Obamas fucking administration is giving tax breaks to companies who move overseas and doing swat raids on american companies here in the states, how the fuck is that not robbing americans of jobs? Fucking twot.
you have no f**king life man.. I hope you get run over by a car.. and a dog f*cks you in yours skull.. you bloody suck.. go do drugs to chill out.. come to amsterdam here in the netherlands and after that your chill.. till then.. please die
This guy is creepy...the maniacal laughing...and what is does he keep looking at off camera, to his upper right? The cough is a bit disturbing as well. Go to a doctor my friend.
I was looking at my screen because I have news updates, pictures, etc. I had a cough because I had just finished a half marathon in the harsh Okinawan humidity.
The "f word"? People that substitute letters for words, like "Oh no, he used the S word!" are being retarded. Your taboo against specific words is unreasonable, but worse it is tiring. The word you were referring to is the word "fuck". Are you honestly against typing a specific word?
CNN the (communist news network) would never run this on there network. Thank God someone has the right sense to say the right thing about all of this BS
Man this video has so much wrong with it, actually.
Look, we live in a community, we take care of one-another. Your ideas of problem solving are off point, if someone falls and breaks their bones we should help them out, WE SHOULD BE GOOD PEOPLE, NOT JUST THINKING ABOUT PROFIT FOR OURSELVES. And you're a fucking hypocrite dude, you take from the community and dont want to give back. If you hate this society so bad then go to a fucking forest, lets see how good is that. Government = The people.
Hmm, this video has a lot of good points about the government, but not on social issues.
What about roads? You need them, dont you? We all do. You wont build them yourself. Healthcare too (in other country's, not USA). Humans have the best situation when they are co-operative, and thats how taxes and etc works. The problem comes when government is too stupid on how to spend the tax money.
yea~ if u really want no social warefare at all..........go china~ back to the socialism time, they did have everything, like global health care~ now they dont, and income tax there is fuckin low~
it's like u get 15000 a month, u only have to pay 2000 for tax....
I personally would like some kind of system set up so that everyone gets "free" medical care. There's a big difference between not being able to afford a kidney transplant for your kid and not being able to afford a college education for your kid.
one point though aborted soul money that your earned. who printed it mmmmm... any guesses, that fed thats right. read what on the money. its never was your money in the first place secondly its worthless coming down to cases. you did not print it,the government did . you live at other people pleasure, you can be taken out,down, abuse, used and raped if others didnt like you. lastly here couple novel concepts compassion and the greater good for look them up
One problem with the China points however, is the unfair currency advantage. If the curreny prices were equal, I'm pretty sure no one would be outsourcing to the other side of the world for toothbrushes
I think that the currency piece is an important part of the puzzle, but I don't think it is vital. With China keeping the RMB's price down, they are having to subsidize it with government money. Even at it's dirty float, it is still not much better than when it was pegged to the USD.
Watching China's financial status now, it seems like the PRC is paying for this mistake in particular. They might only have enough money for one more bank bailout, and they are experiencing negative growth.
In financial terms this is known as the one and only hard-and-fast law of trade- the market will always correct itself. We live in a physical universe and even with the markets as distorted as they are, China is finding out that you reap what you sew.
No one put a gun to the heads of the lenders so poor people buy housing. so stop attacking people that dont know any better and Fuck u all you college educated morons that blame those that had little to do with the problem, one college educated moron stole more that all the poor put toghether (enron)but its the poor who pay harsher punishment.
If the rich did not live in the suburban hills, perhaps we could save billions from fighting fires and catering to them!
"one college educated moron stole more that all the poor put toghether (enron)but its the poor who pay harsher punishment."
I suggest that you check your premise and try again. How high is the national debt now? How many taxes are wasted on stupid welfare programs to support people who will not support themselves? The numbers aren't even close, friend.
While the national debt is at alarming levels, the reality about welfare is that not all of the recipients of this social benefit are scammers and I could say with confidence that only a small percentage fall within this category. You are only talking from your mouth and continuing a myth about welfare, to me it seems that you are saying that, because of welfare programs we are in this mess, you might wanna be the one that checks your premise my friend...
"the reality about welfare is that not all of the recipients of this social benefit are scammers and I could say with confidence that only a small percentage fall within this category."
I never said they were "scammers". I am saying that it is not their money to begin with, and the government seized it from those who earned it. I know that many of those people genuinely need that money, or at least need it to live somewhat comfortably.
i just have to say freedom only lets in corruption the government needs to run the banks atleast thats all peace out o and to get all the corruption out of the government is simple all u have to do is force them to were cameras and wires and have a site where u can see and hear them any time now dont get me wrong thay should not do it to norm jobs but if u want power u should have to give up something
...I suggest that you do some research on a place called the "Soviet Union" before you go around endorsing whole-sale socialism.
The reason for the corruption and the collapse of modern banking isn't because it is too free; actually the opposite is true.
This is the downfall of the fascist fractional-reserve system, where the markets are not free at all. The government has regulated and printed the markets to death, and now we are seeing the consequences. No business owner would do that.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Leaches of society? What do you spend your hard-earned money on, cable porn? It's one thing to blurt out Social Darwinist rhetoric like it makes you clever to tar the working class with one brush, it's quite another to be obnoxiously flaunting your superiority complex on YouTube of all places.
