[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
That said, this anarcho-libertarianism is nothing more than a theoretical form of feudalism - which is no problem as a political system, if you are one of the strong ones.
[/quote]
See, why do you imply we should fear the “strong ones”? Should we not more appropriately fear those who steal, murder, kill, rape, and plunder – those whom have managed to sell a lie to us in the name of keeping hold of some other abstract idea called power?
There is no power. There is only freedom and those that stand in the way of it – the classic story of “good” and “evil”.
…may the “strong” survive and may they be moral…
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
See, why do you imply we should fear the “strong ones”? Should we not more appropriately fear those who steal, murder, kill, rape, and plunder – those whom have managed to sell a lie to us in the name of keeping hold of some other abstract idea called power? There is no power. There is only freedom and those that stand in the way of it – the classic story of “good” and “evil”.
…may the “strong” survive and may they be moral…[/quote]
Where to begin? Your post is completely incoherent.
What makes you think “strong ones” and those who do bad things are mutually exclusive?
Some strong ones we should fear, some we should not - the only thing we can know for sure is that Human Nature will ensure that your fanciful musings would fall short of in the first 24 hours.
Your last sentence is more of your utopian nonsense - setting aside the fact that you contradict yourself yet again on morality. You are as naive as the statists that you chide for believing in the infallibility of the State.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
If such a world should ever come to pass, can you imagine where an Orion or a Lifticus would fit in? I can - they would be serving cold drinks to Jabba the Hut.
[/quote]
It’s funny because you managed to both imply we would allow ourselves to be subjugated by force and at the same time threw in a geek reference to star wars…the pun wasn’t lost on me – I do like a good nerd joke.
I have neither intention to serve drinks nor die easily.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
It’s funny because you managed to both imply we would allow ourselves to be subjugated by force and at the same time threw in a geek reference to star wars…the pun wasn’t lost on me – I do like a good nerd joke.[/quote]
Well, you found a pun where there was none - so enjoy that.
But you would wind up doing both, because of your gullibility and feebleness.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
What makes you think “strong ones” and those who do bad things are mutually exclusive?[/quote]
You said the only ones who would like the anarcho-libertarian society would be the “strong ones” because it would be like feudalism. This implies a fear to me or perhaps it is a threat.
But either way the use of the words strong and weak are meaningless. I can imagine you fancy yourself one of the strong.
Besides, feudalism is neither free nor libertarian so it would never happen again. Humanity has been there and done that and no one is going back to it.
You call me naive but I call me young of spirit. It is, in fact, the young of spirit with the capacity for change…and it is them only that understand the concept of independence.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
But you would wind up doing both, because of your gullibility and feebleness.[/quote]
You would be the first to taste my bootheel.
lol. You would get eaten alive.
[quote]orion wrote:
Cheat on your taxes. Whenever they want something from you, drag your heels…
That actually works…
[/quote]
Unfortunately here in the US the only efficient aspect of government is that which is tasked with collecting the money…go figure.
[quote]
I would drink my wine out of your skull.
You would be the first to taste my bootheel.[/quote]
Setting aside the high chuckle factor associated with these comments from our resident gamma-male airheads, anyone else amused at how our “as an anarcho-libertarian, I reject the immorality of force” types have such violent fantasies in their ridiculous non-violent utopias?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Setting aside the high chuckle factor associated with these comments from our resident gamma-male airheads, anyone else amused at how our “as an anarcho-libertarian, I reject the immorality of force” types have such violent fantasies in their ridiculous non-violent utopias?
[/quote]
Well there is nothing immoral about self defense.
You are the one that is so sure about what we have to “fear” that I can only gather you mean that as a threat.
You aren’t one who is foolish enough to stand in the way of freedom are you?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Well there is nothing immoral about self defense. [/quote]
Who said anything about “self-defense”? You need to work out your violence fantasies.
But the truth remains - in your ideal world, you’d be a footstool.
Just dumb. My general comment that the world you want would be a violent, cutthroat one in which you would be victimized was perceived as a a threat, over the internet?
If you were 13, this would be stupid, but would make more sense. What is your excuse?
Heh. You are no different than the statist radicals you claim to distinguish yourself from. Gullible, naive, and completely convinced in a historical line towards utopia - again, you are old enough to know better: what is your excuse?
[quote]tg2hbk4488 wrote:
Do you just post on these political forums because this is the only way to get your message out because in a real face-to-face convo people just walk away after talking to you for ten minutes?[/quote]
I just saw this - you are being charitable in assuming anyone would give him ten minutes, but your point is absolutely right.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Heh. You are no different than the statist radicals you claim to distinguish yourself from.
[/quote]
There is nothing wrong with radicalism. Seldom is anything accomplished without it. It was a radical notion indeed that man thought he could live in freedom without a supreme master in the first place. Besides, the use of the word radical is just a value judgment. People who use that term either have no principles of their own or are just staunch opponents of the proposed ideal.
You can call me a “radical” but it doesn’t change what is real or necessary.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Carwashes Violating Wage Laws, State Finds - The New York Times [/quote]
Well if you want to startup a carwash and pay your employees more than their market value you are free to do so. Good luck staying in business.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Well if you want to startup a carwash and pay your employees more than their market value you are free to do so. Good luck staying in business.[/quote]
Break the law and try to stay in business
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Break the law and try to stay in business
[/quote]
Well to be fair the law that was broken isn’t a crime – it is a malum prohibitum.
The consequence of enforcing this minimum wage law is disemployment and a shortage of car washes.
No problem. There is no need for car washes anyway, right?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Break the law and try to stay in business
Well to be fair the law that was broken isn’t a crime – it is a malum prohibitum.
The consequence of enforcing this minimum wage law is disemployment and a shortage of car washes.
No problem. There is no need for car washes anyway, right?[/quote]
You are funny, you do not think some one would be willing to pay an extra dollar so the car washes could pay minimum wage? They should put those people in jail
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
You are funny, you do not think some one would be willing to pay an extra dollar so the car washes could pay minimum wage?
[/quote]
That one may or may not be willing is not for one to impose on others.
[quote]
They should put those people in jail[/quote]
Why is it okay for you as a consumer to demand the lowest price but it is not okay for consumers of labor to demand it?
Carried to its logical conclusion one would be forced to admit that all prices should have a floor that any consumer cannot buy below. Imagine the lunacy of having a minimum price on a pair of shoes or toilette-paper?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
You are funny, you do not think some one would be willing to pay an extra dollar so the car washes could pay minimum wage?
That one may or may not be willing is not for one to impose on others.
They should put those people in jail
Why is it okay for you as a consumer to demand the lowest price but it is not okay for consumers of labor to demand it?
Carried to its logical conclusion one would be forced to admit that all prices should have a floor that any consumer cannot buy below. Imagine the lunacy of having a minimum price on a pair of shoes or toilette-paper?[/quote]
If they did not want to pay an extra dollar they would have to wash their own car, I personally do not buy the lowest priced objects very often. Usually you get what you pay for.
Why you have to guarantee a minimum wage is because some people have to depend on their jobs to live, and most other markets are not alive so they have no requirements that a person would have
One of the difference between you and I are what we consider logic.