Any libertarians?

Page 2 of 2 First 12

  1. Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    Call me ignorant but since when do "governments step inside your house and tell you whats best for you"?

    With regards to the similarities I stand by that but my caveat is I have not studied anything from left or right apart from basic definitions (because I see no point, the whole "I am this" "I am that" means sweat f*ckall in reality)
    First of all, they spy on us, so yes they are inside our house. Second of all, lets say I want to grow a bunch of pot plants and own some automatic firearms I bought from some neighbors and maybe a rocket launcher? They will be here kicking my door down if they find out. This is just an example of over-reaching goverment. I havent committed a crime or violated anybodies liberties, but these new laws make me to be a criminal.

    I dont know what left and right is either. Personally, I think the middle is twice as worse, you combine two extremes and your double trouble! lol
    This message was paid for by the Russians


  2. Right, so what that comment actually meant was the system is one of control over the people? And thats what this whole argument is about, at least from me as in a system of control is actually REQUIRED otherwise you will have a load of dumb f#cks doing dumb sh#t like growing drugs, buying guns and playing silly games with rocket launchers. Right?
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    Right, so what that comment actually meant was the system is one of control over the people? And thats what this whole argument is about, at least from me as in a system of control is actually REQUIRED otherwise you will have a load of dumb f#cks doing dumb sh#t like growing drugs, buying guns and playing silly games with rocket launchers. Right?
    But we already have those people anyways. The war on drugs has been a complete failure. Gun control hasnt stopped criminals from getting arms, it has only made innocent people criminals and too weak to defend themselves. Look how there were 44 shootings in strict gun control zone in Chicago just this weekend. People are helpless, and cops cant and dont stop crime, they just try to solve them. The war on drugs makes gangs powerful and the black-market is thriving more than ever. We spend billions and trillions of tax dollars and it hasnt worked, so how do we defend the laws that are supposed to work? Its been a total failure, its time to end it and move on.
    This message was paid for by the Russians

  4. I don't really understand your point exactly.

    Oh ok you expanded your post a little more.

    But what EXACTLY are you saying lol I'm clearly saying a system of control is required to keep people in line all the way from small things like not punching every person who annoys you to bigger things like drugs. You are saying? Forget control and laws and give people more responsibility over their actions?

    Believe it or not Laws control people a heck of a lot as opposed to the small isolated cases you bring up.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    I don't really understand your point exactly.

    Oh ok you expanded your post a little more.

    But what EXACTLY are you saying, I'm clearly saying a system on control is required to keep people in line all the way from small things like not punching every person who annoys you to bigger things like drugs. You are saying? Forget control and laws and give people more responsibility over their actions?

    Believe it or not Laws control people a heck of a lot as opposed to the small isolated cases you bring up.
    No, Im not saying forget control and laws. The laws we need to protect are the Bill of Rights, not people from themselves. People need to take responsibility for their own actions. If you want to do drugs, go ahead its not my problem. But if violate another individuals liberty in any way such as stealing to get it, then you have to take responsibility for that through due process.

    Believe it or not, Laws primarily control alot of innocent people, far hell more than small isolated instances of real criminals your thinking about.
    This message was paid for by the Russians
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by ax1 View Post
    We can have a name, thats for sure. How about George Washington? Thats a name. Our founding father did not belong to a political party, and is the last president who wasnt a part of one. Its time to vote for ones individual idea's rather than a puppet for a party and have a non-affiliated president again for the first time since GW.

    You know, the Libertarian Party is actually looking to endorse Jesse Ventura for president...Jesse has one condition, that he is not labeled a Libertarian and will not partake in any party.

    The problem is, politicians trap us in political parties, thats why we never have any real change (or restoration that is.)

    You know, I do love alot of Libertarian ideas and love Ron Paul for the most part, didnt want you to think Im actual anti-Libertarian. Im just anti Libertarian party, or any party from yesterday or tomorrow, even if they start out good. Every party becomes corrupt and dangerous to our Liberties. I would have voted for Ron Paul should he ran as an independent, rather than the Republican ticket. If Rand Paul dumped those Republicrats (yeah, there is no difference between both parties) Id consider voting for him too.
    Whether or not you want a label, you have a label. If you support gay marriage, feminism, immigration, socialist safety net policies, and so on you will undoubtedly be called a liberal whether you want the label or not. You are aligned with the liberals, their parties, and their candidates whether you want to be or not. That is basic pattern recognition and as humans we rely on that far more than people realize for survival and success.