Thank you! You give Me hope for the future! Our Nation is heading downward and it is up to those like you to correct this problem. Power to the strong and death to the weak! Survival is our main objective. Thanks again!!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Weak was the wrong word. Who I am referring to are those People that are the leaches of our society. I am tired of paying for People to pop out babies and smoke crack all day!
Well since it is not really the fault of a child or most other people if they get sick, don't you think it is positive and a moral achievement if the community sticks together to help those unfortunate people? Do you have no pity for them? I understand your general reasoning of responsibility and agree in general, but it makes no sense when it comes to sickness since that is mostly through no fault of one's own...
"don't you think it is positive and a moral achievement if the community sticks together to help those unfortunate people?"
Yes, in some cases. As long as the money is pooled specifically for that purpose, and not forcefully taken from those who choose not to do so. A community choosing to collect for charity, sure. A country taxing it's people to give it to someone else? No fucking way.
All reigning systems will fail in the end because you need privileged people for a hierarchical structure.
The problem is that once obtained nobody wants to give away the privileges (like the banksters). This leads to more and more injustice -- until the ordinary people are sick of it or cannot get enough money for their labor to feed themselves.
you counter one power with another power over which the people have the ultimate say. thats essentially democracy. people have say over the government who has say over things like corporations, to a degree i know there are limits. but the government can make the priveledged give up some of that cash which makes them priveledged and give it to those with less
People may have theoretically a say in a young democracy but look at the USA now: a two party system which is essentially the same; e-voting with all its manipulations; I don't recognize where the people have a say.
And in Europe? Have the people been asked whether they want to join the EUR, or was it just the elitist Orwellian politicians?
However, I agree with you that I do find comfort in socialism, but I also like the freedom of the early USA (without the FED and IRS).
thats america's look at canada's we arent exactly a young democracy and a number of parties have collapsed. fragmented merged. but were stuck in something of a minority goverment again. did you consider it isnt the process but the number of viable prospects which has stagnated the american system?
Actually it is the "freedom" of the young USA which made it invidious to "the stronger makes the rules" (even with Jefferson's foreboding that people must be ever watchful.) With time grew corruption and double speak. But as I said before, it doesn't matter whether America started as a republic, a democratic, communist or socialist state. They all may have a longer durability but in the end the elites will try to enslave the people because of their unstoppably unfair privileges.
Governments shouldn't make people do anything, governments shouldn't exist and people should already know that sacrificing some of their own wealth to help the less fortunate is something worth doing (unless they've read an Ayn Rand book and equate all wealth with effort).
humans are animals, you wanna know what happens in other social animal circles? the strong tend to rule and they dont give up more then they have to to keep the group together. humans are no different from chimp this way. also corruption and stagnation breed fast in small pools. in a two party systems there is no such thing as a minority government. and as the two parties begin to resemble eachother there is no third to split the vote. hence corruption breeds through a lack of balance.outofwords
i was simply pointing out that not all democratic systems with generous social programmes are failing. infact most are thriving, the people educated often with help of a social programme osap in my province of canada and when sick healed also with a social programme health care. and i dont think that anarchism will solve the problem simply because i dont think it can work by human nature. people want leaders it gives them someone to blame when it all falls down. it also. continued next comment
it also allows them to make someone else make those choices that noone really wants to make. then theres the whole anti good samaratan nature of nature. in nature the strong dominate. with social animals the strong lead the pack. humans are no different in this nature. you do get the odd ones who are but as a whole were no different then other animals. governments are used by the people to keep power with the little guys. though they are made of humans so the system is imperfect by nature.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Chimps also like rape. I wasn't aware that the moral backbone of human society was defined by what chimps do, or I would've torn off all of my clothing and brutally violated any object of my desire. Seriously, YouTube's political thinkers are hilarious.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
i didnt say we werent more evolved as a social species. oh and btw some humans do like rape they rape people and get sent to jail for it. we still carry alot of those ancient primal instincts
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Why is it that when the actions of chimpanzees are concurrent with your political affiliations, these ancient primal instincts, as you call them, are so ubiquitous an element in the human condition, but when it's rape, it's only a tiny percentage of the population affected by this psychological chimp influence (I can't believe I actually just said that)? It seems to me that you're arbitrarily deciding when chimps, and Darwinism in general, are relevant and when they're not.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
who says it's only a small percentage of the population now. time was just several hundred years ago when rape was not all that uncommon. you know them dark and middle ages. so we've grown up as a civilization since then and maybe even as a race. doesnt mean we dont still have at least some of those primal instincts
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Rape is hilarious because most women aquiesce to it. The submissiveness and daintyness of women have been breeded into them for generations because being potential rapists who would you rather have? Someone who fights back and tears out your eyes and balls or someone who screams just at the sight of the mighty penis?
You've got to be shitting me. Your comment didn't even make any sense. Socialism is ultimate in a certain way; it is the ultimate way to trick a society into destroying itself.
"Also, you never responded to me about what you thought would be just in the X-Box situation."
