Our Government: Evil or Incompetent?

  • 101 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for TigerWars
#1 Posted by TigerWars (427 posts) -

Incompetence: Opposing parties refuse to cooperate with eachother, and only work for thier own political gain, creating a system in which important issues hardly see any kind of resolutions. Adding to this, nearly all are corrupt and work in a deeply corrupt system in which lobbyists control their votes and corporations fund thier campaigns. Though some politicians have honorable intentions (your team!), there is always some check or balance in government that prevents them from accompishing meaningful legislation (damn other team!)

 

Evil: A shadow government, or a concealed third-party (think the Emperor from Star Wars), pull strings from behind the scenes. Disallowing any important issues from seeing any kind of resolution to keep the people divided and bickering. The only legislation or major policy decisions that come to light are ones that serve its intentions (Oil, Money Power). Having control over all major banks and corporations (news media, food, military industrial complex, music, hollywood etc.) , they sculpt society as they see fit and even control the government through the guise of lobbyists and special interest groups.

 

The first seems much more rational but I challenge people to consider if the second option is truly impossible? Couldn't it be true? What wouldn't be possible with unlimited money?

Avatar image for Master_Live
#2 Posted by Master_Live (18821 posts) -
It reflects its leader: incompetence.
Avatar image for famicommander
#3 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
All governments are both evil and incompetent; it is the inherent nature of government. They are evil because they rest on the threat or initiation of violence in any action they take, and they are incompetent because government action is not subject to the profit/loss mechanism or the pricing system and thus have no method for the rational allocation of resources. All governments are the same in type; they only differ in degree. Some are much more evil than others and some are much more incompetent, but evil and incompetence are the very characteristics that define government. To expect a government to behave in a moral or competent fashion is to expect a square to be round.
Avatar image for Grimdalus
#4 Posted by Grimdalus (135 posts) -
I can't take accusations that the Government is evil seriously. It reminds me of all those NWO conspiracy theorists. The Government is most likely incompetent and out of touch with people's lives.
Avatar image for famicommander
#5 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
I can't take accusations that the Government is evil seriously. It reminds me of all those NWO conspiracy theorists. The Government is most likely incompetent and out of touch with people's lives.Grimdalus
Government by nature relies on theft for the perpetuation of its existence. There is no conspiracy theory necessary; they are an organization that is defined and perpetuated by violence.
Avatar image for Grimdalus
#6 Posted by Grimdalus (135 posts) -
[QUOTE="Grimdalus"]I can't take accusations that the Government is evil seriously. It reminds me of all those NWO conspiracy theorists. The Government is most likely incompetent and out of touch with people's lives.famicommander
Government by nature relies on theft for the perpetuation of its existence. There is no conspiracy theory necessary; they are an organization that is defined and perpetuated by violence.

By theft, do you mean taxes?
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#7 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="Grimdalus"]I can't take accusations that the Government is evil seriously. It reminds me of all those NWO conspiracy theorists. The Government is most likely incompetent and out of touch with people's lives.famicommander
Government by nature relies on theft for the perpetuation of its existence. There is no conspiracy theory necessary; they are an organization that is defined and perpetuated by violence.

Hahaha, you're one of those people who think taxation is theft.
Avatar image for Master_Live
#8 Posted by Master_Live (18821 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"]I can't take accusations that the Government is evil seriously. It reminds me of all those NWO conspiracy theorists. The Government is most likely incompetent and out of touch with people's lives.Makhaidos
Government by nature relies on theft for the perpetuation of its existence. There is no conspiracy theory necessary; they are an organization that is defined and perpetuated by violence.

Hahaha, you're one of those people who think taxation is theft.

What is taxation?
Avatar image for famicommander
#9 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"]I can't take accusations that the Government is evil seriously. It reminds me of all those NWO conspiracy theorists. The Government is most likely incompetent and out of touch with people's lives.Makhaidos
Government by nature relies on theft for the perpetuation of its existence. There is no conspiracy theory necessary; they are an organization that is defined and perpetuated by violence.

Hahaha, you're one of those people who think taxation is theft.