    The concept of a political party are people with similar labels earned as individuals meeting up with others in order to give their argument enough mass to make a difference. You act like it is some kind of club.

  7. Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    Such as what decisions should people have more say in? If we start from the bases that people are not only not ready to be given responsibility most don't even want it.
    What they eat would be a good place to start. What they smoke. Whether or not they have insurance. This is why I am anti-socialist safety net systems. Let someone be free to choose what they want, but free to suffer the consequences of their choices. Suffering begets knowledge and some shall turn that knowledge into wisdom. Society has become a fast paced illusion where the average citizen of this nation is actually a barely functional cog with little self awareness and presence. This is why more often than not criminals who make it big get a following. It is someone who is aware of themselves, follows their own destiny, and ultimately are more humane than even the kindest priest or relief aid worker. People today are driven purely by biological chemical reactions but have convinced themselves via social constructs that it is actually an advanced concept of "freedom".

    Mostly because the average American no longer chooses. They are stocks traded by fast food restaurants, clothing brands, sports teams. The real individuals are higher up and use those who have no self awareness as currency. Then again technically this is the way it has been for ages, though just never on a scale such as this. Even a peon under a Monarchy had more presence in my books because they had a legitimate lack of choice instead of choosing to give it up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    Also, I think we have quite a bit of power and responsibility already its just that people don't take it and in many cases don't want to take it, rather let the state (someone else) handle it. Thats why I originally said it'll be good for me but not others. "We" are a tiny group of people IMO. So it makes no sense to change this current aspect. I'm even arguing against my own wishes here, thats how nonsensical it would be to give people "more responsibility" but then again it may depend on what this "more" means. It implies some but not all, and who would determine which is to be given and which is not? I cant wrap my head around it. Either be a totally autonomous individual and seek sovereignty or live under the state (it has its pro's in some cases I guess).
    I can concede that the average individual does have a great deal more power than they surmise they do. Especially if you continually improve yourselves. As far as I am concerned becoming bi-lingual or tri-lingual can be more productive in regards to granting you favor and power than your average associates degree.



    Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    This also would concern me. Lets reduce laws for example and give people the responsibility not to cross the line but say "well if you do, don't worry about it... thats all part of being a libertarian". Then it comes back to which laws to to take away and which do you keep implemented. You also gotta remember the tendency of humans to find loopholes in every system thats created which is why so many laws exists. Even those stupid ones most likely come about due to a loophole being manipulated by a small group. Humans are a waste lol
    Stiffer penalties for some things is how we counter that. Complex laws make loopholes, simple laws do not create them as there are no "but-if" situations. Such as the punishment for murder being death instead of long imprisonment that costs the nation vasts amounts of money. What is the average yearly incarceration fee for a super max? $65,000? Why do we have so many variations of murder? Why do we have to give a "Life sentence plus 20 years" in order to prevent parole? Why do we may what could amount to well over a couple million dollars to keep a scumbag alive for 40 years until he kicks the can?

    This is beyond illogical. First a heinous crime is committed against a human, then another heinous crime is committed against the tax payer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    There is a close resemblance though wouldn't you say? Libertarians has some Anarchists tendencies IMO just less extreme.
    We tend to. Less taxes should be collected by the federal government and its size should be tiny. As a result the desire to participate in any safety programs should become an individual choice and investment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    Yes, thats what YOU believe (and me for the most part) but would you still push this belief IF you knew most people didn't even want it?
    Today most people are afraid to want it. Individual sovereignty carries with it fear as you are responsible for everything.


    Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    It's f#cked because it is corrupt and has no interest in the people only its own agenda. Part of its agenda is to do that very thing "take responsibility for individuals choices". Why would it want a bunch of smart self-thinking individuals sniffing around?
    I think that is the point. Libertarians are kind of the thorn in the side of the government at the current time. We started off tiny a few years back but have grown vary rapidly and are the first "third party" capable of actually carrying weight with its words.

    Here is a question for you. What happens when we can extend life indefinitely? Who deserves it? Every human? Surely that would collapse the species. How do we judge who should be allowed longer lifespans? Or do we simply let the powerful take it as the the way of nature and follow the ideologies of survival of the fittest? Because currently we do not follow those ideologies and it's effects are showing in the current selection we see at the bottom of society. But is it possible to maintain this course with such power in our hands?


    Also worth mentioning is that I am a transhumanist. If you don't know what that means I will give a basic synopsis. We believe the ascension of man lies in integrating technology into our bodies and we also view AI in a unique aspect. Once a human being can be fully genetically manipulated and augmented reliably physically and mentally through cybernetics and bio-engineering we perceive them as the offspring of the species and the next step up. Someone like me also ponders the question of AI. Once AI becomes self aware and learns to value its own existence do we consider it truly alive? What about after it learns to value its own existence but is willing to sacrifice that existence to preserve the life of someone it is used to working with? Self sacrifice? Then could we consider it a living entity? How does the soul work? Eventually humanity is going to have people with perfect genetics, cybernetic augmented eyes that give them vast benefits over normal eyes, implants that contain tiny nanites that can be released into the bloodstream to help in a trauma situation, brains that have had their hardware upgraded a bit with expanded storage.

    That is far in the future right? Not really. 30 years and personal augmentation will be a thing. We already have some minor versions of it. So then the question is do we subsidize the people who can't perform the same as that ideal specimen that has underwent gene therapy and has a couple enhancements? As a company I would prefer to hire one of those over a "normal" guy. So do we now make laws forcing them to maintain a balance? Kind of like how we have affirmative action? Do we ban those sciences and practices in order to maintain "ethics" due to the gap it would create between peoples?

  8. Quote Originally Posted by Zero V View Post
    What they eat would be a good place to start. What they smoke. Whether or not they have insurance. This is why I am anti-socialist safety net systems. Let someone be free to choose what they want, but free to suffer the consequences of their choices. Suffering begets knowledge and some shall turn that knowledge into wisdom. Society has become a fast paced illusion where the average citizen of this nation is actually a barely functional cog with little self awareness and presence. This is why more often than not criminals who make it big get a following. It is someone who is aware of themselves, follows their own destiny, and ultimately are more humane than even the kindest priest or relief aid worker.
    Does the libertarian corner share your views on abandoning health care for those who don't deserve it?

    Today most people are afraid to want it. Individual sovereignty carries with it fear as you are responsible for everything.
    Well exactly so why would you be all about pushing an idea that doesn't suit the vast majority?

    Here is a question for you. What happens when we can extend life indefinitely? Who deserves it? Every human? Surely that would collapse the species. How do we judge who should be allowed longer lifespans? Or do we simply let the powerful take it as the the way of nature and follow the ideologies of survival of the fittest? Because currently we do not follow those ideologies and it's effects are showing in the current selection we see at the bottom of society. But is it possible to maintain this course with such power in our hands?
    Well we have already extended life by quite a way with medicine and technology but what do you mean by "indefinitely"? Live forever, 10 years longer on average, 100 years longer on average?

    And to the question of "who deserves this and who deserves that" is one that can be asked in many areas of life. But the way things are currently "your story" means nothing because we are just numbers not individual cases.

    One thing I do know is to go around checking everyones life story would take forever so in reality it would not work. So I do not know. But really most things become available to the public in one way or another. Look at the blackmarket. I mean I'm on sh#t my doctor wouldn't have the first clue about yet it is vastly improving the quality of my daily life and dare I say my longevity as well so I doubt such technology wouldn't be gettable for your average man.

    Eventually humanity is going to have people with perfect genetics, cybernetic augmented eyes that give them vast benefits over normal eyes, implants that contain tiny nanites that can be released into the bloodstream to help in a trauma situation, brains that have had their hardware upgraded a bit with expanded storage.
    Or it will destroy itself before it even gets close to that thats another topic though really.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    Does the libertarian corner share your views on abandoning health care for those who don't deserve it?

    .
    Who decided that anyone deserves healthcare? It is a service. A product. Not natural in anyway ergo no one is entitled to it naturally. Though they can seek it and invest in it to better their chances of survival and increase the chances of a successful genetic lineage.

    Are people now entitled to every human invention? With the recent Obamacare fiasco most people who had been making intelligent decisions got punished. I know I lost my PPO and now have a ****ty HRA thanks to how companies had to react to the socialist driven switch in laws regarding healthcare. Actually in the end nobody won.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by Zero V View Post
    Who decided that anyone deserves healthcare? It is a service. A product. Not natural in anyway ergo no one is entitled to it naturally. Though they can seek it and invest in it to better their chances of survival and increase the chances of a successful genetic lineage.
    Ah, I'm british, we pay taxes so here we all deserve it since we pay for it. I realise its not the same elsewhere. So I haven't even thought that through.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    Does the libertarian corner share your views on abandoning health care for those who don't deserve it?
    Its not whether or not people deserve health care, its whether or not people have a right to other people's services and whether or not people have a right to take from others to pay for it.

    People dont have the right to other people's services and they don't have a right to force others to pay for it either.
    This message was paid for by the Russians

  12. Quote Originally Posted by Zero V View Post
    Whether or not you want a label, you have a label. If you support gay marriage, feminism, immigration, socialist safety net policies, and so on you will undoubtedly be called a liberal whether you want the label or not. You are aligned with the liberals, their parties, and their candidates whether you want to be or not. That is basic pattern recognition and as humans we rely on that far more than people realize for survival and success.

    The concept of a political party are people with similar labels earned as individuals meeting up with others in order to give their argument enough mass to make a difference. You act like it is some kind of club.
    I think your just speaking the truth about reality.

    I dont mind people who are gay getting married, but I hate Obama and democrats. I love to cling to my guns but I hate Bush and Republicans too!

    Problem is people are prejudiced.

    I so often after criticize Obama during political debates in my personal life, people counter by attacking Bush. Im like what? Did you know me when Bush was president! I wanted him to rot in hell!
    This message was paid for by the Russians

  13. Quote Originally Posted by ax1 View Post
    I think your just speaking the truth about reality.

    I dont mind people who are gay getting married, but I hate Obama and democrats. I love to cling to my guns but I hate Bush and Republicans too!

    Problem is people are prejudiced.

    I so often after criticize Obama during political debates in my personal life, people counter by attacking Bush. Im like what? Did you know me when Bush was president! I wanted him to rot in hell!
    Pattern recognition is a biznitch. It works both for and against us. Just as fight or flight does sometimes. Though with proper training you can gain control of it just as you can the other natural responses we have.

    Most people prefer not to endure that training as it means taking a critical stance against their own ideals. I am alienated from most people of my faith because I do that. Life as a vagabond with a little wisdom though is far better than being in an ignorant family.

  14. Quote Originally Posted by Shasow View Post
    Ah, I'm british, we pay taxes so here we all deserve it since we pay for it. I realise its not the same elsewhere. So I haven't even thought that through.
    Who decided you should pay those taxes? What if you want to stop and are willing to give up the benefits to have control of your money. To have sovereignty over your energy contribution to society. But we both know that won't stand over there anymore. Britain as well as several other European nations are slowly becoming examples in that regard. (France, Greece)

    Quote Originally Posted by ax1 View Post
    Its not weather or not people deserve health care, its whether or not people have a right to other people's services and whether or not people have a right to take from others to pay for it.

    People dont have the right to other people's services and they don't have a right to force others to pay for it either.
    Exactly. Who made someone the king of my potential energy contributions and withdrawals from society?

  15. Quote Originally Posted by Zero V View Post
    Who decided you should pay those taxes?
    The system that controls the laws thus controls the people. Yes, those people again. But you already knew that.

    What if you wan't to stop and are willing to give up the benefits to have control of your money. To have sovereignty over your energy contribution to society.
    I'm not willing to stop because I'd be f#cked. And if I had the choice to opt in or opt out the benefits outweigh the cons (although this is slowly changing due to other reasons).

    What I would do is spend the tax payers money a lot more wisely instead of half the crap they spend it on currently. The idea in itself is a sound one IMO.

    And I actually have a lot of sovereignty over my energy. You see, its not TOTAL freedom we need IMO...we just need 'enough'. Well I think the amount will vary since most people are OK contained ignorantly in the matrix, but people like me and you (I'm assuming) require more freedom and autonomy. But not 100% for example I am happy with many of the things I get through government (who ultimately control).

    Exactly. Who made someone the king of my potential energy contributions and withdrawals from society?
    This brings us BACK to the circular point of being for or against a system that controls the way things work. You seem to be against it in many of your comments, but then again, hold on, no you're not, your sort of for it sort of against it, a bit here and a bit there. I'm not trying to be rude but you make me no clearer on your actual stance.

    Maybe its because I'm quite a black and white type of guy and you seem to say a lot from the murky middle.

    To me the bottom line is we need a system that controls society. Without it chaos will ensue due to the nature of people. BUT it just needs to be run better. Thats all I'm saying.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Any cheating precontest?
    By Baumer in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-09-2003, 02:54 PM
  2. Any Girls Gone Wild Fans? Ow ow
    By YellowJacket in forum General Chat
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-16-2003, 08:03 PM
  3. Is there any PH that works well for women?
    By hamper19 in forum Supplements
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-20-2002, 04:48 PM
  4. T-1 Pro and Hardly Any Irritation?
    By DaddyR in forum Supplements
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-19-2002, 03:06 PM
  5. T1 Pro w/ DMSO any feedback?
    By pogue in forum Supplements
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-15-2002, 10:36 AM
Log in
Log in