Stolen item should be returned to owner, money used to buy stolen item returned to purchaser if they were ignorant of receiving stolen goods. Thief should be punished.
SonofNewo is absolutely correct in pointing out that your dislike of car insurance is irrational. There is a balance of rights between you and other people. Other people have the right to be protected from economic catastrophe in cases where YOU damage THEM or their property. Since you cannot possibly claim the ability to self-insure $250,000-$500,000 million in potential property losses and medical bills, you have an obligation to maintain insurance. That is definitely YOUR responsibility.
Oh, and in closing, what kind of fucking air-headed libertarian would be supportive of the Electoral College to safeguard against the 'excesses of democracy'? The man is a charade.
"Oh, and in closing, what kind of fucking air-headed libertarian would be supportive of the Electoral College to safeguard against the 'excesses of democracy'?"
The excesses of democracy are self-evident. No one has the right to vote away the rights of others, and if there is a case to be made for the existence of a government then that is a problem that it must address. I agree partially, because the electoral college is bullshit.
Nobody can vote away the rights of others in a democracy, this would imply that not everyone is on an equal footing, which is antithetical to the very basic principles of democracy where there's universally recognised rights and universal suffrage. Whenever any politician says anything about safeguarding from the excesses of democracy, they're creating a straw man of some totalitarian democracy state as the end result of choice. Ron Paul is against democracy by being pro-electoral college.
"Nobody can vote away the rights of others in a democracy, this would imply that not everyone is on an equal footing, which is antithetical to the very basic principles of democracy where there's universally recognised rights and universal suffrage."
Any bailout (such as the one currently underway) is a prime example of the voting-away of someone's rights (each taxpayer) to their own property. No straw man intended, or even present, in this case.
- Ron Paul has been embraced by the White Supremacist movement, Bill White has written about Paul's presence at Stormfront, American Renaissance and other WS meetings.
- Ron Paul accepted donations from KKK members David Duke and Don Black.
- There was the issue with the racist and homophobic leaflets that he was apparently unaware of.
- Ron Paul is entirely reactionary, treating the Consititution as the sole truth in some strange worldly hall of mirrors out to deceive the people.
"- Ron Paul has been embraced by the White Supremacist movement, Bill White has written about Paul's presence at Stormfront, American Renaissance and other WS meetings."
Ron paul isn't responsible for the igorance of others, Period.
"- Ron Paul is entirely reactionary, treating the Consititution as the sole truth in some strange worldly hall of mirrors out to deceive the people."
That document's merits are self-evident. Sticking to your guns doesn't make you reactionary.
Well, when I said that he has been embraced by the movement, I wasn't implying that they've kidnapped his ideology against his will and are entirely excluded from him in their reverence, I meant that he's been an active presence within the movement, just keeping it relatively secret because he's as obsessed with PR as every other politician.
The Consititution certainly has merit, but how far can we take it as an infallible guide to a just system? The Electoral College is constitutional.
Very good point. The constitution is, however, one of the most moral and logical documents ever written. It does have its flaws, and it was built with mechanisms to correct its mistakes.
However, if you are claiming that Ron Paul is some sort of underground supporter and "active presence" in radical hate groups, you had better be prepared to present some solid evidence for that. Why exactly do you believe that? Please, share it with me.
-Supportive of 'Don't ask, don't tell' position within military, evidenced by the Republican debate.
- Laissez-faire libertarianism is for the same naive rich kids as Objectivism, "if you're poor, the only person that could POSSIBLY to be blame is yourself, so let's fuck you over for all you're worth."
- Ron Paul voted against the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, which extends the vote to blacks in the Southern states.
"-Supportive of 'Don't ask, don't tell' position within military, evidenced by the Republican debate."
Agreed.
"- Laissez-faire libertarianism is for the same naive rich kids as Objectivism, "if you're poor, the only person that could POSSIBLY to be blame is yourself, so let's fuck you over for all you're worth."
No, you are missing the point of that completely. Read "Economics in One Lesson" (free link provided in sidebar of this video).
I read section one and immediately found what I hate:
"do not the idler and the spendthrift know, even in the midst of their glorious fling, that they are heading for a future of debt and poverty? "
Capitalism is not a straightforward meritocracy. The opportunities that present themselves to the poor, the reasons why they are there in the first place and the ability of the aforementioned poor to take those opportunities are rooted in many things seemingly imperceptible to the Randroid glance.
Any business venture (either self-employment or working for another) involves a certain level of risk. Each is in command of his or her own situation, however. You choose which risks to take or not take, and you take responsibility for the outcome. How else would someone like it to be?
Nobody is in complete control of their situation. Capitalism isn't a system where the slate is wiped clean each generation, nobody is born on a totally equal footing and nobody is presented with the same opportunities as someone else. It's remarkably easy for the rich to say that they have earned their riches, but often, the only reason that someone wins in this game is that someone else started out at a disadvantage. If you are born into a poor area with poor education, it's hard to succeed.
If capitalism is mutual benefit, how come you started off in the shitter? Capitalism has winners and losers. When capitalism privatises everything; education, food, healthcare, nobody should be supportive of this winners-losers system, these things are too important to lose. Mutual benefit and consensual co-operation is something for free societies, and I don't mean free in the skewed Anarchocapitalism sense, I mean anarchist communism, communities supporting each other, no victors or victims.
My life started out in the shitter because my parents didn't work hard enough to give me a better start.
What you are proposing is that the productive, hard-working members of society should be obligated to babysit and provide for the people who aren't? The productive members get no benefit, and there is no penalty for being lazy. That is a cannibalistic society where the weak are entitled to eat food off of the plates of those who actually earn it. No victims? Justice is a victim.
Poor people work harder than the rich people born with silver spoons in their mouth. The elitism of objectivists based upon the naive assumption of poor being synonymous with laziness is the worst form of oppression: an opression that masquerades as justice for the hard-working. There is no need for victory or for victims, money is not the barometer of social virtue, but of social discontent and malice. Cooperative existence trumps winners.
I think the ultra-rich feel guilty over their unearned prosperity and hire hacks like Ayn Rand to 'justify' the inequities of the system that puts them on top and keeps them there.
Objectivism is so full of holes it makes swiss cheese look solid.
When you become a bit more focused, calm down and substitute, "umm," for fuck you'll be one hell of a news anchor. If you stay...passionate the next O'Reilly. Wait this is your therapy.
Fuck Ron Paul and fuck these neoliberal capitalist scumbags stealing libertarianism from the anarchists. I mean, Ron Paul is a racist, woman-hating, nationalist piece of shit too, but I can't forgive the neoliberalism bullshit that people eat up out of his ass as if it's the definition of freedom to be completely at the mercy of your bourgeois slavekeepers.
Are you claiming that the only moral standpoint in life is to be poor? That is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in quite some time.
If you want to be rich, go get rich. The world is made of money. If you only want to make enough to get by, that's fine too; it's all up to your own personal choice.
"starvation is not exactly a 'non-coercive' environment."
Are you trying to claim that need provides a fair claim to someone else's property?
"Plenty of people work hard and create but do not get wealthy or powerful."
That is a problem due the injustices like government and parasitic "need = entitlement" philosophy.
Starvation has always been a threat. How you deal with that problem is, and always has been, a personal choice.
It isn't barbarism, it's reality. This is the world that we live in. The alternative is absolute folly; need does not entitle anyone else to someone else's property. It's absolutely illogical.
The fact remains many of the wealthy have done nothing to earn their privileged postions, while many hardworking people are in poverty through no fault of their own.
It is unjust for the rich parasites to prosper while the hardworking individuals go hungry.
Nothing 'parasitic' about searching for a way to address the injustice of this.
"...many of the wealthy have done nothing to earn their privileged postions, while many hardworking people are in poverty through no fault of their own."
Nobody (except the government, both in theft and in subsidizing large corporations) is stopping those hard-working people from earning their fair due.
Just because someone succeeds and becomes wealthy you consider them parasites? I would refer you to the hordes of social welfare recipients, in case you forgot what a parasite looked like.
Some people do earn their wealth, but many do not. That is just a historical fact.
If everyone started on equal footing maybe Randian anarchy would work.
We are not starting from any kind of 'equal' footing - many have advantages and many have dis-advantages because of past coercion. Why should thieves decide whether hardworking people should starve or live?
"Nothing 'parasitic' about searching for a way to address the injustice of this. "
There is something very parasitic about obtaining the spoils of others by force and then giving it to those who had no hand in the making of their wealth. Please, explain this mechanism that wealthy people use to mystically steal from the poor? I'd bet quite a bit that it is a direct result of government interfering in free-market economics.
If you study history you might find that armies invade other countries, slaughter the people and take the land. They are the Powers that now 'own' the land and that is the basis of wealth. Nothing mystical about it.
How did 'free non-coercive market' get Europeans to control all of North America?
The people that did that invading are now dead. Is this "power" that you talk about some sort of self-aware force that is beyond the people involved? Is it a religious belief or something?
"How did 'free non-coercive market' get Europeans to control all of North America?"
Wait, ok. So now the societies that are prominent because of ancient historical injustices have something to do with free markets? I'm not really catching your drift here. Ancient theft. That is completely off-topic.
"There seems to be some idea that 'wealth' is self-created, when history shows it is often the result of coercion."
Yes, that is true. The government exists, and has wealth, but creates none. I'm glad we can agree.
"There seems to be some idea poverty is the result of lack of virtue, when it can be shown to be the result of coercion."
Doubtless some poverty exists as a result of coercion. I would say that a much more prevalent reason would be laziness as a result of previous handouts.
"Does Objectivism want to create level playing field so real merit can be rewarded and encouraged? Or just confirm the results of theivery of the past?"
I'm simply making the case that someone should keep the spoils of their work. Just answer me this- if I earned my money, fairly, is it just for a government to steal that from me and give it freely to those who haven't earned it?
If you choose, with the vast wealth available to you (such as owning an internet connection and a personal computer) to try and make things better for the less productive/fortunate, great. That is all well and good. But do not expect, or demand (especially with force), to be able to steal from those who have to give to those who don't. Theft is one of the easiest crimes to understand, and right to the fruits of your labor is one of the easiest forms of justice to grasp.
So you are saying that no one in the history of human society has ever established themselves fairly, from their own labor and ideas? I wonder how much "wealth and privilege" you have seen in your life that wasn't government sponsored.
The alternative seems to be to continue to propagate this sort of misery, or compound it with socialist hand-outs. I don't think it would be just to punish people for the government's wrongdoings.
Here's an analogy- your neighbor (the government) steals your X-Box and sells it to your brother. Your thieving neighbor spends all of the money, and has no money left to pay you back. Should your brother have to return the X-Box?
I'm just saying that a justice difficulty exists. Of course I want it corrected, but I don't think coercion-based welfare is anywhere close to a just solution.
I'm just pointing out that a justice difficulty exists with the proposal that the current unjust distribution of wealth should be ratified and accepted as if it were 'earned'.
It certainly did; it described how large corporations are subsidized by theft-based funds provided by the government (for example, in the form of roads used in freight transportation). Also, you never responded to me about what you thought would be just in the X-Box situation. I'd love to hear your thoughts.
a) Taxes are the fee for living in civilized society where social fictions like private property, inheritance & capitalism can flourish.
b) We all benefit from gov't projects like roads, dams, etc - not just corporations.
Long doesn't not address the unjust distribution of wealth under discussion: one's wealth/poverty is not wholly based on merit because the economic playing field isn't level and never has been.
Too many spoiled people, born on 3rd base, think they've hit a triple.
so i'm guessing if u were at the bottom of a donor recipient list u wouldn't mind if u had to wait with the possibility that u may die before u obtain that much needed organ or/and pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for the surgery? dude that's cool, it would be nice because then it would save me and the rest of us money!! i wonder how much money we would save if more people were down to pay for shit out of pocket!
I don't know about the economic situation in the US but I think the idea of money from the government is a good. I got unemployed myself a few years before due to a fusion. So I got unemployment pay until I found a new job and since then paying my stuff alone again. Sometimes situations like that happen and help should be offered. The problem is just that the services are misused and the money is badly shared.
"Sometimes situations like that happen and help should be offered."
Then you offer it, out of your own pocket willingly. It is not the responsibility of your countrymen to support you when your situation goes sour. Any amount taken to support you is stolen; only money given to you willingly (by a charity, a friend or a family member) would be clean money.
Well, I couldn't have helped myself. I got money from my country, before and after I gave it back so that others can have it. I think that's what a society is. And it would be a loss for all society if someone with great abilities or skills can't render it's part because there was a problem. One single event shouldn't have the power to throw people out of the race. If all those people don't get support ... what then? Beggars? Prison? Shoot them?
"I got money from my country, before and after I gave it back so that others can have it."
I have no problem with that sort of framework. The problem with the government enforcing it is that you don't have a choice in the matter. It violates your right to your own property when someone forcefully takes it from you, even under the guise of trying to take care of you. If a private company offered you unemployment insurance, say, I wouldn't find a problem with that.
Let people live with the consequences of their decisions. Why would I advocate shooting them? If you haven't noticed, personal rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of property are self-evident, and I support nothing that violates these tenants unless it is in the plain and
Obamas fucking administration is giving tax breaks to companies who move overseas and doing swat raids on american companies here in the states, how the fuck is that not robbing americans of jobs? Fucking twot.
12Oc7ock 5 months ago
this guy knows whats going on.
SuicideCrippler 1 year ago
My-my-my!
My money! My life! My time!
This kid is delusional, like so many others in America.
Too many toys for Xmas leads to a nation full of egotistical brats who become republicans whiners.
stelron5050 2 years ago
great video it should be played on tv.
TheVikingsRevenge 2 years ago
you have no f**king life man.. I hope you get run over by a car.. and a dog f*cks you in yours skull.. you bloody suck.. go do drugs to chill out.. come to amsterdam here in the netherlands and after that your chill.. till then.. please die
mrquintnl 2 years ago
haha vind ik ook x D
loadsofsqueels 2 years ago
U-571 is this great movie about these American marines that go on a submarine mission to steal the German code book. I highly recommend it.
pajamadude15 2 years ago
Why don't we utilize technology and free Earth's resources for everyone to benefit from?
shirtrippah 2 years ago
good idea; tell us how.
abortedsoul 2 years ago
A resource based economy sounds nice.
shirtrippah 2 years ago
This guy is creepy...the maniacal laughing...and what is does he keep looking at off camera, to his upper right? The cough is a bit disturbing as well. Go to a doctor my friend.
summerinthecity09 2 years ago
I was looking at my screen because I have news updates, pictures, etc. I had a cough because I had just finished a half marathon in the harsh Okinawan humidity.
abortedsoul 2 years ago
What do you look like naked?
summerinthecity09 2 years ago
It looks to me like I was wearing a towel.
abortedsoul 2 years ago
Hot! So let's see more...
summerinthecity09 2 years ago
Hot...so let's see more!
summerinthecity09 2 years ago
The repetitive use of the F word says it all...
summerinthecity09 2 years ago
The "f word"? People that substitute letters for words, like "Oh no, he used the S word!" are being retarded. Your taboo against specific words is unreasonable, but worse it is tiring. The word you were referring to is the word "fuck". Are you honestly against typing a specific word?
abortedsoul 2 years ago
Um....yes, as a matter of fact I am against the indiscriminate use of the F word. It's a great word- it loses power the more you use it.
summerinthecity09 2 years ago
haha this guy have the same voice as fox mulder from x-files
sslinaa 2 years ago
I concur with your economic views and people taking responsibility for themselves. What do you think about the military budget?
guthguth67 2 years ago
CNN the (communist news network) would never run this on there network. Thank God someone has the right sense to say the right thing about all of this BS
tdvan80 2 years ago
republican pig.
rextony22 2 years ago
Again, your making these "facts" up. "Killed more than all the wars ever"... huh? NO!
kithkin01 2 years ago
lazy people rule this world.
rextony22 2 years ago
america is doing alot of bad things whith our tax dallars and i will never trust my kids in public school
coolwalt101 2 years ago
Man this video has so much wrong with it, actually.
Look, we live in a community, we take care of one-another. Your ideas of problem solving are off point, if someone falls and breaks their bones we should help them out, WE SHOULD BE GOOD PEOPLE, NOT JUST THINKING ABOUT PROFIT FOR OURSELVES. And you're a fucking hypocrite dude, you take from the community and dont want to give back. If you hate this society so bad then go to a fucking forest, lets see how good is that. Government = The people.
MistaJussu 2 years ago
Hmm, this video has a lot of good points about the government, but not on social issues.
What about roads? You need them, dont you? We all do. You wont build them yourself. Healthcare too (in other country's, not USA). Humans have the best situation when they are co-operative, and thats how taxes and etc works. The problem comes when government is too stupid on how to spend the tax money.
U should:
Pay for your own stuff, by working.
Private school your kids.
Build your capital.
MistaJussu 2 years ago
Your girl friend is hot ;)
DAUCUSCAROTATHEMOVIE 2 years ago
... soooo ...
... you're NOT a Socialist?
LondonWeekendLesbian 2 years ago
wait a second.....one thing i dont get : America does NOT have global health care ...........does it?
u dont pay tax to take care of someone else.....do u?
skyfrank 2 years ago
yea~ if u really want no social warefare at all..........go china~ back to the socialism time, they did have everything, like global health care~ now they dont, and income tax there is fuckin low~
it's like u get 15000 a month, u only have to pay 2000 for tax....
yea, think about it, take a hint ;)
skyfrank 2 years ago
I personally would like some kind of system set up so that everyone gets "free" medical care. There's a big difference between not being able to afford a kidney transplant for your kid and not being able to afford a college education for your kid.
TextAndViolence 2 years ago
try canada~ the easist way for yer
skyfrank 2 years ago
one point though aborted soul money that your earned. who printed it mmmmm... any guesses, that fed thats right. read what on the money. its never was your money in the first place secondly its worthless coming down to cases. you did not print it,the government did . you live at other people pleasure, you can be taken out,down, abuse, used and raped if others didnt like you. lastly here couple novel concepts compassion and the greater good for look them up
jedimagejoe 2 years ago
I wrote a bunch of replies on the video response by rumpagump. I thought you might be interested in reading some of them.
yellotrace 2 years ago
however, you make sence.
laoshapigou 2 years ago
Oh man!!!
ImmortalCHN 2 years ago
Wow, people are hating on supportive comments.
AnarchyBalsac 3 years ago
I'm glad you were here to figure it all out for us.
LordLargo37 3 years ago
Asian chicks FTW!!!
damagejackal10 3 years ago
What the fuck does this have to do with Asian chicks you son of a bitch?
ImmortalCHN 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fuck you
jojoplaymaker 3 years ago
AWESOME video man
chris3443 3 years ago
One problem with the China points however, is the unfair currency advantage. If the curreny prices were equal, I'm pretty sure no one would be outsourcing to the other side of the world for toothbrushes
chris3443 3 years ago
I think that the currency piece is an important part of the puzzle, but I don't think it is vital. With China keeping the RMB's price down, they are having to subsidize it with government money. Even at it's dirty float, it is still not much better than when it was pegged to the USD.
Watching China's financial status now, it seems like the PRC is paying for this mistake in particular. They might only have enough money for one more bank bailout, and they are experiencing negative growth.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
In financial terms this is known as the one and only hard-and-fast law of trade- the market will always correct itself. We live in a physical universe and even with the markets as distorted as they are, China is finding out that you reap what you sew.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
No one put a gun to the heads of the lenders so poor people buy housing. so stop attacking people that dont know any better and Fuck u all you college educated morons that blame those that had little to do with the problem, one college educated moron stole more that all the poor put toghether (enron)but its the poor who pay harsher punishment.
If the rich did not live in the suburban hills, perhaps we could save billions from fighting fires and catering to them!
enchilada01 3 years ago
"one college educated moron stole more that all the poor put toghether (enron)but its the poor who pay harsher punishment."
I suggest that you check your premise and try again. How high is the national debt now? How many taxes are wasted on stupid welfare programs to support people who will not support themselves? The numbers aren't even close, friend.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
While the national debt is at alarming levels, the reality about welfare is that not all of the recipients of this social benefit are scammers and I could say with confidence that only a small percentage fall within this category. You are only talking from your mouth and continuing a myth about welfare, to me it seems that you are saying that, because of welfare programs we are in this mess, you might wanna be the one that checks your premise my friend...
enchilada01 3 years ago
"the reality about welfare is that not all of the recipients of this social benefit are scammers and I could say with confidence that only a small percentage fall within this category."
I never said they were "scammers". I am saying that it is not their money to begin with, and the government seized it from those who earned it. I know that many of those people genuinely need that money, or at least need it to live somewhat comfortably.
Need entitles no one to the belongings of others.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
i just have to say freedom only lets in corruption the government needs to run the banks atleast thats all peace out o and to get all the corruption out of the government is simple all u have to do is force them to were cameras and wires and have a site where u can see and hear them any time now dont get me wrong thay should not do it to norm jobs but if u want power u should have to give up something
ghostflame14mypassgo 3 years ago
...I suggest that you do some research on a place called the "Soviet Union" before you go around endorsing whole-sale socialism.
The reason for the corruption and the collapse of modern banking isn't because it is too free; actually the opposite is true.
This is the downfall of the fascist fractional-reserve system, where the markets are not free at all. The government has regulated and printed the markets to death, and now we are seeing the consequences. No business owner would do that.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
I totally agree with you, no one should have my taxes for sitting on their ass in government funded homes. Fuck them, work you lazy fucking people.
stfaulk89 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i thought that most of the products we sell here in the U.S are made in China...
TheSoapiestWanger 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You know why China is winning? Because of their philosophy and hard team workmanship.
Changeisgood12 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Leaches of society? What do you spend your hard-earned money on, cable porn? It's one thing to blurt out Social Darwinist rhetoric like it makes you clever to tar the working class with one brush, it's quite another to be obnoxiously flaunting your superiority complex on YouTube of all places.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
"the government needs to have a certian degree of FIRM control on ALL areas of our lives"
Did you read what you wrote before you typed it? I surely hope that you are fucking joking. Ever hear of a little something called liberty?
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Thank you! You give Me hope for the future! Our Nation is heading downward and it is up to those like you to correct this problem. Power to the strong and death to the weak! Survival is our main objective. Thanks again!!
heymantake5 3 years ago
Death to the weak? I say offer them help, but out of your own pocket- and not forcefully taken from someone else's.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Weak was the wrong word. Who I am referring to are those People that are the leaches of our society. I am tired of paying for People to pop out babies and smoke crack all day!
heymantake5 3 years ago
Yea right you assholes pay for the fucking assholes! that fuck up the world that we live in!!!!!!!
heymantake5 3 years ago
Well since it is not really the fault of a child or most other people if they get sick, don't you think it is positive and a moral achievement if the community sticks together to help those unfortunate people? Do you have no pity for them? I understand your general reasoning of responsibility and agree in general, but it makes no sense when it comes to sickness since that is mostly through no fault of one's own...
MisterWeed 3 years ago
"don't you think it is positive and a moral achievement if the community sticks together to help those unfortunate people?"
Yes, in some cases. As long as the money is pooled specifically for that purpose, and not forcefully taken from those who choose not to do so. A community choosing to collect for charity, sure. A country taxing it's people to give it to someone else? No fucking way.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
I read an article in a Libertarian magazine that showed how the fall of the Roman Empire is the same road America is heading down today.
I can't, however, say that I'm against helping people in need, but it is ridiculous how we're "paying" people who don't NEED it.
It's only going to get worse, too.
OlySezHey 3 years ago
Yes, I think that all modern societies need to adhere to the fact that you are the sole arbiter of who needs financial help.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
oly -
In Rand theory the whims of the wealthy trump the needs of everyone else - it is an anti-life agenda.
proudfootz 3 years ago
In that, Rand was a fool. I think everyone can understand the concept of "theft", however.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
I agree Rand was foolish.
Maybe everyone can understand the concept of theft.
Apparently it is difficult for some to distinguish theft from legitimate taxation and social responsibility.
proudfootz 3 years ago
hello idiot word from canada. we have better social programmes then america and we arent collapsing think about that
kitrana 3 years ago
"we aren't collapsing think about that"
All reigning systems will fail in the end because you need privileged people for a hierarchical structure.
The problem is that once obtained nobody wants to give away the privileges (like the banksters). This leads to more and more injustice -- until the ordinary people are sick of it or cannot get enough money for their labor to feed themselves.
uncertaintyprinciple 3 years ago
you counter one power with another power over which the people have the ultimate say. thats essentially democracy. people have say over the government who has say over things like corporations, to a degree i know there are limits. but the government can make the priveledged give up some of that cash which makes them priveledged and give it to those with less
kitrana 3 years ago
People may have theoretically a say in a young democracy but look at the USA now: a two party system which is essentially the same; e-voting with all its manipulations; I don't recognize where the people have a say.
And in Europe? Have the people been asked whether they want to join the EUR, or was it just the elitist Orwellian politicians?
