don't worry, jay, you're my favourite pathological denier on this forum.Jay wrote:
Lol@uzi. What a useless twat he is and always will be.
Last edited by aynrandroolz (2012-10-03 15:23:36)
*denialistaynrandroolz wrote:
don't worry, jay, you're my favourite pathological denier on this forum.Jay wrote:
Lol@uzi. What a useless twat he is and always will be.
it can be used to disguise racism and/or other bigotry. I didn't say it has to do with racism. Nowhere was it stated libertarians = racism. you made that deduction based on the statement that people can turn down serving a certain race or demographic and hide behind the idea of "its a free country, the government shouldn't tell me who I can and can't serve" which is an argument libertarians have made in response to the civil rights laws and other anti-discriminatory laws. And this gets to the crux of uzi's argument (and something my drive-by comment addressed): its not pragmatic.Jay wrote:
Wtf with the racism? Holy fuck it has nothing to do with racism, that's just the progressive argument to marginalize the philosophy.
The GOP embraced the rednecks and racists with the Southern Strategy and the anti-intellectualism movement of the party has grown like the noxious weed that it is.
Damn liberal elites with their college degrees are the polar opposite of Perry, Bachmann and Santorum.
Damn liberal elites with their college degrees are the polar opposite of Perry, Bachmann and Santorum.
Well, you don't believe in capitalism so any counter argument I'd make you would just dismiss... Impasse.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
it can be used to disguise racism and/or other bigotry. I didn't say it has to do with racism. Nowhere was it stated libertarians = racism. you made that deduction based on the statement that people can turn down serving a certain race or demographic and hide behind the idea of "its a free country, the government shouldn't tell me who I can and can't serve" which is an argument libertarians have made in response to the civil rights laws and other anti-discriminatory laws. And this gets to the crux of uzi's argument (and something my drive-by comment addressed): its not pragmatic.Jay wrote:
Wtf with the racism? Holy fuck it has nothing to do with racism, that's just the progressive argument to marginalize the philosophy.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
You're the best argument against the beliefs you espouse, do you know that?AussieReaper wrote:
The GOP embraced the rednecks and racists with the Southern Strategy and the anti-intellectualism movement of the party has grown like the noxious weed that it is.
Damn liberal elites with their college degrees are the polar opposite of Perry, Bachmann and Santorum.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
it seems to me AR has a better grasp on American politics than you have
i believe in capitalism, and ken's argument echoes mine.Jay wrote:
Well, you don't believe in capitalism so any counter argument I'd make you would just dismiss... Impasse.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
it can be used to disguise racism and/or other bigotry. I didn't say it has to do with racism. Nowhere was it stated libertarians = racism. you made that deduction based on the statement that people can turn down serving a certain race or demographic and hide behind the idea of "its a free country, the government shouldn't tell me who I can and can't serve" which is an argument libertarians have made in response to the civil rights laws and other anti-discriminatory laws. And this gets to the crux of uzi's argument (and something my drive-by comment addressed): its not pragmatic.Jay wrote:
Wtf with the racism? Holy fuck it has nothing to do with racism, that's just the progressive argument to marginalize the philosophy.
so go on, entertain me.
How can I believe or disbelieve in capitalism? It's not something you can believe or not believe. I acknowledge that capitalism is an economic system. it exists in theory and in practice. I've stated many times that I don't agree that profit = good is the best way to run our society, because there is no ethics wildcard in capitalism; it simply rewards maximum profit. It has nothing to do with whether or not I believe in capitalism, and everything to do with me disagreeing that greed = good is the best economic system to support the society we live in.Jay wrote:
Well, you don't believe in capitalism so any counter argument I'd make you would just dismiss... Impasse.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
it can be used to disguise racism and/or other bigotry. I didn't say it has to do with racism. Nowhere was it stated libertarians = racism. you made that deduction based on the statement that people can turn down serving a certain race or demographic and hide behind the idea of "its a free country, the government shouldn't tell me who I can and can't serve" which is an argument libertarians have made in response to the civil rights laws and other anti-discriminatory laws. And this gets to the crux of uzi's argument (and something my drive-by comment addressed): its not pragmatic.Jay wrote:
Wtf with the racism? Holy fuck it has nothing to do with racism, that's just the progressive argument to marginalize the philosophy.
And I don't have an alternative, yet. Working on it.
Enjoy your communism
please be quiet, business major kid. people with real degrees are talking about adult topics. go back to revising elastic and inelastic theories of demand. the stuff that gets discussed in d&st doesn't have an 'answers' section at the back of the textbook.Roc18 wrote:
Enjoy your communism
p.s. there are many alternatives to capitalism which =/= communism.
p.p.s. enjoy puberty, when it finally hits
Last edited by aynrandroolz (2012-10-03 17:09:29)
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|6910
Can respect for happiness be structured into an economic system?
Last edited by Superior Mind (2012-10-03 17:19:25)
Direct quote from Santorum:Jay wrote:
You're the best argument against the beliefs you espouse, do you know that?AussieReaper wrote:
The GOP embraced the rednecks and racists with the Southern Strategy and the anti-intellectualism movement of the party has grown like the noxious weed that it is.
Damn liberal elites with their college degrees are the polar opposite of Perry, Bachmann and Santorum.
"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side"
Are you shocked that the core GOP voter demographic deny climate change,evolution?
Jon Huntsman believes in both and had to qualify the statement with "call me crazy, but"
I find it hard to believe a smart person can look past the above and still vote Repub.
Some people look past party platforms and vote on who they think will be the best leader. Some people understand that politicians say certain things they may know to be false or not agree with to pander to certain voting factions.
Why would you have to pander to your own base or to the extreme of it? I'd have thought those votes were yours anyway.
Does pandering to the moderates and independents in the middle not make more sense?
Does pandering to the moderates and independents in the middle not make more sense?
Because those voters may not show up at the polls if they don't feel included. We don't have your forced voting system.AussieReaper wrote:
Why would you have to pander to your own base or to the extreme of it? I'd have thought those votes were yours anyway.
Does pandering to the moderates and independents in the middle not make more sense?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
forced, lol
Forced? lolJay wrote:
Because those voters may not show up at the polls if they don't feel included. We don't have your forced voting system.AussieReaper wrote:
Why would you have to pander to your own base or to the extreme of it? I'd have thought those votes were yours anyway.
Does pandering to the moderates and independents in the middle not make more sense?
By all means rally the base, but it's embracing the anti-intellect bible bashing racists that I have issue with.
And it's frightening that the social issues take precedent over the economic when that rallying does take place.
don't you get fined if you don't vote? Or is that whole mandatory (read: forced) voting thing not true?
I don't like Romney but he's winning this debate.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
You don't have to register to vote.
Once you're on the rolls it is expected, and you are fined if you don't vote at that point.
But even then you just have to turn up and have your name ticked.
It's easier for us to vote as its a weekend.
Your system makes voting more difficult in that regard.
Once you're on the rolls it is expected, and you are fined if you don't vote at that point.
But even then you just have to turn up and have your name ticked.
It's easier for us to vote as its a weekend.
Your system makes voting more difficult in that regard.
our system is difficult because you have to vote on tuesday unless you have an absentee ballot? Yeah, such a burden.
I get the day off to vote
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
your employer by law has to give you time to vote.
Compulsory =/= forced.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
don't you get fined if you don't vote? Or is that whole mandatory (read: forced) voting thing not true?
I have a friend who's 41 and he has never voted, and never been fined either.