If government provides "services" that are so good, why do they have to use force ?

UncleBuck · Nov 20, 2013

BrewsNBuds said:
Are you serious? Now vs. Then?!

January 2009: 80,507,000 Americans out of work
September 2013: 90,609,000 Americans out of work.
source: BLS

I guess the Stimulus Act worked. Right? C'mon, man!

baby boomers going into retirement, smarty.

schuylaar · Nov 20, 2013

Rob Roy said:
I'm not sure your question addresses the questions I've asked. So, I'll politely ask you to try to address them in between rubbing cream all over your glowing skin.

do be hating on the genetically superior :lol:

Rob Roy · Nov 20, 2013

UncleBuck said:
public infrastructure: an american boondoggle

said no historian ever.

oh, i see. you want the benefit of the road, but you don't want to foot the cost.

you just answered the question to your thread.

why use force? because of the freeloader problem (i.e., you).

/thread

No. I want to pay for what I use. I also don't think you answered the questions posed in my original post. Could you do that please?

BrewsNBuds · Nov 20, 2013

abandonconflict said:
Most of the debt comes from wars. Domestic spending on the other hand is unlike "defense" spending in that the money does not end up overseas. It bounces around at home, creating jobs.

I'll give you that Defense spending ends up out of the country. I would add that domestic entitlement spending also leaves the country via Western Union. Anything dispensed in cash.

Soc Sec, Disability, Medicare, Medicaid accounts for 60% of the debt.

UncleBuck · Nov 20, 2013

Rob Roy said:
No. I want to pay for what I use. I also don't think you answered the questions posed in my original post. Could you do that please?

i answered your question.

force is used to get rid of freeloaders like you who want all the benefit for none of the cost.

you just didn't like the answer, mooch.

schuylaar · Nov 20, 2013

Rob Roy said:
Roads are pretty handy, I agree on that. Is it possible to devise a system where the people that use them pay for them and the people that don't use them are not forced to pay for them?

ZOMFG um, seriously?..like a toll road? :lol:

beenthere · Nov 20, 2013

Infrastructure is supposed to be paid for by state and federal excise taxes, so in essence people that used the roads and bridges pay to use them at the fuel pump.

BrewsNBuds · Nov 20, 2013

UncleBuck said:
baby boomers going into retirement, smarty.

Assuming you actually believe this: That was a four year spread, there are about 70 Million boomers, and the oldest one just reached retirement age a year ago.

Rob Roy · Nov 20, 2013

UncleBuck said:
i answered your question.

force is used to get rid of freeloaders like you who want all the benefit for none of the cost.

you just didn't like the answer, mooch.

No. You made a nonsensical reply that shifts the subject. You do that alot when the subject matter is beyond your ability to comprehend or rebut.

If you are so worried about free loaders wouldn't you want all services to be presented as options to individuals ? Those that valued a given service, would select from any number of providers and engage in commerce. Then perhaps at the point of sale the willing exchange could take place?

Do you not have similar mechanism for exchange with customers you may have dealt with in the past or do you use force to make them buy your goods, even if they don't want them or use them?

abandonconflict · Nov 20, 2013

BrewsNBuds said:
I'll give you that Defense spending ends up out of the country. I would add that domestic entitlement spending also leaves the country via Western Union. Anything dispensed in cash.

Soc Sec, Disability, Medicare, Medicaid accounts for 60% of the debt.

No, 60% of the debt is not from any of those things. Social security does not add to the deficit at all.

Rob Roy · Nov 20, 2013

abandonconflict said:
No, 60% of the debt is not from any of those things. Social security does not add to the deficit at all.

Is social security a consensual exchange for all the participants ? Do you endorse non consensual exchanges Abandon Conflict?

BrewsNBuds · Nov 20, 2013

abandonconflict said:
No, 60% of the debt is not from any of those things. Social security does not add to the deficit at all.

"I does not," Obama said, "NOT ONE DIME!" That one wasn't true either.