What I think is irrelevant. Taxation is the involuntary extraction of property by the threat of violence. That's theft.
Avatar image for TigerWars
#10 Posted by TigerWars (427 posts) -

I can't take accusations that the Government is evil seriously. It reminds me of all those NWO conspiracy theorists. The Government is most likely incompetent and out of touch with people's lives.Grimdalus
Any particular reason you can't take those theories seriously? Politicians have openly admitted their intentions for a New World Order (a number of times), The Bilderberg group, Bohemian Grove, Skull and Bones are all real things. They clearly only serve their own interests in foriegn affairs (Children are being slaughtered by the thousands in Africa, yet they have no oil so we send no troops.). It's not that hard to believe for me. Then I hear quotes like this that really make me think:

 

" I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." ~ Woodrow Wilson (After creating the Federal Reserve)

Avatar image for Makhaidos
#11 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -

[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"] Government by nature relies on theft for the perpetuation of its existence. There is no conspiracy theory necessary; they are an organization that is defined and perpetuated by violence. Master_Live
Hahaha, you're one of those people who think taxation is theft.

What is taxation?

Your part of the bargain in the social contract. You live in society, you contribute to society's basic needs (infrastructure, military, certain standards of living, etc.), which are administered by the government.

Avatar image for Makhaidos
#12 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"] Government by nature relies on theft for the perpetuation of its existence. There is no conspiracy theory necessary; they are an organization that is defined and perpetuated by violence.

Hahaha, you're one of those people who think taxation is theft.

What I think is irrelevant. Taxation is the involuntary extraction of property by the threat of violence. That's theft.

It's not involuntary at all. You can move to a country that has no taxation. Or you can make your own country. Or you can go live in the ocean.
Avatar image for DroidPhysX
#13 Posted by DroidPhysX (17098 posts) -

[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"] Government by nature relies on theft for the perpetuation of its existence. There is no conspiracy theory necessary; they are an organization that is defined and perpetuated by violence. famicommander
Hahaha, you're one of those people who think taxation is theft.

What I think is irrelevant. Taxation is the involuntary extraction of property by the threat of violence. That's theft.

lol violence 

Avatar image for Grimdalus
#14 Posted by Grimdalus (135 posts) -
[QUOTE="TigerWars"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"] Any particular reason you can't take those theories seriously? Politicians have openly admitted their intentions for a New World Order (a number of times), The Bilderberg group, Bohemian Grove, Skull and Bones are all real things. They clearly only serve their own interests in foriegn affairs (Children are being slaughtered by the thousands in Africa, yet they have no oil so we send no troops.). It's not that hard to believe for me. Then I hear quotes like this that really make me think: " I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." ~ Woodrow Wilson (After creating the Federal Reserve)

[QUOTE="Grimdalus"]I can't take accusations that the Government is evil seriously. It reminds me of all those NWO conspiracy theorists. The Government is most likely incompetent and out of touch with people's lives.TigerWars
Any particular reason you can't take those theories seriously? Politicians have openly admitted their intentions for a New World Order (a number of times), The Bilderberg group, Bohemian Grove, Skull and Bones are all real things. They clearly only serve their own interests in foriegn affairs (Children are being slaughtered by the thousands in Africa, yet they have no oil so we send no troops.). It's not that hard to believe for me. Then I hear quotes like this that really make me think: " I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." ~ Woodrow Wilson (After creating the Federal Reserve)

1) There is no historical proof of it. 2) Logistic. The amount of money and enforcement to run a secret government is so huge, , it wouldn't be a very big secret. Even a government in the Open would have huge logistic problems, let alone a government that can't enforce any laws. 3) Politicians would never voluntarily share power. 4) The moment a foreign party took over, the entire system would collapse. This has happened repeatedly throughout the history of every nation. 5) Nations would not work together. the Soviets/Chinese and the US. If one of these were part of this organization, the other would've known and outed the illuminati immediately to make their case for their enemy being imperialists. 6) There are patriots in the government. The entire idea is flawed because someone from the government would out what was going on behind the scenes as a patriotic person for his nation. 7) If there were any credibility to this, the mass media would attack it immediately. No one can really control the media either, so it would be a massive story immediately. This entire conspiracy is like christmas for news stations if it's true.
Avatar image for famicommander
#15 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -

[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"] Hahaha, you're one of those people who think taxation is theft.DroidPhysX

What I think is irrelevant. Taxation is the involuntary extraction of property by the threat of violence. That's theft.

lol violence 

Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.
Avatar image for DroidPhysX
#16 Posted by DroidPhysX (17098 posts) -
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="famicommander"] What I think is irrelevant. Taxation is the involuntary extraction of property by the threat of violence. That's theft.famicommander

lol violence 

Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.

lol violence
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#17 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="famicommander"] What I think is irrelevant. Taxation is the involuntary extraction of property by the threat of violence. That's theft.famicommander

lol violence 

Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.

