Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
This is all I have to contribute to this thread
bad as Germany but worse then the US.
From what I heard, Australia is worse than Germany.
Capitalism - You have two cows. You're allowed to sell one to you neighbour to buy a bull, but your neighbour isn't interested when Cow-Mart has thousands of them for half as much with only a slight chance of the milk being poisonous.
Pure
Socialism: You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in
a barn with everyone else's cows. You have to take care of all the cows. The
government gives you as much milk as you need.
Bureaucratic Socialism: You have two cows. The government takes them
and puts them in a barn with everyone else's cows. They are cared for by ex-chicken
farmers. You have to take care of the chickens the government took from the
chicken farmers. The government gives you as much milk and as many eggs as its
regulations say you should need.
Pure Communism: You have two cows. Your neighbors help you take care
of them, and you all share the milk.
Russian Communism: You have two cows. You have to take care of them,
but the government takes all the milk.
> I mean gov ernment c0ntrolls aspects of every little thing.
You really, really, really need to stop with your paranoia.
Let me show you what's wrong with your thinking:
> rationing out resources by the threat of force
I have NEVER seen anyone threaten me or my parents with "YOU WILL BUY FIVE ORANGES, AND ONLY FIVE ORANGES, OR ELSE".
> controlling our social and personal behaviors
I can go outside in the rain and dance like an idiot. I can run screaming down the street in speedos if I so wish. Your point is invalid.
> restricting mutual voluntary interactions because "they" deam it nessecary
I have never had police telling me that I can't go and hang out with my friends.
----
> I've pretty much stopped trusting any sort of authority or orginization. There is no such thing as a benevolent state. So it is best to limit the functions and role of the state. Ideally to abolish it. To reject all authority whether it be of the state, of the elite, of the majority, whatever it may be authority comes from the will of a collective and it must be rejected.
The problem with your thinking this is that the absence of a state does NOT and WILL NEVER mean the absence of some sort of leadership power structure. Anarchy will not sustain itself.
Also Glenn I forgot to say the word you were looking for is pessimistic.
If you're talking about not having laws that protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation then the problem is that "we don't have laws protecting rights yet", NOT "we have laws oppressing people".
If you're talking about people doing defense-of-marriage stuff, though, yes, you're right.
As for banning drugs (especially harder drugs), that's because the rest of society has to pay for the consequences. Police do crack and heroin busts because that disrupts gangs and organized crime--which cuts down on violent crime in communities.
I don't get laws against public nudity, since I don't really care much (and find nudity mildly amusing and little more than that), but I'd say that if people want to make a law like this for themselves, I have no real authority to say no to it. Unless you want to call up your local constitutional lawyer and bring this up to federal appeals courts or something.
As for marijuana, which is probably what you're talking about, IIRC it was found to be less addictive or harmful than alcohol or tobacco. People are trying to phase out tobacco use gradually. Alcohol, though, when consumed in moderation may have beneficial health effects.
I wholly agree.
But people don't have a right to fuck up their lives and others' lives along with it.
People also don't have the right to fuck up their own lives just for the rest of us to pay for their treatment.
And what about fucking up other people's lives? What about the child or spouse of a drug addict? What about organized crime dealing drugs and killing people over it? What about addicts spending money on drugs and grinding the local economy to a halt? What if people come to school or work too stoned to do anything? What if people get blood-transmitted diseases through their drug habits and them pass them onto non-addicts?
There is no legitimate market for some goods, y'know.
Face it; not all problems can be solved by laissez-faire capitalism and entirely voluntary action on the part of individuals.