't know where you get the idea that only government spending could create computers or medicine. If that was the case, then the Soviet Union, which totally controlled their entire economy, would have produced all manner of fantastic advances. Instead, when the USSR collapsed, people saw that they lived with very little, spending up to 2 hours each day in lines waiting for basic necessities like food and vodka. Everything they produced was outdated, and inferior. That was the result of a command economy.

Harvey, I regard you as one of the smart guys around here. What you're spewing is public education dogma. You're better than that. Take a walk on the wild side, free your mind and I guarantee your ass will follow. Because what you've posted is not only immoral (ends justify the means), it's factually incorrect.

Thats how you tear a new one without lubrication.

I guess we need more funding for public education.

 

[guerilla]

Here are some points.

If the government can spend money better than people can, why don't we give government all of our money?

Or if we have to pay our fair share, how come most people pay nothing, and some people pay the bulk? Is it fair that the more your produce in the economy, the greater your burden? Isn't that a deterrent from working harder and smarter?

Quick show of hands. Everyone who is for taxes and for socialism.

How many of you give the government more than you owe each year when you file?

 

[pat J]

There is a difference between criminalizing aggression (murder), and criminalizing personal choices (drugs). Sad you can't even distinguish between those two.

Not the point. Sad that you can't understand that.

Of course you would. Not only do you not have a philosophy or principle guiding you, you make absolutely no coherent, rational sense.

I make perfect rational sense if you use your head for a second or two.

Like this moronic statement. A society can only function with abuse of personal liberty and theft. Oh genius.

The alternative is not an alternative. I'm just going to assume that you are a republican... do you think any republican (including ron paul) stands for personal liberty? Maybe you do. In that case your definition of liberty is rather... interesting.

Yes, I believe Hitler, Stalin and Mao all subscribed to this ideology. Good job Pat. You're a fucking monster.


But then that's no surprise, because those are your socialist luminaries. Those are the heroes of the "common good", "state power", "country first", "dictatorship of the proletariat".

I'm going to ignore the informal fallacy here. I'm FAR from being a socialist.

There will come a day when the looters like you, the petty little jealous people who would rather steal than carry the weight of your own "social ideas", are going to meet the fist of the productive, and the message will be "no more".

I guess i'll just ignore this fallacy too.

 

[pat J]

If the government can spend money better than people can, why don't we give government all of our money?

Ah, and there we have the problem. Black and white thinking.

 

[guerilla]

The alternative is not an alternative. I'm just going to assume that you are a republican... do you think any republican (including ron paul) stands for personal liberty? Maybe you do. In that case your definition of liberty is rather... interesting.

You made numerous replies, and managed to say nothing, with the exception of an assumption (which is incorrect btw).

I'm going to ignore the informal fallacy here. I'm FAR from being a socialist.

Someone who endorses state theft is a socialist. You have no regard for the right to own property.

I guess i'll just ignore this fallacy too.

Why not just stick your head all of the way up your ass? As long as you are in denial, dodging and avoiding, you might as well not bother to read either.

The more I work, the more taxes I pay. The more I produce, think, plan, sweat and earn, the more I pay. I'm not taxed by my "footprint" in society, I'm taxed for doing more than others. Against my will, under threat of violence.

People like you are looters. You believe you have a right or some sort of moral/logical imperative to take from the few to give to the many, even if the few came by what they earned honestly.

Any internet marketer should understand incentives. Socialism does not work on incentives, on the contrary, it tries to negatively shape behavior by punishing production. Thinking. Innovation. Profit.

Socialism is the dumbing down of man. We wouldn't even be having this discussion today, but people are so fat and lazy from living off free credit and an inflationary debt economy for the last 25 years, that they have no conception of what it is to struggle to earn and survive. A bunch of fat cunts, like wealthy heirs who become granola and yoga marxists, feeling guilt for their wealth, because they have no conception of what goes into earning it in the first place.

 

[guerilla]

Ah, and there we have the problem. Black and white thinking.

Sure, you can thrive under grays. You can be wishy washy, never form a coherent opinion based on logic or rationality. It's the only way socialism works.

Pretend that taxing is not theft.
Pretend that progressive taxation is not imposing a penalty on the successful.
Pretend that you care about the unfortunate, while advocating that everyone but you make sacrifices.
Use the power of the state to push an agenda on others you don't have the courage to impose on yourself.

You're either free or you are a slave. There is no in between. You can't be mostly free, because that is partially enslaved.

Is the world black and white? I think murder is black and white. I think theft is black and white. I think pedophilia is black and white. I think good and evil are black and white.

Socialists like to argue that what is, isn't and vice versa. Sometimes it takes someone to stand up and call bullshit for what it is.

 

[LazyHippy]

People like you are looters. You believe you have a right or some sort of moral/logical imperative to take from the few to give to the many, even if the few came by what they earned honestly.