Commit a crime and you'll be arrested. Resist arrest (with violence) and you *might* be shot. The horrible gubment! Why then were taxes ever created at all in a democratic society?
Avatar image for famicommander
#18 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"] Hahaha, you're one of those people who think taxation is theft.

What I think is irrelevant. Taxation is the involuntary extraction of property by the threat of violence. That's theft.

It's not involuntary at all. You can move to a country that has no taxation. Or you can make your own country. Or you can go live in the ocean.

You cannot control where you are born and if you do not pay taxes to the regime under which you are born you will be met with violence. There are no countries that do not have any form of taxation.
Avatar image for Grimdalus
#19 Posted by Grimdalus (135 posts) -
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="famicommander"] What I think is irrelevant. Taxation is the involuntary extraction of property by the threat of violence. That's theft.famicommander

lol violence 

Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.

Why do taxes exist? You are paying for services from the Government. If you don't like it, don't go to the Police, don't send your children to school, don't use our roads.
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#20 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"] There are no countries that do not have any form of taxation.

Yeah. You might want to reflect on why that is.
Avatar image for famicommander
#21 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

lol violence 

Makhaidos
Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.

Commit a crime and you'll be arrested. Resist arrest (with violence) and you *might* be shot. The horrible gubment! Why then were taxes ever created at all in a democratic society?

Your example of a crime is not applicable to this situation because the taxpayer has not committed a crime. It is not a crime to desire to keep your own property. For a crime to have been committed there must be an identifiable victim whose rights have been violated; nobody else has a right to your property.
Avatar image for Serraph105
#22 Posted by Serraph105 (32123 posts) -

depends on which part of the government we are talking about, also who.

Avatar image for Master_Live
#23 Posted by Master_Live (18821 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

lol violence 

Grimdalus
Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.

Why do taxes exist? You are paying for services from the Government. If you don't like it, don't go to the Police, don't send your children to school, don't use our roads.

Can I choose to "not go to the police", "not sending my children to school" and "not use the roads"? And then not pay taxes?
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#24 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"] Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.

Commit a crime and you'll be arrested. Resist arrest (with violence) and you *might* be shot. The horrible gubment! Why then were taxes ever created at all in a democratic society?

Your example of a crime is not applicable to this situation because the taxpayer has not committed a crime. It is not a crime to desire to keep your own property. For a crime to have been committed there must be an identifiable victim whose rights have been violated; nobody else has a right to your property.

And yet by virtue of living in your own society you consent to have a percentage of your property deducted for the benefit of that society; otherwise, you would not live in that society (either because you left or you were removed). Ergo, the social contract. Furthermore, the money you make would not exist (and thus you would not have it) if the government did not print it, which requires your tax dollars. Therefore, to even have property in the first place, taxes are necessary.
Avatar image for famicommander
#25 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

lol violence 

Grimdalus
Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.

Why do taxes exist? You are paying for services from the Government. If you don't like it, don't go to the Police, don't send your children to school, don't use our roads.

I do not have a choice because the government has a violent monopoly over those areas. They have outlawed competition. In any other sector of the economy people naturally recognize that violent monopolies are harmful, but for some reason they refuse to apply that thought process to transportation, defense, or law enforcement. If the market can be trusted to provide food, shelter, and clothing why cannot it be trusted to provide other important commodities? Or do you believe that government should nationalize the food supply and housing industries, too?
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#26 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="Master_Live"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"][QUOTE="famicommander"] Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.

Why do taxes exist? You are paying for services from the Government. If you don't like it, don't go to the Police, don't send your children to school, don't use our roads.

Can I choose to "not go to the police", "not sending my children to school" and "not use the roads"? And then not pay taxes?

Don't call 911, use private roads/ditches, and homeschool.
Avatar image for Capitan_Kid
#27 Posted by Capitan_Kid (6700 posts) -
Neither. It is the force that keeps our country together. It is our parent, our lover, and our brother. It is here to protect us and uphold Justice.
Avatar image for Ace6301
#28 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
There's some people in it who are extremely self-serving but for the most part they're weak willed or just plain dumb which goes under incompetence.
Avatar image for famicommander
#29 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"] Commit a crime and you'll be arrested. Resist arrest (with violence) and you *might* be shot. The horrible gubment! Why then were taxes ever created at all in a democratic society?

Your example of a crime is not applicable to this situation because the taxpayer has not committed a crime. It is not a crime to desire to keep your own property. For a crime to have been committed there must be an identifiable victim whose rights have been violated; nobody else has a right to your property.

And yet by virtue of living in your own society you consent to have a percentage of your property deducted for the benefit of that society; otherwise, you would not live in that society (either because you left or you were removed). Ergo, the social contract. Furthermore, the money you make would not exist (and thus you would not have it) if the government did not print it, which requires your tax dollars. Therefore, to even have property in the first place, taxes are necessary.

You have a very confused perspective on property rights, money creation, and pretty much everything else. There is so such thing as a social contract. I reject the entire notion of society as an entity; society is a collection of individuals acting in their own best interests. Social cooperation is in the best interest of people and it would continue absent the government.
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#30 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"][QUOTE="famicommander"] Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.

Why do taxes exist? You are paying for services from the Government. If you don't like it, don't go to the Police, don't send your children to school, don't use our roads.

I do not have a choice because the government has a violent monopoly over those areas. They have outlawed competition. In any other sector of the economy people naturally recognize that violent monopolies are harmful, but for some reason they refuse to apply that thought process to transportation, defense, or law enforcement. If the market can be trusted to provide food, shelter, and clothing why cannot it be trusted to provide other important commodities? Or do you believe that government should nationalize the food supply and housing industries, too?

Would you relegate the printing of money to private industries?
Avatar image for famicommander
#31 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="Master_Live"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"] Why do taxes exist? You are paying for services from the Government. If you don't like it, don't go to the Police, don't send your children to school, don't use our roads.

Can I choose to "not go to the police", "not sending my children to school" and "not use the roads"? And then not pay taxes?

Don't call 911, use private roads/ditches, and homeschool.

I have never called the police for any reason, and if I had children I would home school them. But avoiding government roads would make it impossible to go anywhere; from my perspective there should be no such thing as public property in the first place.
Avatar image for Master_Live
#32 Posted by Master_Live (18821 posts) -
[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="Master_Live"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"] Why do taxes exist? You are paying for services from the Government. If you don't like it, don't go to the Police, don't send your children to school, don't use our roads.

Can I choose to "not go to the police", "not sending my children to school" and "not use the roads"? And then not pay taxes?

Don't call 911, use private roads/ditches, and homeschool.

That is good, what about the "not paying taxes" part?
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#33 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"] Your example of a crime is not applicable to this situation because the taxpayer has not committed a crime. It is not a crime to desire to keep your own property. For a crime to have been committed there must be an identifiable victim whose rights have been violated; nobody else has a right to your property.

And yet by virtue of living in your own society you consent to have a percentage of your property deducted for the benefit of that society; otherwise, you would not live in that society (either because you left or you were removed). Ergo, the social contract. Furthermore, the money you make would not exist (and thus you would not have it) if the government did not print it, which requires your tax dollars. Therefore, to even have property in the first place, taxes are necessary.

You have a very confused perspective on property rights, money creation, and pretty much everything else. There is so such thing as a social contract. I reject the entire notion of society as an entity; society is a collection of individuals acting in their own best interests. Social cooperation is in the best interest of people and it would continue absent the government.

I'm wrong in thinking that the government prints money, that to do so requires tax dollars, and that a social contract exists? The idea of the social contract goes back hundreds of years. Why then do we have government at all? You've been asked this question several times and you haven't provided an answer.
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#34 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="Master_Live"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="Master_Live"] Can I choose to "not go to the police", "not sending my children to school" and "not use the roads"? And then not pay taxes?

Don't call 911, use private roads/ditches, and homeschool.

That is good, what about the "not paying taxes" part?

Do all that, plus own property that doesn't belong to the United States, and then we'll talk.
Avatar image for famicommander
#35 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"] Why do taxes exist? You are paying for services from the Government. If you don't like it, don't go to the Police, don't send your children to school, don't use our roads.

I do not have a choice because the government has a violent monopoly over those areas. They have outlawed competition. In any other sector of the economy people naturally recognize that violent monopolies are harmful, but for some reason they refuse to apply that thought process to transportation, defense, or law enforcement. If the market can be trusted to provide food, shelter, and clothing why cannot it be trusted to provide other important commodities? Or do you believe that government should nationalize the food supply and housing industries, too?

