Socialism's Eventual Result

smh23 · May 26, 2011, 10:39pm

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:
[Admittedly, I have not done research on how the program is structured. My question is: what does it matter? This is just semantics. Either way, they get $4 Billion dollars a year or taxpayer money. In a time when the GOP is talking about ending Medicare, while contiuing 2 wars, does giving “tax dollars” to oil companies see fair to you?

BTW: How did that election in the most conservative district in NY work out the other day??? I forgot.

Smartass[/quote]

In your (supposed PhD earning) mind, I’m sure all money belongs “to the taxpayers” and the gov’t just lets us keep whatever they decide they don’t need. For those of us with brains, we realize that money BELONGS to the oil companies and it is NOT “taxpayer money”. The gov’t has no more right to it than they do to come into your house and take food out of your refrigerator.

Where do you teach, so I can ensure my kids don’t attend school there.[/quote]

It sounds like you are attacking taxation at its most fundamental philosophical level. It is incredibly easy to justify taxation, and if you wish I will do it for you.

Once taxation has been justified, you can argue matters of amounts and magnitudes. But you don’t seem to be doing that. You seem to believe that taxation itself is wrong. Am I right about this?[/quote]

I believe it’s a necessary evil
[/quote]

Then your whole “the money belongs to the oil companies argument” doesn’t work here. Taxation is the taking of a person or corporate entity’s money. You can’t say taxation is necessary and then use elements of the fundamental definition of taxation in an argument against it.

orion · May 26, 2011, 11:37pm

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:
[Admittedly, I have not done research on how the program is structured. My question is: what does it matter? This is just semantics. Either way, they get $4 Billion dollars a year or taxpayer money. In a time when the GOP is talking about ending Medicare, while contiuing 2 wars, does giving “tax dollars” to oil companies see fair to you?

BTW: How did that election in the most conservative district in NY work out the other day??? I forgot.

Smartass[/quote]

In your (supposed PhD earning) mind, I’m sure all money belongs “to the taxpayers” and the gov’t just lets us keep whatever they decide they don’t need. For those of us with brains, we realize that money BELONGS to the oil companies and it is NOT “taxpayer money”. The gov’t has no more right to it than they do to come into your house and take food out of your refrigerator.

Where do you teach, so I can ensure my kids don’t attend school there.[/quote]

It sounds like you are attacking taxation at its most fundamental philosophical level. It is incredibly easy to justify taxation, and if you wish I will do it for you.

Once taxation has been justified, you can argue matters of amounts and magnitudes. But you don’t seem to be doing that. You seem to believe that taxation itself is wrong. Am I right about this?[/quote]

Oh, oh, please do that.

Since I wrote a thesis on the subject I am downright eager for this incredibly easy justification that I seem to have missed.

orion · May 26, 2011, 11:41pm

And please, just so that it has a general structure:

First, we would need a justification for the state.

Then, derived from its raison d´etre, the exact kind of taxes it can levy and to what ends those money can be directed in order to not clash with the justification for said state and with the indended purpose of that taxation.

I am waiting with baited breath.

garcia1970 · May 27, 2011, 12:20am

Are you guys serious?

I get it. You guys think you’re all rich and don’t need the government. You think the social safety net is being abused by all those brown people who are lazy, right? (Someone said “staying home having babies”? Wonder who you were talking about?)

The way commerce works is to do business in a state, country, the entity must pay some sort of tax. With that revenue, the country can function–build infrastructure, pay govt workers–and, yes… Take care of people that are unable to take care of themselves. This stabilizes the economy, which is compromised 68% on consumer spending. If you guys have a problem with that, you are so far out of the mainstream and reality that we really have nothing to discuss.

These views are VERY Draconian. Thus, you have the results of this week’s election.

BTW: LOVE those smartass “professor” comments. I assure you, your kids most probably couldn’t get into our school or make it very far if they have the same Michigan Militia views as you. And THAT’s the truth!

garcia1970 · May 27, 2011, 2:09am

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]theBird wrote:
I would like to take this opportunity to encourage my suggestions to make the
world a fairer and better place to be in;[/quote]

There is no “fairness” you create your own world and you live in it. You don’t know this do you? Furthermore, you cannot create fairness for those who refuse to help themselves. Sorry for the harsh dose of reality. Are you going to be okay?

[quote]-try and avoid cooperations. Try not to work for them and dont do business with them. I know
this will be difficult, but try and do what you can.[/quote]

One of the dumbest things I’ve ever read on T Nation. Do you realize that millions of people are employed by corporations? Those people are dependent on their corporation to profit so that they can put food on the table for their families. Why do you want to hurt working class and middle class people? Also by trying to cripple corporations this will only harm the economy. The millions of people employed by corporations spend a great deal of money in the economy if that money is no longer there many, many others will become unemployed. Why do you want to see people without jobs? I guess you didn’t think this one through either huh?

