The Democrats do something I agree with! And at the same time, something I don't! - Page 5

Kytro · 02-01-2007, 09:33 PM

Originally Posted by JSmythe

Power and ability, as in the governments ability to use overwhelming power in order to tell its citizens what they can and can not do. Why do you leave these decisions up to the powerful state, which is supposed to be of and by us, the people?

I'm not saying we should leave them up to a powerful state. I am saying that power and ability are the only real regulators.

Originally Posted by JSmythe

Currency is the opposite of barter. If you mean that currency can act as a commodity then I guess you are correct, but its irrelevant. You seem to think that the government is our friend, that it wants what is best for us. I thought that once too, but I now would have to say you are mistaken.

No I don't. I agree with the concept of taxation, but I don't agree with it's deployment or how the government currently works.

I'm a socialist in ideal, but the practical reality of things (human nature and understanding) means this is not currently possible.

So while I don't like to pay tax, and will not be giving any more than I am legally required to I don't believe it is morally equivalent to theft as a concept. I do believe that some implementations of tax could be

JaJae · 02-01-2007, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

You're mistaking right for privilege. Libertarians hold the belief that rights are inherent. Libertarians also hold the belief that rights are derived from ownership.

Yes but we don't live in a libertarian nation. So I don't think I'm the one mistaken.

Dumpy Dooby · 02-01-2007, 10:47 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Yes but we don't live in a libertarian nation. So I don't think I'm the one mistaken.

Apparently you didn't read the rest of my post.

As classical liberals (the worldly way of saying "libertarian"), the Founding Fathers of America held these ideals. The Declaration of Independence is almost entirely about explaining the association between ownership and rights, and how rights are inherent.

In other words, our country was FOUNDED on classical liberalism. When the Founding Fathers talk about "liberties" they're referring to the classical liberal understanding of the concept.

Dumpy Dooby · 02-01-2007, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

I remember life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, I don't recall property rights. I also recall an ability to amend laws. And that nothing in the constitution was above being amended.

That's kinda funny because "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" isn't in the Constitution, but if you think you saw it in there, then more power to you.

And yes, there are limitations on how the Constitution shall be amended. You didn't read the Constitution. Don't say that you did. You're not fooling those of us that actually know the contents of it. That said, go read it. It's only three pages, and it's one of the most important documents in your life as an American.

US Constitution

nbiggershaft · 02-02-2007, 02:22 AM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

That's kinda funny because "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" isn't in the Constitution, but if you think you saw it in there, then more power to you.

And yes, there are limitations on how the Constitution shall be amended. You didn't read the Constitution. Don't say that you did. You're not fooling those of us that actually know the contents of it. That said, go read it. It's only three pages, and it's one of the most important documents in your life as an American.

US Constitution

You were talking about the declaration of independence in what I quoted.

nbiggershaft · 02-02-2007, 02:50 AM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

That's kinda funny because "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" isn't in the Constitution, but if you think you saw it in there, then more power to you.

And yes, there are limitations on how the Constitution shall be amended. You didn't read the Constitution. Don't say that you did. You're not fooling those of us that actually know the contents of it. That said, go read it. It's only three pages, and it's one of the most important documents in your life as an American.

US Constitution

and BTW as far as the constitution goes, it aint 1808 any more. They can amend all they want(minus the whole state rep thingy).

Dumpy Dooby · 02-02-2007, 04:24 AM

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

and BTW as far as the constitution goes, it aint 1808 any more. They can amend all they want(minus the whole state rep thingy).

So by "nothing in the constitution was above being amended." I guess you meant "nothing in the constitution was above being amended ... minus the whole state rep thingy and the pre-1808 regulations" right?

Sorry, that wasn't what I inferred. By "nothing in the constitution was above being amended." I assumed you meant "nothing in the constitution was above being amended."

My bad.

Dumpy Dooby · 02-02-2007, 04:29 AM

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

You were talking about the declaration of independence in what I quoted.

The extraconstitutional writings of the Fathers are where the concept of "rights derived from ownership" comes from. Modern libertarians didn't just pull that out of their ass. The concept was adopted by classical liberals, especially the Founding Fathers. So if you were saying that ownership rights weren't discussed by the Fathers outside of the Constitution, you're entirely wrong. And if you're saying that ownership rights aren't discussed in the Constitution, you're definitely wrong.

So umm ..... yeah, what were you saying?

JaJae · 02-02-2007, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

The extraconstitutional writings of the Fathers are where the concept of "rights derived from ownership" comes from. Modern libertarians didn't just pull that out of their ass. The concept was adopted by classical liberals, especially the Founding Fathers. So if you were saying that ownership rights weren't discussed by the Fathers outside of the Constitution, you're entirely wrong. And if you're saying that ownership rights aren't discussed in the Constitution, you're definitely wrong.

So umm ..... yeah, what were you saying?

The Founding Fathers are dead. They have been dead for a very long time. They never had to compete in a global economy. They had no idea of what the future would bring. They made the constitution a living document for this reason. Taxes are legal. We have to pay taxes. It's not theft. It doesn't violate any "ownership" right.

nbiggershaft · 02-02-2007, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

The extraconstitutional writings of the Fathers are where the concept of "rights derived from ownership" comes from. Modern libertarians didn't just pull that out of their ass. The concept was adopted by classical liberals, especially the Founding Fathers. So if you were saying that ownership rights weren't discussed by the Fathers outside of the Constitution, you're entirely wrong. And if you're saying that ownership rights aren't discussed in the Constitution, you're definitely wrong.

So umm ..... yeah, what were you saying?

I was referring to this, exactly what you said, "
As classical liberals (the worldly way of saying "libertarian"), the Founding Fathers of America held these ideals. The Declaration of Independence is almost entirely about explaining the association between ownership and rights, and how rights are inherent."

There is nothing in the declaration about ownership rights. And yes I did exclude the obvious pre-1808 exemptions. Why wouldn't I exclude them? The don't apply anymore. As for the state representative exemption section, it has fuckhole to do with this topic, so sorry if I didn't consider that as well.