Oregon passes tax increases on corporations and the wealthy..

[cdbussey]

Money makes the world go around. We all know that and I doubt a single one of us believes we should get to live here for free.

I doubt, that any of us would disagree that we NEED to send our money to a central govt for the management OF our money. MY GUESS is that we would assume that central govt would use that money in our best interests. I believe we have a right to expect them to manage the money we send them responsibly.

I guess it's apparent that at least some of us don't.

I don't really need them to build roads. Me and my friends, hey guys, we CAN build roads. Really, it's not very hard. Let them make some "central" laws which binds the states together. I'm a citizen, I have friends, nearly all of them are loyal to this country.

Let them coordinate our national defense. My dad is an army vet of korea and vietnam. I will too. You know you would too, and so would my kids fight for our freedom. I know that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

THAT, AND THAT ALONE is what I believe our govt OWES us. I believe EVERY SINGLE THING ELSE we can do better, we ALWAYS HAVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Guys, our govt didn't create doctors, we the people did. Our govt didn't provide midwifes when we were pregnant, we got them ourselves. Our GOVT did not provide us this country people, we provided it to them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....................... We don't owe them, they owe us. call your governor, your senator, congressman, don't ASK to speak to him, DEMAND his attention and tell him, THE TRUTH, you owe me.

You don't support us, we support you. He won't argue. Why? He's absolutely nothing, no power to blow his nose. Talk to him and find out he's nothing, he's a voice recorder. SERIOUSLY. He can't do a single thing for you because all he is is a face, a position, a voice. He might as well be a piece of paper.

Your best friend lives nowhere near washington. Look next door. Even if it's that guy you never talk to, he's a better friend. He's not asking you for money, well maybe he is, heh, depends on your neighbors, but at least if he is, you see where your bandage is going, not just taking somebodies' word for it. Trust your government that is reporting buying $25,000 dollar hammers????? come on.

 

[citizenzen]

You mean you socialist patriots didn't volunteer for that? I don't mean to be antagonistic here, but earlier you sounded like you WOULD have volunteered for the pay cut. to help the needy of course.

I haven't been part of this conversation, but I'll jump in to add...

I am a California state employee. Last year our union voted to take a 10% furlough in lieu of laying off workers. I'm the senior member of my division and would not have been laid off, but voted to take a pay cut so that some of the newer staff kept their jobs.

That cost me over $4,000 dollars this year.

I'm a socialist patriot, who cares about my fellow workers.

 

[GenSeneca]

That cost me over $4,000 dollars this year.

I'm a socialist patriot, who cares about my fellow workers.

Wouldn't it be great if you could force every employee to take a 10% pay cut, then their employers could hire the country's 10% of unemployed workers?

 

[citizenzen]

The kind of society that I advocate for is one... where the initiation of the use of force is banned from all aspects of life.

Wouldn't it be great if you could force every employee to take a 10% pay cut, then their employers could hire the country's 10% of unemployed workers?

Gotcha.

But it's still morning. Rub that sleep out of your eyes and have a second cup of coffee.

I think you need it.

 

[GenSeneca]

Gotcha.

But it's still morning. Rub that sleep out of your eyes and have a second cup of coffee.

I think you need it.

It's true I don't think you should force people into things but I thought you did, that's why I suggested it... seemed like a plan you'd go for: Mandating that one group sacrifice for the benefit of another group.

 

[dogtowner]

It's true I don't think you should force people into things but I thought you did, that's why I suggested it... seemed like a plan you'd go for: Mandating that one group sacrifice for the benefit of another group.

and its the more openly marxist states that favor govt violent force the most. but even this country enforces things at the point of a gun or tank in some cases.

 

[citizenzen]

It's true I don't think you should force people into things but I thought you did, that's why I suggested it...

I don't want to force people to do anything.

If you want to pay your taxes, that's your choice. If you want to rob a bank that's your choice.

I want people to live freely according to their conscience.

On the other hand, we as a society place consequences upon actions that are outside our laws. You have all the freedom in the world to act unlawfully. You don't even have to accept that your actions are wrong or unwarranted, but you run the risk of being caught and losing your freedom (of personal property) if you do.

Do you have a problem with that concept?

 

[GenSeneca]

I don't want to force people to do anything.

...Except you want to force some people to sacrifice of themselves for the benefits of others and rather than looting people with a gun, you use laws.