[quote]-try to avoid purchasing mass produced goods. Even if you have to spend an extra dollar, purchase
something that has been made locally by locals.[/quote]

Another dumb idea for obviuous reasons.

Why would anyone try to use less oil? Don’t tell me, you’re an Al Gore global warming “the world is coming to an end” freak. There is ample oil in the world to last many more thousands of years. So that’s not the reason.
[/quote]

Zeb<

Being that you are so abrasive and crass in your posts, I thought I would simply respond with a question:

a)what is the estimated world supply of oil reserves? --from a CREDIBLE source, not FOX!!
b)what is forecasted world consumption for the next 50 years or so?

What do you get when you divide?

Is that thousands of years of supply?

Moron.

smh23 · May 27, 2011, 4:34am

[quote]orion wrote:

Oh, oh, please do that.

Since I wrote a thesis on the subject I am downright eager for this incredibly easy justification that I seem to have missed.

[/quote]

Oh boy! A thesis! Now I’m terrified!

For the benefit of all, societal cooperation must be regulated, its disparate components protected from each other, and the machinery of its quotidian comings and goings kept in a state of constant vitality. These things cost money. Since we are the benefactors, and the recipients of the services, we pay the money.

Make it as fucked and convoluted as you’d like. That right there is simple and true.

smh23 · May 27, 2011, 4:36am

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:
[Admittedly, I have not done research on how the program is structured. My question is: what does it matter? This is just semantics. Either way, they get $4 Billion dollars a year or taxpayer money. In a time when the GOP is talking about ending Medicare, while contiuing 2 wars, does giving “tax dollars” to oil companies see fair to you?

BTW: How did that election in the most conservative district in NY work out the other day??? I forgot.

Smartass[/quote]

In your (supposed PhD earning) mind, I’m sure all money belongs “to the taxpayers” and the gov’t just lets us keep whatever they decide they don’t need. For those of us with brains, we realize that money BELONGS to the oil companies and it is NOT “taxpayer money”. The gov’t has no more right to it than they do to come into your house and take food out of your refrigerator.

Where do you teach, so I can ensure my kids don’t attend school there.[/quote]

It sounds like you are attacking taxation at its most fundamental philosophical level. It is incredibly easy to justify taxation, and if you wish I will do it for you.

Once taxation has been justified, you can argue matters of amounts and magnitudes. But you don’t seem to be doing that. You seem to believe that taxation itself is wrong. Am I right about this?[/quote]

Oh, oh, please do that.

Since I wrote a thesis on the subject I am downright eager for this incredibly easy justification that I seem to have missed.

[/quote]

By the way, why wasn’t this “thesis” published?

orion · May 27, 2011, 6:15am

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:
Are you guys serious?

I get it. You guys think you’re all rich and don’t need the government. You think the social safety net is being abused by all those brown people who are lazy, right? (Someone said “staying home having babies”? Wonder who you were talking about?)

The way commerce works is to do business in a state, country, the entity must pay some sort of tax. With that revenue, the country can function–build infrastructure, pay govt workers–and, yes… Take care of people that are unable to take care of themselves. This stabilizes the economy, which is compromised 68% on consumer spending. If you guys have a problem with that, you are so far out of the mainstream and reality that we really have nothing to discuss.

These views are VERY Draconian. Thus, you have the results of this week’s election.

BTW: LOVE those smartass “professor” comments. I assure you, your kids most probably couldn’t get into our school or make it very far if they have the same Michigan Militia views as you. And THAT’s the truth![/quote]

Wait, was there an argument in there?

Because if you think there was, your school indeed is shite.

orion · May 27, 2011, 6:20am

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]theBird wrote:
I would like to take this opportunity to encourage my suggestions to make the
world a fairer and better place to be in;[/quote]

There is no “fairness” you create your own world and you live in it. You don’t know this do you? Furthermore, you cannot create fairness for those who refuse to help themselves. Sorry for the harsh dose of reality. Are you going to be okay?

[quote]-try and avoid cooperations. Try not to work for them and dont do business with them. I know
this will be difficult, but try and do what you can.[/quote]

One of the dumbest things I’ve ever read on T Nation. Do you realize that millions of people are employed by corporations? Those people are dependent on their corporation to profit so that they can put food on the table for their families. Why do you want to hurt working class and middle class people? Also by trying to cripple corporations this will only harm the economy. The millions of people employed by corporations spend a great deal of money in the economy if that money is no longer there many, many others will become unemployed. Why do you want to see people without jobs? I guess you didn’t think this one through either huh?

[quote]-try to avoid purchasing mass produced goods. Even if you have to spend an extra dollar, purchase
something that has been made locally by locals.[/quote]

Another dumb idea for obviuous reasons.

Why would anyone try to use less oil? Don’t tell me, you’re an Al Gore global warming “the world is coming to an end” freak. There is ample oil in the world to last many more thousands of years. So that’s not the reason.
[/quote]

Zeb<

Being that you are so abrasive and crass in your posts, I thought I would simply respond with a question:

a)what is the estimated world supply of oil reserves? --from a CREDIBLE source, not FOX!!
b)what is forecasted world consumption for the next 50 years or so?

What do you get when you divide?

Is that thousands of years of supply?

Moron.
[/quote]

Well, if you take shale oil, and those resources not counted right now becausae regulations forbid drilling there and those resources where it is not now economically feasible to drill which would change if they price rose and if you throw in the coal reserves that can be liquified if we are in a pinch, a couple of hundred years give or take.

That of course is true for the fossile fuel theory, if the Russians are correct with their dissenting modell, all bets are off.

orion · May 27, 2011, 6:24am

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

Oh, oh, please do that.

Since I wrote a thesis on the subject I am downright eager for this incredibly easy justification that I seem to have missed.

[/quote]

Oh boy! A thesis! Now I’m terrified!

For the benefit of all, societal cooperation must be regulated, its disparate components protected from each other, and the machinery of its quotidian comings and goings kept in a state of constant vitality. These things cost money. Since we are the benefactors, and the recipients of the services, we pay the money.

Make it as fucked and convoluted as you’d like. That right there is simple and true.[/quote]

ORLY?

Thats it?

And pray tell, why do we need the state to do that?

How much regulation and what form of regulation is justified because of it?

All you do is pile one unfounded assumption on the next and then draw convenient conclusions, that is not an argument, nor an ethical justification, that is rubbish, oh major leaguer PHD.

orion · May 27, 2011, 6:36am

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:
[Admittedly, I have not done research on how the program is structured. My question is: what does it matter? This is just semantics. Either way, they get $4 Billion dollars a year or taxpayer money. In a time when the GOP is talking about ending Medicare, while contiuing 2 wars, does giving “tax dollars” to oil companies see fair to you?

BTW: How did that election in the most conservative district in NY work out the other day??? I forgot.

Smartass[/quote]

In your (supposed PhD earning) mind, I’m sure all money belongs “to the taxpayers” and the gov’t just lets us keep whatever they decide they don’t need. For those of us with brains, we realize that money BELONGS to the oil companies and it is NOT “taxpayer money”. The gov’t has no more right to it than they do to come into your house and take food out of your refrigerator.

Where do you teach, so I can ensure my kids don’t attend school there.[/quote]

It sounds like you are attacking taxation at its most fundamental philosophical level. It is incredibly easy to justify taxation, and if you wish I will do it for you.

Once taxation has been justified, you can argue matters of amounts and magnitudes. But you don’t seem to be doing that. You seem to believe that taxation itself is wrong. Am I right about this?[/quote]

Oh, oh, please do that.

Since I wrote a thesis on the subject I am downright eager for this incredibly easy justification that I seem to have missed.

[/quote]

By the way, why wasn’t this “thesis” published?[/quote]

Why would it be?

Back to you not making an argument, I was waiting for you to get the more advanced utilitarian crap on how redistribution maximizes social utility, which would be fun because you would be completely and totally unable to establish cardinality or intercommensuribility of individual utility functions which makes aggregation and quantification quite impossible I am afraid, but so far all you gave provided is the lulz which is also good I guess.

Please, produce more of said lulz.

So:

Ethical justification for the state excistence.

Then, what kind of taxes are justified to achieve that purpose.

Is income redistribution justified and if so, why?

How come a state can do things that would be called theft, blackmail or sevitude and yet was is seen as immoral on an individual level is seen as social good if the state does do it on a massive scale?

Come on kiddo, you said it was easily justifiable and you are all like Ivy League and shit and I am just a peon from a state run university (they all are, but still), please finish me with your mighty intellect.

I long to drink from the fountain of wisdom that is you.

garcia1970 · May 27, 2011, 10:10am

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

Oh, oh, please do that.

Since I wrote a thesis on the subject I am downright eager for this incredibly easy justification that I seem to have missed.

[/quote]

Oh boy! A thesis! Now I’m terrified!

For the benefit of all, societal cooperation must be regulated, its disparate components protected from each other, and the machinery of its quotidian comings and goings kept in a state of constant vitality. These things cost money. Since we are the benefactors, and the recipients of the services, we pay the money.

Make it as fucked and convoluted as you’d like. That right there is simple and true.[/quote]

ORLY?

Thats it?

And pray tell, why do we need the state to do that?

How much regulation and what form of regulation is justified because of it?

All you do is pile one unfounded assumption on the next and then draw convenient conclusions, that is not an argument, nor an ethical justification, that is rubbish, oh major leaguer PHD.

[/quote]

I am the one with the PhD. Try to keep up. Oh, and its not PHD. its PhD genius.
Back to the oil discussion:
a) I asked for TOTAL estimated oil reserves, which take into account ALL oil in the world. Where is the number Mr. thesis? So far you have failed the quiz.

b) I asked ZEB

I’ll give ALL you geniuses a second shot. Then you get called for spouting bullshit by everyone else.

orion · May 27, 2011, 10:23am

Ach, come on, for something as simple as this, this takes for too long.

Well, lets make it easier for you, the philosopher/ social theorist that would probably the most prominent one to hold something akin to your position is Amartya Sen.

I will even tell you which part of his argument I will take apart, namely that he proposes a kind of utilitarianism even though he knows full well that the concept of utility does not lend itself to what he is trying to justify.

See, now I have provided you with a direction and my route of attack, my defeat is imminent and only a formality.

Please, please, please take the time to crush and route me utterly, I know your highly educated mind must at least take some delight in showing off to your intellectual inferiors and I am practically begging for it.

If you want it still easier, tell me when, and I will do this drunk, stoned and without any supporting literature whatsoever.

Because, you know, us none intellectual elites are actually used to defend our arguments, because in our case name dropping universities just would not do.

Also, it would surely be nice for yourself to know that your education actually was one instead of mere indoctrination for otherwise you might not owe society as much as think you do and surely, to form and ariculate ones core believes and being able to defend them is one of the signy of an educated mind?

garcia1970 · May 27, 2011, 10:32am

[quote]orion wrote:
Ach, come on, for something as simple as this, this takes for too long.

Well, lets make it easier for you, the philosopher/ social theorist that would probably the most prominent one to hold something akin to your position is Amartya Sen.

I will even tell you which part of his argument I will take apart, namely that he proposes a kind of utilitarianism even though he knows full well that the concept of utility does not lend itself to what he is trying to justify.

See, now I have provided you with a direction and my route of attack, my defeat is imminent and only a formality.

Please, please, please take the time to crush and route me utterly, I know your highly educated mind must at least take some delight in showing off to your intellectual inferiors and I am practically begging for it.

If you want it still easier, tell me when, and I will do this drunk, stoned and without any supporting literature whatsoever.

Because, you know, us none intellectual elites are actually used to defend our arguments, because in our case name dropping universities just would not do.

Also, it would surely be nice for yourself to know that your education actually was one instead of mere indoctrination for otherwise you might not owe society as much as think you do and surely, to form and ariculate ones core believes and being able to defend them is one of the signy of an educated mind?

[/quote]

Nice English
Personal attacks instead of facts. Takes too much time? Takes 10 minutes–lust about the time it took you to think up and type your jealous assault on education. Book burning anyone?

You get a big fat F, dumb dumb.

Anybody else want to prove to me that there are THOUSANDS of years of oil in the ground??

Zeb???

orion · May 27, 2011, 10:32am

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

Oh, oh, please do that.

Since I wrote a thesis on the subject I am downright eager for this incredibly easy justification that I seem to have missed.

[/quote]

Oh boy! A thesis! Now I’m terrified!

For the benefit of all, societal cooperation must be regulated, its disparate components protected from each other, and the machinery of its quotidian comings and goings kept in a state of constant vitality. These things cost money. Since we are the benefactors, and the recipients of the services, we pay the money.

Make it as fucked and convoluted as you’d like. That right there is simple and true.[/quote]

ORLY?

Thats it?

And pray tell, why do we need the state to do that?

How much regulation and what form of regulation is justified because of it?

All you do is pile one unfounded assumption on the next and then draw convenient conclusions, that is not an argument, nor an ethical justification, that is rubbish, oh major leaguer PHD.

[/quote]

I am the one with the PhD. Try to keep up. Oh, and its not PHD. its PhD genius.
Back to the oil discussion:
a) I asked for TOTAL estimated oil reserves, which take into account ALL oil in the world. Where is the number Mr. thesis? So far you have failed the quiz.

b) I asked ZEB

I’ll give ALL you geniuses a second shot. Then you get called for spouting bullshit by everyone else.[/quote]

Oh, I ansered you oil question, a couple of hundred years, give or take.

Also, your question is loaded insofar as “estimated oil reserves” excludes by definition those in foir example wildlife resorts where you cannot drill legally.

Further, no oil company is going to search for oil that it will only be able to sell in a couple of decades, they search for it when they are going to need it in one or two decades at most.

Finally, if all else fails, we are going to exploit the methane reserves at the bottom of the ocean and turn them into oil.

So, any take on the whole “easily justifiable” claim.

Cause you are certainly able to pull the perpetuum mobile of political philosophy off, who could, if not you and when would be a better time than now.

orion · May 27, 2011, 10:35am