The problem is, the very top of the few didn't earn it honestly.

The few that should really shoulder the burden of taxation are the Enrons and Halliburtons that use their political muscle to take from us all and the many that should receive handouts are the kids dying - one every 2 fucking seconds - from lack of clean water in Africa, not the welfare scroungers pumping out kids in trailer parks in the US and council estates over here.

 

[pat J]

Someone who endorses state theft is a socialist. You have no regard for the right to own property.

You got to stop making up your own definitions. Socialism is where the government (or collective) controls all means of production. Nothing is privatized. Private property does not exist. Everything is shared. Everything.

You're using an informal fallacy again.... I have nothing against private property since i'm a social liberal (note: social does not equal socialist). I support a free market just like you. The difference is that i have realized that a safety net is required for a society if it wants to offer true liberty and freedom.

"Everyone for themselves" mentality only offers liberty to the fittest. Oh wait.. what's that called again?... oh right! Social darwinism.

Oh and..
I have never pretended that taxing is not theft.
I don't support a progressive tax system. Flat tax is the most fair system.
You are always a slave to something. In a pure capitalistic world we are all slaves to money and those who control it. In a pure socialist world we are all slaves to the collective. But there is something in between. Something much better.

So, again.. the problem is that you can only see the world in black and white. Good and evil are entirely subjective.

 

[guerilla]

The problem is, the very top of the few didn't earn it honestly.

The few that should really shoulder the burden of taxation are the Enrons and Halliburtons that use their political muscle to take from us all and the many that should receive handouts are the kids dying - one every 2 fucking seconds - from lack of clean water in Africa, not the welfare scroungers pumping out kids in trailer parks in the US and council estates over here.

What utter tripe Lazy.

For every Enron and Haliburton, there are 10 well run, ethical corporations. If your idea of justice is to send 11 men to jail for the crime of only one of them....

Because the laws affect all of them equally.

The lack of clean water in Africa, is because do-gooders encourage government to send aid, which is used to prop up dictators and tyrants, who rape the country and abuse the people. The reason why Africa has not emerged, is because there is no justice, because the very people who impose totalitarian regimes, are the ones WE ARE FUNDING.

That psycho in Zimbabwe has destroyed their economy and their money. How? With his psycho socialist ideas and so-called racial justice.

Government is not a solution. It is the problem. That is why as China becomes less authoritarian, less socialistic, their country is opening up and the people are starting to gain some measure of prosperity.

 

[guerilla]

You got to stop making up your own definitions. Socialism is where the government (or collective) controls all means of production. Nothing is privatized. Private property does not exist. Everything is shared. Everything.

This is incorrect. You are correct about the means of production, which includes capital goods, or "savings" which are profit.

When you tax profit, it is no longer privately owned. It is socially owned 100% (show me the law that prevents 100% taxation) and the taxpayer is allowed to keep a portion of the taxes. Good luck ever trying to pay yourself first and the tax man second, he has the higher claim on your earnings, a higher claim than you do!

You're using an informal fallacy again.... I have nothing against private property since i'm a social liberal (note: social does not equal socialist). I support a free market just like you. The difference is that i have realized that a safety net is required for a society if it wants to offer true liberty and freedom.

You just contradicted yourself. You don't even know what a free market is. If you did, and you believed in it, then you couldn't brook the notion of safety nets, which are anti-free market.

Social liberal is nonsense. The original liberals were laissez-faire and all about private property. They were for hard money, small or no government and zero regulation. Learn some history.

"Everyone for themselves" mentality only offers liberty to the fittest. Oh wait.. what's that called again?... oh right! Social darwinism.

Actually, it is the natural order. Any man who lives his life for another, is a slave. And any man who relies on another man for his life, is also a slave. Self-ownership is independence.

It doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't help another, but you have no obligation, no connection by birth to serve another man, or require that another man serve you.

If that was the case, you wouldn't be on here posting. You would be out working until you passed out each day, in order to feed clothe and educate all of your fellow men, who (based on this premise) have a claim on you and your life.

Oh and..
I have never pretended that taxing is not theft.
I don't support a progressive tax system. Flat tax is the most fair system.
You are always a slave to something. In a pure capitalistic world we are all slaves to money and those who control it. In a pure socialist world we are all slaves to the collective. But there is something in between. Something much better.

Flat tax is not a fair system. No tax is a fair system. People pay for what they use. They do not pay for what they do not use. If they want to pay for someone else, that is charity. They cannot be forced, which is theft.

Again, you're babbling, because you don't have a principle to lean on. You're flitting back and forth behind common social ideals that are based on logical fallacies.

So, again.. the problem is that you can only see the world in black and white. Good and evil are entirely subjective.

Only a socialist would say something this ignorant. You totally disgust me.

 

[Rusky]

I guess we need more funding for public education.

Its to late. I was already fluent in another language when I got here. Dont throw away tax money in ESL programs. I was there I know.