You're confusing debt and deficit. Entitlements represent at least 60% of the public debt.

I mean, these are the numbers. If you still disagree, then I guess you're entitled to your own facts.

BrewsNBuds · Nov 20, 2013

Rob Roy said:
Is social security a consensual exchange for all the participants ? Do you endorse non consensual exchanges Abandon Conflict?

Progressives believe you ought to be able to do anything you want, as long as its mandatory.

Rob Roy · Nov 20, 2013

BrewsNBuds said:
Progressives believe you ought to be able to do anything you want, as long as its mandatory.

I'm sorry I couldn't hear you so well, due to the echo. It does appear that there are alot of empty seats here and the usual suspects have fled to safer places where the mirror does not reflect their dissonance. Thanks for the support.

beenthere · Nov 20, 2013

Rob Roy said:
I'm sorry I couldn't hear you so well, due to the echo. It does appear that there are alot of empty seats here and the usual suspects have fled to safer places where the mirror does not reflect their dissonance. Thanks for the support.

Threads on gay marriage and George Zimmerman are great place to hide!

abandonconflict · Nov 20, 2013

BrewsNBuds said:
"I does not," Obama said, "NOT ONE DIME!" That one wasn't true either.

You're confusing debt and deficit. Entitlements represent at least 60% of the public debt.

View attachment 2901659

I mean, these are the numbers. If you still disagree, then I guess you're entitled to your own facts.

I'm not confusing debt and deficit. If Social Security does not add to the deficit it can't possibly add to the debt. The paper that you quoted is therefore incorrect.

Here is a video that explains it better.

[video=youtube;LcvLHHMC4iI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcvLHHMC4iI[/video]

The entire debt can be eliminated by increasing taxes on the rich, cutting "defense" and making sure there are no more recessions.

Rob Roy · Nov 20, 2013

abandonconflict said:
I'm not confusing debt and deficit. If Social Security does not add to the deficit it can't possibly add to the debt. The paper that you quoted is therefore incorrect.

Here is a video that explains it better.

[video=youtube;LcvLHHMC4iI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcvLHHMC4iI[/video]

The entire debt can be eliminated by increasing taxes on the rich, cutting "defense" and making sure there are no more recessions.

So, how does a forced taxation help you achieve the goal of Abandoning Conflict? Wouldn't it be better to cut all coercive driven budgets?

abandonconflict · Nov 20, 2013

Rob Roy said:
So, how does a forced taxation help you achieve the goal of Abandoning Conflict? Wouldn't it be better to cut all coercive driven budgets?

This is really a lame troll attempt. You know I don't care about the gov't, the deficit, the debt or even the economy. I have been commenting in order to set a few things straight, because of all of the loaded statements, which make untrue assumptions. I'm not here to defend what the gov't does, I'm just explaining why you're asking the wrong questions.

Rob Roy · Nov 20, 2013

abandonconflict said:
This is really a lame troll attempt. You know I don't care about the gov't, the deficit, the debt or even the economy. I have been commenting in order to set a few things straight, because of all of the loaded statements, which make untrue assumptions. I'm not here to defend what the gov't does, I'm just explaining why you're asking the wrong questions.

Not really trolling. No room under the bridge anyway with all the rest of the gang that hangs out there.

I respect your intellect and thought you had your mind right, but was simply asking you why you focus on "defense" rather than saying ALL coercive budgets should be cut. Now, take a few puffs and quit teasing your dog with that laser, there's probably a law against it.

abandonconflict · Nov 20, 2013

Rob Roy said:
Not really trolling. No room under the bridge anyway with all the rest of the gang that hangs out there.

I respect your intellect and thought you had your mind right, but was simply asking you why you focus on "defense" rather than saying ALL coercive budgets should be cut. Now, take a few puffs and quit teasing your dog with that laser, there's probably a law against it.

Any law which curtails my cheap laughs, even if I get them at the expense of my chattel pet, is a coercive law.

If government provides "services" that are so good, why do they have to use force ?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads