Added: 4 months ago
From: defnug66
Views: 50,205
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (411)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Depends on what you consider "big" govt. Socialism is never complimentary of greater personal freedoms and liberty, as socialism, to one degree or other, assumes the control of the economy. If you consider how importantly the economy figures in society, from the food one buys, to the healthcare he receives, then yes, socialism can mean big govt., in any operative sense.

  • I need a shirt with Cornell West face on it

  • fro'y negro likr'zz dem big word'z

  • Cornell West is no Libertarian!

  • What specifically does Bill think is crazy about Dr. Paul? He has never elaborated on that.

  • @whiff1962 Yes he has... Plenty of times. Ron Paul was the topic of Real Time for 2 weeks straight.

  • No, he hasn't elaborated on anything. Let's face it, Mr. Maher, that smug, conceited, elitist, would love the whole of the U.S. to be one huge socialist-style France or Switzerland. Do you know that the Socialist candidate for the presidency of France wants a 75% tax rate for those making 1mill. Euros or more? So much for rewarding risk and hard work! Dr. West is a radical throwback to 1960s tribal politics. He wants some to be more equal than others. The Constitution is secondary to him.

  • @whiff1962 You're mad because you don't pay attention? I see.

  • I used to be a socialist; then, I grew up and got smart. There is no way that I trust big govt. to run my life, let alone a national healthcare. It already has screwed up the latter. Suggest you read "the Road to Serfdom", by F.A. Hayek

  • @whiff1962 No.

  • @whiff1962 socialism doesn't necesarily mean big gov't.

  • How much does Dr. West give to charity, in time and money? How about the Marx sycophant, Bill Maher?

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Fat-ass Uncle Newt.

  • I wish i could have hair like Dr. Cornel West...I would go places.

  • Depends on which group is being taxed ..... white middle class America taxed to death. I believe that is what he means. Libertarian. Maher is a country bumpkin who usually never has anything good to say about his own country.

  • @TheLiberty53 lol @ this guy

  • the guy on the left is so touchy. he's like a drunk friend at a bar he just keeps touching your arm and rubbing his face.

  • @gogoyojimbo its because he has post traumatic stress 

  • Dr. Cornel West, his intelligence is spellbinding. 

  • Ron Paul "stumbles" upon some truths. I have listened to many of his speeches and it ALL sounds true to me.

  • @JScott1266 Yeah, but you have to remember they're talking to a liberal audience, they have to break them in gently, to be seen to be reluctantly accepting Paul's points to maintain their credibility with that audience.Same with Cenk Uygur, he's always apologizing for liking Paul, making token reference to the newsletters - which he knows don't really hurt Paul - just to be seen to maintain some critical stance.

  • Wow, I never noticed how smart Cornell West is. I knew he was intelligent, since he is a professor, but that last remark - man, that was even more witty than Bill.

  • Cornell West isn't a libertarian, either is Ron Paul, Americans need to look up the historical definition meaning of libertarian or search noam chomsky libertarian

  • corporate media machine.

  • That guy has black Einstein hair

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Cornell West isn't a libertarian and it is ridiculous to even suggest such a thing. He loves Statism with a romantic fervor. Because he can use it so he can turn around and say he's for the poor and brainwash people into believing him, no matter how horrible a failure the things he supports show themselves.

    People like West are like squawking birds. They've got their way for the past 70 damned years. On economic policy all the way. Poverty and income inequality has only gotten worse.

  • @Premier112 - "They've got their way for the past 70 damned years"

    1) Poverty and income inequality has gotten worse in the past 30-35 years. Your post uses strawman logic by taking poverty in the Great Depression Era and now as if inequality has risen the entire time since the 30s. Inequality went way down from the mid-30s to early-80s, the period of the most economic intervention in US history; 2) Lefties have gotten their way with Reaganomics and Keynesian corporatism?

  • Grover Norquist should crawl back under his rock. Most of America is sick of him. Half of the corporate bought Rethuglican congress is afraid he'll go Joseph McCarthy on their ass and denounce them for "Breaking the Pledge". Fuck Norquist and his freak show. His hands are brown from being shoved up the ass of every elected Republican nit-wit in Washington.

  • @somersetdc. Agreed. He's a joke. His close association with Abramoff should've discredited him from the political scene. DNC doesn't like him and most of the RNC steers clear of him

  • Cornell West for one is a Communist. Secondly he has ZERO tolerance for anyone who disagrees with him

  • @StonewallJackson26 You have no idea what communism is, not the difference between anger and passion.

  • @xvegansxex I doubt you know what Capitalism is.

  • fuck him he's a socialist

  • @TakisAthensGr - You can be both. Globally most libertarians ARE socialists (anarchists). Only in the United States does the word "libertarian" usually mean "the unfettered capitalist free market will solve everything" ideology, due to the marketing of the Libertarian Party. In the rest of the world the term "libertarian" is a tongue-in-cheek word for syndicalists and anarcho-communists, who make up the majority of libertarians and anarchists in the world.

  • @A86 No he can't. In order for the production of wealth to become "social" it must be collectivized i.e. taken from the personal hands of the worker. There are two ways this could be done. Voluntarily or involuntarily. The first is the type of voluntary collective that can only exist in anarchocapitalism where every one has complete personal rights before voluntarily giving them to the collective. The second requires the initiation of force by the state, so it is not libertarian but statist

  • @TakisAthensGr - "In order for the production of wealth to become "social""

    Honestly, what the hell does that even mean and when have socialists talked about "socializing" wealth?

    Socialism and communism are philosophies about property, not wealth. Socialism and communism propose that the means of production (workplaces, factories, farms, etc.) be owned by the public in some manner - either through a democratic government at the behest of workers or owned directly by workers.

  • @TakisAthensGr - "voluntary collective that can only exist in anarchocapitalism"

    How would a "voluntary collective" exist in anarcho-capitalism since property ownership and production is involuntary in capitalism for most of society? Someone simply declares some productive property "theirs" and monopolizes it to themself and doles tells people where to go and what they can and can't do or consume. Of course this requires, wait for it, force (private army or private courts).

  • @TakisAthensGr - It requires force because in a stateless society who would willingly work for a boss or manager? There's nothing to stop people from walking into a store and taking what they want or doing whatever they want in a factory (or even enforce what qualifies as currency) unless you force them.

    Most anarcho-communists and anarcho-syndicalists believe in worker-owned enterprises (cooperatives, workers' councils). What force is required with those?

  • @A86 I think you confuse production with confiscation.Worker owned enterprises is force. Think for example how I am gonna work in a gigolo enterprise and you're gonna be cleaning the cesspool?This "libertarian" gaffe of yours leads to totalitarianism. It is as just as embodied in nature the ownership of wealth to belong to the one that produces it. He is entitled to every bit of it, including to lend it or to give it to those who voluntarily accept it.Only that way no force can be iniciated

  • @TakisAthensGr - "Think for example how I am gonna work in a gigolo enterprise and you're gonna be cleaning the cesspool?"

    What on Earth are you talking about? Sorry but that made no sense at all. I have no idea what you were even trying to say there.

    All I ascertained is that you think worker-owned enterprises is force. How is an enterprise owned by the public force but an enterprise owned by an individual dictating to rank and file is not force?

  • @TakisAthensGr - That's like saying public libraries that no one has to pay for are force but a guy setting up his own turnpike at the entrance to New York City and charging everyone a fee to pass into New York or else they can't enter isn't force.

    In capitalism you don't have to do a lick of work at a company to own it, you just have to have enough money to buy the title to it. Did Cheney did most of the production at Halliburton and built the company? Think not.

  • @TakisAthensGr - "He is entitled to every bit of it"

    I think people are entitled to what they use to produce for themselves consistently. Employees not only produce the majority of what is made but use it to produce for themselves. If you're not using something only for yourself and not the one doing most of the work I see no rational entitlement to own it unilaterally. If a person is the first person to use a brush to brush their hair but never uses it again should they own it?

  • @A86 1) If factories and jobs are for free then how we know who's gonna do what? Who will be the gold digger and who will be the cesspool cleaner? duh!

    2) Public Libraries (lol you say you are not statist but all public libraries are state owned) are force. Someone has to initiate force to impose their costs on you and me. This is not true with private libraries.

    3) Nobody would produce capital if he can't own it. Would you produce capital in order for me to use it (own it) for free?

  • @TakisAthensGr - 1) I don't know what you mean by "gold digger" but such enterprises would operate "grunt duties" the way employee-owned companies do now - task-shifting/sharing. What does this have to do with authority anyway or ownership?

    2) I specifically said "one you don't have to pay taxes for" since I'm well-aware they're state-owned. Someone has to initiate force to acquire private property in the first place for there to be a private library.

  • @A86 1) All jobs are not equal. Some are better by all standards some are better by personal standards. I want to work where all the jobs are taken by workers/owners/stalins etc. Who's gonna build my factory? Would it be a gift from you?

    2) Library is a thing that has a cost. You know what cost is? The Cost! Who's paying it in public things? Yes you! By force!

    3) WTF! The workers, i said, PRODUCED CAPITAL! WHO OWNS IT? YOU, THE DICTATOR? THEY UPLOADED IT ON μTORRENT? Learn Economics!

  • @TakisAthensGr - 1) Okay...never said they were. You can work wherever you're qualified.

    "Who's gonna build my factory"

    The question is why should anyone work for you? It's ironic for you to call workers "stalins" while you're the one who wants to subjugate others to work for you. In my society no one is subjugated to others.

  • @TakisAthensGr - 2) Libraries have a financial cost in societies that run on currency.

    "Who's paying it in public things? Yes you! By force!"

    I'm not talking about state-run libraries, and technically the American public are the ones who elected public libraries to exist in the first place by electing representatives to create them.

  • @TakisAthensGr - 3) "PRODUCED CAPITAL! WHO OWNS IT? YOU, THE DICTATOR?"

    What in the blue hell are you talking about? Owning your own labor and people jointly owning their workplace makes them dictators? Over whom? Themselves? How does one have a dictatorship over oneself? How does that work?

    BTW, you're talking to an economist. I sincerely doubt you're one.

  • @A86 Lol. I'm ironic. Who's gonna say who's qualified to work where? That was (1)

    2) Library, I say again, has a cost! Not financial. Financial - real is the same thing. Someone has to build it, to work in it. You are proposing for us to vote that you work there and if you deny our democracy/power then we gonna shoot you? And this isn't force?

    3) Owing the factory jointly makes them CAPITALISTS!!! They can enable you to work there, who you aren't "qualified" in (1)^ by taking their share!

  • @TakisAthensGr - 1) Obviously someone who doesn't have a degree in Physics isn't qualified to be a physicist. Actually-existing employee-owned companies today still do job interviews for people who want to apply there.

    2) Yes, libraries have resource and opportunity costs.

    "You are proposing for us to vote that you work there"

    I did? Where?

    And saying that enforcing democracy is "totalitarian" is saying it's "totalitarian" to deny authoritarian force. Nonsensical.

  • @TakisAthensGr - 3) "Owing the factory jointly makes them CAPITALISTS"

    Perhaps you don't know what capitalism is, it appears. Capitalism is private ownership of the means of productions. If all employees jointly own their workplace where is the private owner? Capitalism doesn't mean simple ownership of any productive property, it's a specific type and structure of ownership.

  • @A86 1) You take for granted that job interviews would still exist in a non capitalist society. The only socialist regime that had those things is in your mind. Who are you gonna give interview to? To the dictator of course.

    2) You say that if majoritarian rule decides that you shall go to Auschwitz and shall become soap, it is a system free of authoritarian force. Public libraries are force!

    3) Shareholders own the factory "jointly". You don't know what capitalism nor socialism is...

  • @TakisAthensGr - 1) I never said they didn't exist in a non-capitalist society.

    "Who are you gonna give interview to? To the dictator of course"

    Revolutionary Catalonia had a dictator? What was his name? Employee-owned companies have dictators? Even in Marxist-Leninist societies you don't get interviewed by the dictator. Kim Jong-il interviewed everyone who works in North Korea? Lol

    2) Where did I say majoritarian rule would not be force if it's a decision to take rights away?

  • @TakisAthensGr - 3) Which is not capitalism. Capitalism is PRIVATE ownership. Not ownership by workers (a type of common ownership). You don't know what capitalism or socialism is apparently. Communism would be when a factory is owned by a community. Socialism is when its owned by its employees. Capitalism is when it is owned by a founder, manager or CEO.

  • @A86 1) You're desperately totalitarian. In Catalonia, USSR, North Korea, which u can't admit u love every interview was to an arbitrarily authoritarian courtier of the regime. That's what u are interviewer. Authoritarian not Libertarian!

    2) Nowhere! That's what I say. You are trying to manipulate & usurp the legitimization of your authoritarian regime based on force via majoritarian rule.

    3) You said factory owned by the workers, now you say by the "community", go ahead...by the dictator

  • @TakisAthensGr You are a misinformed idiot, and i think I can shed some light on this issue. The Second Spanish Republic had no dictator, no ruler, no CEO. The CEO is a form of dictator-an economic one. There was no State-coercion because there was no state. In Catalonia standard of living increased by 150% and productivity by 20%. You are obviously a moron; as you have no idea what @A86 is talking about, yet you try to argue anyway. You have not studied Catalonia, I can tell; so don't pretend.

  • @normalkuriboh No I have studied marxism and the catalonia gaffe better than you. Everything was being decided by a revolutionary committee like dictatorships with no democratic processes whatsoever. The "civil guards" were initiating heinous force against starving collectives which they were all being accused for "lower middle class behaviour" by the dictators. Only young students still believe catalonian & soviet statistics, and as with gods no one believes in all the other gods

  • @normalkuriboh Moreover I have to submit that the dictatorship banned money & instead was giving coupons to their slaves. The slaves used coupons instead of money then, making all the over marxists laugh of your success at destroying money & the bargainers were being chased by the police. Also such a society proved it can't be protected against violence, a bunch of nazi and fascist soldiers foiled the wrong stupid notions that an army should be undisciplined cause bakunin said so.

  • @TakisAthensGr Well, it seems that you just called Bakunin a Marxist and stated that "all the over marxists laugh of" my success. That really is unfortunate. Okay, I get it; by no democratic process you mean elections. Clever.

  • @normalkuriboh cnt and all the other marxist/anarcho-communist movements never won any election and never allowed any true elections. They came into power with guns and ruled by them. Hitler was more democratic than all the marxists put together. Bakunin's critique of marx was a joke, the guy was a communist, translated today as marxist. Sorry pal, you're a marxist too.. that's what you ended up doing, deifying a charlatan as your god.

  • @TakisAthensGr Hey man, realize that everything wrote was completely false, yet? You are laughably imbecilic.

  • Who is the beautiful brunette?

  • 0:02 Why did all 3 words have to start with m? That's why this guy's a clown.

  • @dubified89 It's called alliteration.

  • you dont go to jail for soundbites!!!!!!!

  • Cornell West is a Libertarian in a way. He wants the "Liberty" to dictate everyone's life for them.

  • Comment removed

  • @skidancin So you think our high money output/earnings ratio in the global market doesn't have some detrimental effect on us?  We don't produce anything, how are we supposed to get our money back in terms of the global market we rely on for survival like that? It's just a massive drain on our wealth. Yes we acquire goods, but where's the money afterwards? We don't have the resources or manufacturing structure to earn enough of it back, because we'd rather rely on other people making products.

  • @OtakuRebel Yeah but the government putting tariffs on things would only cause prices to go up. The solution is less government interference in the market, not more.

  • @dubified89 You're not going to compete with the dramatically low pay, standards, and quality in a country like China without drastically lowering them here. Doing so would just repress the working class more. You have to become more self sufficient.

    Corporations and business tycoons couldn't care less about patriotism when in grasp of the untold profits of outsourcing. It has next to nothing to do with regulation. Capitalism is about investment, not the cashing out they do today.

  • @dubified89 Their income's have gone up nearly 200% on TOP of already being at the top. If they actually cared about the company and the country, they'd take a pay cut and INVEST the money. Pay the employees better, boost production, hire more people, invest in research, etc, and do it all HERE. But they don't. They have untold wealth they'd rather sit on and hold us hostage until they get more. They're a freakin cancer, already manipulating our systems for their sole gain.

  • Comment removed

  • @dubified89 I agree the corporate tax is a downside of how we do things here, but a huge portion of the taxes we USED to have on the top %'s have dropped nearly half of what they used to be. You have to have a tax system that incentivize investment, and HERE

    A lower corporate tax traded for higher personal tax would encourage investment in the companies to build VALUE, not a strained shell. The vulture capitalistic cashing out we see to day is just pure greed of the top.

  • @dubified89 in the wake of the corporate wall street free for all i hardly beleive that the government should stay ilde as the "market" ravishes the fortunes and economic prospects of working people

  • @mgalore What a vague and predictable statement...

  • @mgalore my bad i responded to the wrong statement i meant this comment for someone else

  • RON PAUL 2012

  • Dr. Cornel West.........AWESOME!!!!!

  • Cornell West is to libertarianism what Nancy Pelosi is to libertarianism.

  • Cornell West isn't libertarian.

  • @tiger6287 meh, he's a civil libertarian. don't get mixed up with labels its just semantics and pigeon holing.

  • @tiger6287 No, he's a "libtard" or "far-left loon." Right-wing dumbasses such as Bachmann, Coulter or Palin = great American intellectuals, great American intellectuals such as Dawkins, Hedges of Maher = "libtards" or "far-left loons."

  • @tiger6287 Libertarian socialist is still libertarian

  • @tiger6287

    right, he's not for corporate tyranny

  • @tiger6287 He technically is, according to the original meaning of the word and not what it came to mean. Look it up.

  • @tiger6287 - I would argue neither is Ron Paul in many ways.

  • @ObamaChineseOwned LOL. Troooooooooll

  • I seen "black & white" world in America

  • America is an empire..... WHAT THE FUCK??????

  • @squarecracker You know how many military bases he have in other countries?

  • @HybridD91

    Yes I know he have many military bases....from Azerbaijan to Zaire..... My quote is from the vidia

  • @wieelhausatgmail Big deal, he lives in lala land

  • What is Cornell a doctor of? Dentistry and hair design.....

  • @rxc128 Believe you me you can't touch him.....

  • @rxc128 Hater , He has a Doctorate in Religious Theology and a Gen. PHD from Princeton.

  • @rxc128 Philosophy

    

  • West reminds me of Gingrich in that they both use 11 dollar vocabulary words in an effort to sound professorial and make you think they're brainiacs. Oh, and vote Ron Paul. He went to medical school. Not just anyone can work "extra hard", write a professorial sounding thesis about sociology and get a phd in medicine. You have to be actually smart. Listen to Ron Paul talk. Listen to West and Gingrich talk. One of them is trying to make you think they're geniuses. The other doesn't have to try.

  • DON'T STEAL, THE GOVERNMENT HATES COMPETITION.--- RON PAUL 2012

  • @watertonrivers Real Footage Of Real Banks Causing real Problems

    Watch “How To Rob A Bank” at UmotionS.com.

    See the trailer at my channel with the link in it’s description.

  • Look zionist maher.America is an empire who spends all the money to maintain an expensive empire,to protect your Israel

  • lmfao Fat ass Uncle Newt

  • I don't know want to think of Bill Maher, one day he supports him and the next day he bashes him, make up you're mind, are you with him or against him.

  • Ron Paul 2012

  • cornell west is nwo

  • It's amazing how many of you tools are for Ron Paul. The guy is both a Young Earth Creationist and, worse, an Austrian "economist" who thinks gold is some magic monetary solution. Two kinds of fundamentalist nonsense. That tell you all you need to know about his relationship to facts.

    I'll be glad when he loses the presidential ticket so you nutters can go work on relieving your blue balls.

  • @jessemaurais Gold is a product and that's all we refer to it as such, but ur magic statement...I don't understand what ur saying. Before you give an emotional response, should you state ur stance on what type of economic system would be better? As far a being a creationist. lots of brilliant people are. But I respect ur opinion, ur just really emotional about it.

  • This idiot says Ron Paul "stumbles" on some truths? Ron Paul would destroy you my friend.

  • ron paul is a little crazy? haha , so was the first people that thought the world was round..the sorry state of our union is begging for crazy now,, or anything else than whats bankrupted a once great nation

  • Bill Maher you know he's a little crazy but every once in a while he tells some truth like about the empire and shit...

  • "Passed Bush tax cuts , food prices going up , gas at over $3 , when it was $1.95 during clinton era"

    HAHAHAHAHAHA...YEA....AND??? What the fuck does that have to do with ANYTHING. Do you think the presidents duty is to control fuel prices? god, this is why people think Americans are so fucking ignorant and flat out DUMB. You haven't refuted tax increases raising prices, you tried the opposite and said that tax cuts won't lower prices. You're an idiot all around

  • @AroundSun What have the tax cuts got us besides fuck in the ass with unemployment going up? You said the tax cuts keep prices low i gave u 3 examples of your stupidness...

    Tax cuts dont create jobs , lower prices , theres no reason to do it unless your against america...

  • @AroundSun And to answer your stupid question yes its the presidents duty to control gas prices, when we give Exxon Mobile billions of tax cuts , yes we control them as should the president... Same way we controll GMC when we bailed there asses out....

  • @AroundSun You cant give me 1 example where tax cuts have helped you and ordinary people in your life.... Not one...

  • Bill Maher is a condescending prick that just talks over anyone else who tries to speak their opinion.

  • HaH! I love the end! "You're one of these tax increase libertarians?" LMFAO!!

    People can't call themselves a libertarian if they believe in more taxes and spending. Regardless what 'group' is being taxed. Because every libertarian knows that tax increases on producers raise prices, higher tax rates usually decrease overall tax revenues for the government, and that government is inefficient with the money they do receive, therefore their role and funding should be constitutionally limited.

  • @AroundSun Thats such a load of fucking bullshit... They've had billions of tax cuts... Passed Bush tax cuts , food prices going up , gas at over $3 , when it was $1.95 during clinton era , Go fuck yourself.... With that tax cutting load of horseshit....

  • @mywotzone no sir, you are the misinformed. why should the government step in and take a percent from both the producer and purchaser? who does this go to? to subsidize markets of political allies thats who. i believe your education has "fucked you" little man

  • @abaddatom What are u talking about "taking a percent from both producer and purchaser"....

  • @gdfg45h wow. You are uninformed big time man. Watch more You Tube videos please. Noone owes you anything and noone else is responsible for your happiness but you. You were born free and that IS your only true priveledge.

  • west should stick with philosophy

  • listen to mauer....people you are being f-ed in the head. stewart and bill and all those little bolsheviks. listen to the con. blaming blacks and whites. when the zionist jews are raping us blind. but bill tells you its the good people. watch the vid NYPD POLICE TRANSMISSION MURAL VAN MOSSAD. you must if you aren't completely dull.

  • RON PAUL 2012. ask bill about this video about him youtube NYPD POLICE TRANSMISSION MURAL VAN MOSSAD. bill is in it. you have to watch it. you'll see he's a real evil bastard. if you want to know...here's your chance.

  • The GOP debates are a reality show? Eh I think there is some truth to that, but what about Obama's presidency? The man who wins a nobel peace prize and continues 2 wars while bombing 3 other countries.

  • Ron Paul "stumbles" on some truths? How incredibly condescending and hilarious, actually, coming from someone like West who can't seem to tell the difference between libertarianism and socialism.

    Both parties want to steal money from you and your children for generations. They just can't agree on where that loot should go: wars or welfare. Not Ron Paul. He'll let you keep your money and maybe, just maybe, your grandchildren can be born free.

  • @RonTakeOne Taxes aren't stealing. Saying so reveals a severe lack of understanding of the world around you, and a fundamental childish selfishness.

  • @monokhem Taking something by force that isn't yours is stealing. Denying this reveals a severe lack of understanding of basic ethics (or the kindergarten definition of stealing), and a fundamental childish selfishness. I don't want the government to steal from anyone. I don't see how that is selfish. When one votes in favor of taxes that won't be taken from him, but rather redistributed to him, now that is selfish.

  • @RonTakeOne Kindergarten is where this kind of thinking belongs, and then only until an adult steps in to set things strait. You owe taxes to the government. It isn't stealing when it collects them. You can not pay them by not living there and not doing business there. Otherwise you owe that money. Take a civics class.

    They steal money form you the same way restaurant steals money from you when the check comes.

  • @monokhem I know why I owe money for food I purchased, but perhaps you can tell me why I owe taxes to the government to fund things I don't want or need like government education and world wars. Is it because the government owns me and I have to purchase my time back from them? Is it because the government owns all property and we merely rent it from them? Because I live here and do business here? Why don't I owe protection money to the local motorcycle gang for the same reason?

  • @RonTakeOne You owe taxes because there is no way an individual could ever achieve as much success without government as they could with it and the taxes that accompany it. You needed government to achieve the success you have. Without it you would probably be dead.

    You can't even have money without government. It's value is based on the security government provides. Without government it is just a bunch of shiny rocks only a fool would trade a cow for.

  • @monokhem This is why I don't want to pay for government education. I'd rather the populace not know much than "know" a bunch of statist junk like this. And your comment regarding the value of "money" is hilarious considering the direction the red arrow is always pointing when it comes to the US dollar. Google competing currencies. You might learn something.

  • @monokhem Even if your messianic views of government were true, this is a pragmatic argument and thus fallacious. Just because you find a particular outcome favorable, that doesn't mean the actions taken to achieve said outcome are morally acceptable. You wouldn't kill a child for a million dollars would you?

  • @RonTakeOne I'm not talking about the outcome. The process is just. Paying what you owe is just. My views of government aren't messianic at all, and that you think that they are shows how poor your understanding of what's going on is.

    You are clearly the one here that prefers money to children's well being.

  • @monokhem Again, you beg the question. How do I owe it?

  • @RonTakeOne You should really learn what that means. Are you trying to say that you never used a road or lived without constant fear of highwaymen?

    You are spoiled. You think taking everything that government provides you for granted means you don't owe your taxes? That's nothing to be proud of.

  • @monokhem I've used roads, but I haven't used all the roads I've paid for and many of the roads I've paid for are crap. The free market can do better with toll roads and corporations funding roads leading to their markets. If Walmart wants customers, why don't they pay for the pavement leading to their stores? But no. Local governments will bend over backwards for a Walmart and even dump loads of city funds into parking lots. This isn't fair for those who don't shop at Walmart.

  • @RonTakeOne These are all concerns you should attempt to resolve through voting. Pretending that trying to opt out of taxes is a noble act of rebellion because you don't like which roads are being built is petty and lame.

  • @monokhem Now your just making stuff up because you have no tenable response to what I had said here. I'm not pretending anything, I pay my taxes, and I vote. But voting isn't the only way to effect political change as I am sure you would agree. And it's not as if the majority is incapable of voting immorality into legislation as this country's history with slavery clearly demostrates. Might doesn't make right. You need a more objective ethic.

  • @RonTakeOne This is what you resort to on once you've lost? You're acting like a baby. Stop paying your taxes. hole up in your basement with a shotgun and wait for them to come take you away. Don't understand how the world works. See if I care.

    By the way. I never bought all that bullshit about you having 8 kids. I just didn't want to get sidetracked arguing over your stupid lie. Eight fucking kids and you've got time for this stupidity? You are unbelievable clown shoes and unworthy of respect.

  • @monokhem You have added ad hominem to your list of fallacies now. The only thing you have succeeded in doing is wearing me out. One can only endure the same baseless assertions for so long before he gives up.

    The winner of a debate doesn't have to self-declare as you have just done. I am happy letting our exchange stand and letting the reader discern who the loser is.

    I couldn't care less if you believe me, but for others:

    plus{dot}google{dot}com/116772­947833662441359

  • @RonTakeOne The debate was over a while ago. Now i'm just commenting on how you have comported yourself. The notion that you would have ever acknowledged defeat is laughable. In case you didn't notice. I don't respect you. That's why I gave up the trappings of a debate, because you never wanted to.

    It's like you are some kid sitting in front of his pile of peas and thinks he's won something because he hasn't ate them.

    It wasn't ad hominem. look it up. It's another thing you don't understand.

  • @monokhem As an observer, I must say if you don't think the phrase "acting like a baby" and other comments about a "basement," and accusations devoid of evidence declaring lies have been told about children are all ad hominem by nature, YOU need to look it up and think harder so that you'll actually understand it.

  • @skidancin The evidence for him acting like a baby was well within his posts. If you don't understand that, it is on you. I have no idea if he was hiding in a basment, it was just the only rational course of action if he believed the rest of his assinine bullshit.

    Since this is the only one of your posts directed at me in which you came close to making a point, I won't respond to the other one.

  • @monokhem I guess you still didn't figure out that you can't change an ad hominem into something relevant just by putting a real argument beside it. I'm not saying "assinine bullshit" is a real argument. I'm not saying the phrase "this is the only one of your posts...in which you came close to making a point" is a real argument to the valid point I made in that post. You didn't touch it. You ignore like a baby, eh? (a valid point, right?) LOL, you putz. See? Bye.

  • @skidancin What's wrong with you? You said a bunch of stupid shit a long time ago and made a fool of yourself. Now you are trying to resurrect it, why? So you can look stupid some more? So you can ignore more definitions? Call me names? No one gives a shit. No one cares about you and I certainly don't respect you. Go start some fresh shit with some one else who hasn't figured out what a waste of time you are. You're boring, and you never did make a point.

  • @monokhem nice points: "boring, no point, ignore, call names, stupid shit" .... gotta hate it when a person gets this angry and describes himself so well, but it's your life.