If you want to pay your taxes, that's your choice. If you want to rob a bank that's your choice.

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but weren't you the one talking about what a sham free will was in relation to religion because of the fact that God was holding eternal damnation over your head if you did not choose to act in accordance with the Christian morality?

You are doing the same thing, enforcing your collectivist morality by way of laws that punish people for not acting in accordance with your morality.

I want people to live freely according to their conscience.

Are you sure you don't mean according to the collectivist morality, which you have seen fit to codify into law, so that people who do not act inaccordance may be punished?

On the other hand, we as a society place consequences upon actions that are outside our laws.

As Jefferson said, the law is often just the weapon of choice for tyrants.

You have all the freedom in the world to act unlawfully. You don't even have to accept that your actions are wrong or unwarranted, but you run the risk of being caught and losing your freedom (of personal property) if you do.

The only reason an individual should be found in violation of the law is when the individual violates the rights of another individual. That was the purpose of our government, to secure our rights.

Do you have a problem with that concept?

What problem do you have with laws being limited to protecting our individual rights by barring the initiation of force from society?

 

[citizenzen]

It's true I don't think you should force people into things but I thought you did, that's why I suggested it...

I didn't want to pass up the opportunity to point out that not only did you directly contradict yourself, but then when caught, you try to blame it on me.

You're just another conservative who's proven they really don't believe in self-responsibility.

 

[citizenzen]

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but weren't you the one talking about what a sham free will was in relation to religion because of the fact that God was holding eternal damnation over your head if you did not choose to act in accordance with the Christian morality?

You are doing the same thing, enforcing your collectivist morality by way of laws that punish people for not acting in accordance with your morality.

Yes. You are mistaken.

• I believe completely in free will

• I do not believe in the "personal" Christian God

• I do not believe in eternal damnation

• I do not necessarily believe that Christian morality is any better or worse than other forms of morality​

You know, when you shoot from the hip, you often miss your target. That kind of thing usually only works in the movies.

 

[GenSeneca]

I didn't want to pass up the opportunity to point out that not only did you directly contradict yourself, but then when caught, you try to blame it on me.
You're just another conservative who's proven they really don't believe in self-responsibility.

You cannot defend your beliefs on any level, so you resort to fallacious attacks on my character.

Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. This is a classic Red Herring since whether the accuser is guilty of the same, or a similar, wrong is irrelevant to the truth of the original charge. However, as a diversionary tactic, Tu Quoque can be very effective, since the accuser is put on the defensive, and frequently feels compelled to defend against the accusation.

I pointed out this and other tactics used by Progressives in my post, Progressives: The Anti-Liberals

Progressives want to shut down all opposition and putting their opposition on the defensive by attacking their character has become a preferred tactic. That way Progressives won't have to deal with the substance of the message, they simply distract the political by standard with these attacks so they won't hear the message. Instead of having a discussion on the substance of the message, the political by standard will hear only the charges against the messenger and the messenger himself defending his character.

What makes your attack even more fallacious is the fact that you used sarcastic statements in order to make it sound like I was the one being inconsistent in his views. If you would like more of my similar sarcasm, so that you may continue in this fallacious argument against my character, you should look at my thread, Since the debt doesn't matter. Loads of good material for you there!

 

[GenSeneca]

Yes. You are mistaken.

Then I stand corrected on who said it but my statement still stands:

You are enforcing your collectivist morality by way of laws that punish people for not acting in accordance with your morality.

If the Christians passed laws that forced you to conform with their morality, you would have a problem with that, yes? I know I would.

Do you deny you hold the collectivist morality? Do you deny that you have no problem with forcing that morality on others by way of laws? Because I have just as much of a problem with being forced to live according to that morality as a religious one.

 

[citizenzen]

As Jefferson said, the law is often just the weapon of choice for tyrants.

Did you know that air and water can kill you?

In 2006 4,279 died from drowning. Frankly, if I were you, I'd stay away from all water. It's pure evil.

And air? 21,647 died from falls. Air offered no protection whatsoever!

 

[citizenzen]

...you resort to... attacks on my character.

Stop providing me so much ammunition.

 

[citizenzen]

The only reason an individual should be found in violation of the law is when the individual violates the rights of another individual. That was the purpose of our government, to secure our rights.

So for instance, you should be able to drive any speed you want, or as impaired as you want, so long as you don't actually hit somebody. Otherwise, the government is violating your rights.

Is that correct?