Would you relegate the printing of money to private industries?

Nobody should "print" money. The only reason we use a fiat currency is because government has outlawed hard, commodity-backed currency. In the free market gold and silver would likely be the common media of exchange, and the amount in circulation would be determined on the market (ie, a cost/benefit analysis of the process of adding new monetary units to the market in the form of mining or melting down non-monetary gold and sliver and minting it into coinage).
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#36 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"] I do not have a choice because the government has a violent monopoly over those areas. They have outlawed competition. In any other sector of the economy people naturally recognize that violent monopolies are harmful, but for some reason they refuse to apply that thought process to transportation, defense, or law enforcement. If the market can be trusted to provide food, shelter, and clothing why cannot it be trusted to provide other important commodities? Or do you believe that government should nationalize the food supply and housing industries, too?

Would you relegate the printing of money to private industries?

Nobody should "print" money. The only reason we use a fiat currency is because government has outlawed hard, commodity-backed currency. In the free market gold and silver would likely be the common media of exchange, and the amount in circulation would be determined on the market (ie, a cost/benefit analysis of the process of adding new monetary units to the market in the form of mining or melting down non-monetary gold and sliver and minting it into coinage).

And how would such a system manage itself, due to the fact that the value of gold and silver would never remain consistent (as it is based on the fluctuating market rather than set standard)?
Avatar image for Grimdalus
#37 Posted by Grimdalus (135 posts) -
[QUOTE="Master_Live"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"][QUOTE="famicommander"] Stop paying taxes and the government will attempt to lock you in a cage. Resist being locked in a cage and you will be shot. Nobody would pay taxes if this were not the case.

Why do taxes exist? You are paying for services from the Government. If you don't like it, don't go to the Police, don't send your children to school, don't use our roads.

Can I choose to "not go to the police", "not sending my children to school" and "not use the roads"? And then not pay taxes?

I think if you do not pay taxes you will have to pay for all public services that is provided by the government. That's right, you have to pay for anything you use from the public community at full price. You want to stop your house from burning down to the ground, you have to pay the Fire Brigade for example.
Avatar image for famicommander
#38 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"] And yet by virtue of living in your own society you consent to have a percentage of your property deducted for the benefit of that society; otherwise, you would not live in that society (either because you left or you were removed). Ergo, the social contract. Furthermore, the money you make would not exist (and thus you would not have it) if the government did not print it, which requires your tax dollars. Therefore, to even have property in the first place, taxes are necessary.

You have a very confused perspective on property rights, money creation, and pretty much everything else. There is so such thing as a social contract. I reject the entire notion of society as an entity; society is a collection of individuals acting in their own best interests. Social cooperation is in the best interest of people and it would continue absent the government.

I'm wrong in thinking that the government prints money, that to do so requires tax dollars, and that a social contract exists? The idea of the social contract goes back hundreds of years. Why then do we have government at all? You've been asked this question several times and you haven't provided an answer.

We have a government because the majority of people are under the impression that we need one, or at least benefit more by having one than not. It does not provide any services that could not be provided more efficiently and more peacefully on the free market. There is so such thing as a social contract. There are only individuals with their own unalienable rights (life, liberty, property so far as it does not interfere with anyone else's rights).
Avatar image for TigerWars
#39 Posted by TigerWars (427 posts) -

[QUOTE="TigerWars"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"] [QUOTE="TigerWars"][QUOTE="Grimdalus"]I can't take accusations that the Government is evil seriously. It reminds me of all those NWO conspiracy theorists. The Government is most likely incompetent and out of touch with people's lives.Grimdalus
Any particular reason you can't take those theories seriously? Politicians have openly admitted their intentions for a New World Order (a number of times), The Bilderberg group, Bohemian Grove, Skull and Bones are all real things. They clearly only serve their own interests in foriegn affairs (Children are being slaughtered by the thousands in Africa, yet they have no oil so we send no troops.). It's not that hard to believe for me. Then I hear quotes like this that really make me think: " I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." ~ Woodrow Wilson (After creating the Federal Reserve)

 

1) There is no historical proof of it. 2) Logistic. The amount of money and enforcement to run a secret government is so huge, , it wouldn't be a very big secret. Even a government in the Open would have huge logistic problems, let alone a government that can't enforce any laws. 3) Politicians would never voluntarily share power. 4) The moment a foreign party took over, the entire system would collapse. This has happened repeatedly throughout the history of every nation. 5) Nations would not work together. the Soviets/Chinese and the US. If one of these were part of this organization, the other would've known and outed the illuminati immediately to make their case for their enemy being imperialists. 6) There are patriots in the government. The entire idea is flawed because someone from the government would out what was going on behind the scenes as a patriotic person for his nation. 7) If there were any credibility to this, the mass media would attack it immediately. No one can really control the media either, so it would be a massive story immediately. This entire conspiracy is like christmas for news stations if it's true.

