What do you mean by "income redistribution"?

[pocketfullofshells]

So a government limited to protecting individual rights is "Chaos"?

Capitalism calls for a strong government to protect individual rights, Anarchy calls for no government. You continually equate Capitalism to Anarchy despite having been told about this difference on several occasions. So anytime you say Capitalism is Anarchy, you are lying. Anytime you try to equate Capitalism with Anarchy, you are using a strawman.

Your lies and fallacies do not cover up the fact that you cannot justify the forced redistribution of wealth as moral, ethical, or just.

What is it about government being limited to protecting individual rights that you oppose?

go read last post again...Anarchy...in the non Government political view...as in Chaos...not the idea that no government is best anarchy....but maybe its to hard for you to understand the difference....

 

[GenSeneca]

go read last post again...Anarchy...in the non Government political view...as in Chaos...not the idea that no government is best anarchy....but maybe its to hard for you to understand the difference....

Once again you choose NOT to defend your belief in the government forced redistribution of wealth but instead offer a red herring fallacy by attacking Capitalism. If you want to attack Capitalism, I have a thread specifically for doing just that where I will happily defend my views.

In this thread, it is YOU who must defend your view in support of the forced redistribution of wealth. Attacking my view is NOT a defense of your own, it is a red herring fallacy.

So please, explain to everyone why it is a moral, ethical, and just system of government to violate individual rights by using force against one individual for the benefit of another.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Once again you choose NOT to defend your belief in the government forced redistribution of wealth but instead offer a red herring fallacy by attacking Capitalism. If you want to attack Capitalism, I have a thread specifically for doing just that where I will happily defend my views.

In this thread, it is YOU who must defend your view in support of the forced redistribution of wealth. Attacking my view is NOT a defense of your own, it is a red herring fallacy.

So please, explain to everyone why it is a moral, ethical, and just system of government to violate individual rights by using force against one individual for the benefit of another.

why? no matter what I said, your not going to buy any of it anyway..I could write books here about why...you will just cry something about communism, wave the free market flag and ignore everything....I already stated without it, the system would be chaos and we would have a rich vs poor gap so huge it would destroy everything and lead to violence...but I doubt you would care....so long as you think you get to be on the rich end anyway

 

[nobull]

little..where does it say that only taxpayers have to suffer the insult of private debt being converted into public debt? Answer, liberals handbook..

86% of the total of all tax collected is paid by just 15% of the working population in this country. Of that, a full 53% of working persons collects from the gov and pays zero tax.

So who is this "we all must make sacrifices" apply to? To some slob on welfare eating KFC off a food stamp card? Or some guy on super secrete extended benefits. How is it that these guys are "sacrificing" Besides since when is any citizen legally liable for public debt? That is most certainly not a Constitutional privilege.

Now if you are talking about blood sacrifices well that is different. We should all impale ourselves at the alter of Goldman; that just stands to reason.

The taxpayer in this country gets a raw deal. The system that exists is theft of property. If the KFC guy tried to rob my place, he would be shocked at the ultra high risk and ultra low reward. Yet, he smirks at a government that does it. At least if a robber sticks a gun in my ribs I know I am being robbed. But gov comes on with the "fair share" krap and the "we must all sacrifice" bullkrap just to justify their immorality. Meanwhile KFC guy just thinks you owe it to him.

Yeah... the rich are angry. That usually is a very bad idea to make them angry. When the rich stop buying, stop working so hard, close down their businesses, stop hiring... life can get pretty tough.

regards
doug

 

[Little-Acorn]

why? no matter what I said, your not going to buy any of it anyway..

That sound you just heard, was POS running away from the argument at high speed, tail clamped firmly between his hind legs.

 

[GenSeneca]

I already stated without it, the system would be chaos and we would have a rich vs poor gap so huge it would destroy everything and lead to violence...

By "it" I can only presume you mean the forced redistribution of wealth...

This is the part where you don't listen to anything I say.

Alright genius... Lets look at some information that totally contradicts your deeply held (almost religious) belief:

Gap between rich and poor won’t be closing any time soon
by Barrie McKenna
Sunday, Oct. 03, 2010

It is what economist Paul Krugman calls “the Great Divergence” – the growing gap between rich and poor in America.

Countless studies assure us it’s real. The rich, as measured by income or net worth, have been steadily and impressively growing more affluent since the 1970s. By some measures, the moneyed class may be richer than it has ever been.

That's an excerpt from a new's story that came out yesterday. But wait! This can't be happening... We have the forced redistribution of wealth to prevent this from occurring! How can it be that since government instituted policies for the forced redistribution of wealth that the wealth gap stopped shrinking and started growing?

The welfare state budget has grown every single year for more than 60 years and is currently swallowing up the majority of our tax money at a rate of roughly $4.2 million PER MINUTE.

It would never occur to you that the forced redistribution of wealth is actually widening the gap between rich and poor... No... It would be sacrilegious to even think about it!

While you see this happening all you do is scream for, "More of the same, more of the same, more of the same! If only we could redistribute MORE wealth, THEN all would be right with the world!"

But the really absurd part is that you buy into the notion that a "wealth gap" is somehow a bad thing... I put that right up there with the belief that trade deficits and the bogeyman are also bad things.

They are economic ghost stories, meant to invoke fear and panic, to scare childish minds into voting for big government because you're told that big brother is the only one capable of keeping you safe from the evil bogeymen that are out to get you.

So we've established that the policies you support are immoral, unjust, unethical, and as if that wasn't bad enough, they are also totally counter productive to their stated purpose and entirely based on fear of economic ghost stories.

In conclusion, trade deficits are not bad, the wealth gap is not bad, these things are not threatening to you in any way and it is only people who believe such economic ghost stories that pose a threat to society. If you would like to dispute that statement, then feel free to try.