1. Yes, there is plenty historical proof of secret socities and men with money controlling the world. I even included a quote from a former US President if you didnt notice.

2. They control the money, they print the money, they are the money. They never run out of money.

     2a. Who the **** would speak out on such a powerful force if they found its existence. They can ridicule and kill your reputation through the media. They can murder you. They can murder your family. They can offer you millions of dollars to stay quiet. You have too much faith in the honor of the average person when faced against such an entity.

3. What?

4. Countries fail, yes, societies like freemasonry live on for thousands of years.

5. The society doesn't control the whole world, they intend to. If they controlled the whole world there would no longer be wars.

6. See 2a.

7. ...See 2a. Also there have been a number of celebrities and public figures (Dave Chapelle, Tupac, Michael Jackson, Woody Harrelson, Lupe Fiasco, Mark Ruffalo) that speak out on them but the general populace (informed by the media) thinks of them only as "CrAaAaZZzy CoOoNnNSpIraCists!! LOLOLOL"

Avatar image for famicommander
#40 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"] Would you relegate the printing of money to private industries?

Nobody should "print" money. The only reason we use a fiat currency is because government has outlawed hard, commodity-backed currency. In the free market gold and silver would likely be the common media of exchange, and the amount in circulation would be determined on the market (ie, a cost/benefit analysis of the process of adding new monetary units to the market in the form of mining or melting down non-monetary gold and sliver and minting it into coinage).

And how would such a system manage itself, due to the fact that the value of gold and silver would never remain consistent (as it is based on the fluctuating market rather than set standard)?

The prices of other goods would always be set in terms of some amount of gold and silver so there is no conflict. The value of the dollar changes on a daily basis too, and has lost over 95% of the value it had before the Federal Reserve Act.
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#41 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"] You have a very confused perspective on property rights, money creation, and pretty much everything else. There is so such thing as a social contract. I reject the entire notion of society as an entity; society is a collection of individuals acting in their own best interests. Social cooperation is in the best interest of people and it would continue absent the government.

I'm wrong in thinking that the government prints money, that to do so requires tax dollars, and that a social contract exists? The idea of the social contract goes back hundreds of years. Why then do we have government at all? You've been asked this question several times and you haven't provided an answer.

We have a government because the majority of people are under the impression that we need one, or at least benefit more by having one than not. It does not provide any services that could not be provided more efficiently and more peacefully on the free market. There is so such thing as a social contract. There are only individuals with their own unalienable rights (life, liberty, property so far as it does not interfere with anyone else's rights).

Why do people have the impression that we need one? Where did this impression come from? Why do we feel we benefit more with one than without one, if the free market so obviously can do it better? How do you come up witht he concept of rights? How do you come up with the concept of property? What is liberty? Where do rights come from?
Avatar image for jimkabrhel
#42 Posted by jimkabrhel (15625 posts) -

The government is imperfect, not incompetent. Anyone who thinks the US government is evil is either delusional, or has a personality that refuses any kind of authority.

Avatar image for Makhaidos
#43 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"] Nobody should "print" money. The only reason we use a fiat currency is because government has outlawed hard, commodity-backed currency. In the free market gold and silver would likely be the common media of exchange, and the amount in circulation would be determined on the market (ie, a cost/benefit analysis of the process of adding new monetary units to the market in the form of mining or melting down non-monetary gold and sliver and minting it into coinage).

And how would such a system manage itself, due to the fact that the value of gold and silver would never remain consistent (as it is based on the fluctuating market rather than set standard)?

The prices of other goods would always be set in terms of some amount of gold and silver so there is no conflict. The value of the dollar changes on a daily basis too, and has lost over 95% of the value it had before the Federal Reserve Act.

So a pair of shoes, say, would always cost x amount of gold/silver, no matter what happens? Seems kinda doomed to fail to me. Yes, but we can manage the changing of the value of the dollar thanks to governments and international cooperation. How are we going to manage the changing of values with no government?
Avatar image for famicommander
#44 Posted by famicommander (8524 posts) -
[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"] And how would such a system manage itself, due to the fact that the value of gold and silver would never remain consistent (as it is based on the fluctuating market rather than set standard)?

The prices of other goods would always be set in terms of some amount of gold and silver so there is no conflict. The value of the dollar changes on a daily basis too, and has lost over 95% of the value it had before the Federal Reserve Act.

So a pair of shoes, say, would always cost x amount of gold/silver, no matter what happens? Seems kinda doomed to fail to me. Yes, but we can manage the changing of the value of the dollar thanks to governments and international cooperation. How are we going to manage the changing of values with no government?

"We" are not going to manage anything. The value of a monetary unit would be determined by its perceived value versus the quantity and quality of available goods in the economy. And no, a pair of shoes would not always have a set cost in terms of gold/silver. Its price would fluctuate on the market, as all other prices would naturally tend to do.
Avatar image for Ace6301
#45 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -

The government is imperfect, not incompetent. Anyone who thinks the US government is evil is either delusional, or has a personality that refuses any kind of authority.

jimkabrhel
Funny you should mention that. I was just thinking that a lot of the hardcore libertarians seem like the sort to be upset in their supposedly ideal setting.
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#46 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"] The prices of other goods would always be set in terms of some amount of gold and silver so there is no conflict. The value of the dollar changes on a daily basis too, and has lost over 95% of the value it had before the Federal Reserve Act.

So a pair of shoes, say, would always cost x amount of gold/silver, no matter what happens? Seems kinda doomed to fail to me. Yes, but we can manage the changing of the value of the dollar thanks to governments and international cooperation. How are we going to manage the changing of values with no government?

"We" are not going to manage anything. The value of a monetary unit would be determined by its perceived value versus the quantity and quality of available goods in the economy. And no, a pair of shoes would not always have a set cost in terms of gold/silver. Its price would fluctuate on the market, as all other prices would naturally tend to do.

But prices in the market fluctuate based on, among other things, the quality and quantity of an item. What makes this perception of value valid? Whose perception do we use? Our own individual perception?
Avatar image for Makhaidos
#47 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -
[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

The government is imperfect, not incompetent. Anyone who thinks the US government is evil is either delusional, or has a personality that refuses any kind of authority.

Ace6301
Funny you should mention that. I was just thinking that a lot of the hardcore libertarians seem like the sort to be upset in their supposedly ideal setting.

Their patron saint Ayn Rand benefited from social security/medicare.
Avatar image for DroidPhysX
#48 Posted by DroidPhysX (17098 posts) -

[QUOTE="Makhaidos"][QUOTE="famicommander"] Nobody should "print" money. The only reason we use a fiat currency is because government has outlawed hard, commodity-backed currency. In the free market gold and silver would likely be the common media of exchange, and the amount in circulation would be determined on the market (ie, a cost/benefit analysis of the process of adding new monetary units to the market in the form of mining or melting down non-monetary gold and sliver and minting it into coinage).famicommander
And how would such a system manage itself, due to the fact that the value of gold and silver would never remain consistent (as it is based on the fluctuating market rather than set standard)?

The prices of other goods would always be set in terms of some amount of gold and silver so there is no conflict. The value of the dollar changes on a daily basis too, and has lost over 95% of the value it had before the Federal Reserve Act.

Psst, stop listening to Ronny

Avatar image for Ace6301
#49 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

The government is imperfect, not incompetent. Anyone who thinks the US government is evil is either delusional, or has a personality that refuses any kind of authority.

Makhaidos
Funny you should mention that. I was just thinking that a lot of the hardcore libertarians seem like the sort to be upset in their supposedly ideal setting.

Their patron saint Ayn Rand benefited from social security/medicare.

And practically worshiped a serial killer. But there's no point in bringing her up. The main thing is that a lot of them are just whiners and pessimists.
Avatar image for deactivated-59f03d6ce656b
#50 Posted by deactivated-59f03d6ce656b (2944 posts) -

The government is imperfect, not incompetent. Anyone who thinks the US government is evil is either delusional, or has a personality that refuses any kind of authority.

jimkabrhel
Well there are certainly some fvcked up parts, lately shown by Manning and Snowden.