However, I agree with you that I do find comfort in socialism, but I also like the freedom of the early USA (without the FED and IRS).
uncertaintyprinciple 3 years ago
thats america's look at canada's we arent exactly a young democracy and a number of parties have collapsed. fragmented merged. but were stuck in something of a minority goverment again. did you consider it isnt the process but the number of viable prospects which has stagnated the american system?
kitrana 3 years ago
Actually it is the "freedom" of the young USA which made it invidious to "the stronger makes the rules" (even with Jefferson's foreboding that people must be ever watchful.) With time grew corruption and double speak. But as I said before, it doesn't matter whether America started as a republic, a democratic, communist or socialist state. They all may have a longer durability but in the end the elites will try to enslave the people because of their unstoppably unfair privileges.
uncertaintyprinciple 3 years ago
Governments shouldn't make people do anything, governments shouldn't exist and people should already know that sacrificing some of their own wealth to help the less fortunate is something worth doing (unless they've read an Ayn Rand book and equate all wealth with effort).
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
humans are animals, you wanna know what happens in other social animal circles? the strong tend to rule and they dont give up more then they have to to keep the group together. humans are no different from chimp this way. also corruption and stagnation breed fast in small pools. in a two party systems there is no such thing as a minority government. and as the two parties begin to resemble eachother there is no third to split the vote. hence corruption breeds through a lack of balance.outofwords
kitrana 3 years ago
Kitrana, where are you going with that comment?
abortedsoul 3 years ago
i was simply pointing out that not all democratic systems with generous social programmes are failing. infact most are thriving, the people educated often with help of a social programme osap in my province of canada and when sick healed also with a social programme health care. and i dont think that anarchism will solve the problem simply because i dont think it can work by human nature. people want leaders it gives them someone to blame when it all falls down. it also. continued next comment
kitrana 3 years ago
it also allows them to make someone else make those choices that noone really wants to make. then theres the whole anti good samaratan nature of nature. in nature the strong dominate. with social animals the strong lead the pack. humans are no different in this nature. you do get the odd ones who are but as a whole were no different then other animals. governments are used by the people to keep power with the little guys. though they are made of humans so the system is imperfect by nature.
kitrana 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Chimps also like rape. I wasn't aware that the moral backbone of human society was defined by what chimps do, or I would've torn off all of my clothing and brutally violated any object of my desire. Seriously, YouTube's political thinkers are hilarious.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i didnt say we werent more evolved as a social species. oh and btw some humans do like rape they rape people and get sent to jail for it. we still carry alot of those ancient primal instincts
kitrana 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why is it that when the actions of chimpanzees are concurrent with your political affiliations, these ancient primal instincts, as you call them, are so ubiquitous an element in the human condition, but when it's rape, it's only a tiny percentage of the population affected by this psychological chimp influence (I can't believe I actually just said that)? It seems to me that you're arbitrarily deciding when chimps, and Darwinism in general, are relevant and when they're not.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
who says it's only a small percentage of the population now. time was just several hundred years ago when rape was not all that uncommon. you know them dark and middle ages. so we've grown up as a civilization since then and maybe even as a race. doesnt mean we dont still have at least some of those primal instincts
kitrana 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Rape is hilarious because most women aquiesce to it. The submissiveness and daintyness of women have been breeded into them for generations because being potential rapists who would you rather have? Someone who fights back and tears out your eyes and balls or someone who screams just at the sight of the mighty penis?
joesub007 3 years ago
You've got to be shitting me. Your comment didn't even make any sense. Socialism is ultimate in a certain way; it is the ultimate way to trick a society into destroying itself.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
"Also, you never responded to me about what you thought would be just in the X-Box situation."
Stolen item should be returned to owner, money used to buy stolen item returned to purchaser if they were ignorant of receiving stolen goods. Thief should be punished.
proudfootz 3 years ago
"money used to buy stolen item returned to purchaser if they were ignorant of receiving stolen goods."
Money from where? I stated originally that the thief had no money, and lets assume that your brother wasn't aware that it was theft.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
OK - forget the money.
The receiver of stolen property should still return it.
proudfootz 3 years ago
SonofNewo is absolutely correct in pointing out that your dislike of car insurance is irrational. There is a balance of rights between you and other people. Other people have the right to be protected from economic catastrophe in cases where YOU damage THEM or their property. Since you cannot possibly claim the ability to self-insure $250,000-$500,000 million in potential property losses and medical bills, you have an obligation to maintain insurance. That is definitely YOUR responsibility.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
I am simply restoring the lost comment above: (scottzellar has made a comment on Why America is Sinking.)
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Comment removed
scottzellar 3 years ago
Oh, and in closing, what kind of fucking air-headed libertarian would be supportive of the Electoral College to safeguard against the 'excesses of democracy'? The man is a charade.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
"Oh, and in closing, what kind of fucking air-headed libertarian would be supportive of the Electoral College to safeguard against the 'excesses of democracy'?"
The excesses of democracy are self-evident. No one has the right to vote away the rights of others, and if there is a case to be made for the existence of a government then that is a problem that it must address. I agree partially, because the electoral college is bullshit.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Nobody can vote away the rights of others in a democracy, this would imply that not everyone is on an equal footing, which is antithetical to the very basic principles of democracy where there's universally recognised rights and universal suffrage. Whenever any politician says anything about safeguarding from the excesses of democracy, they're creating a straw man of some totalitarian democracy state as the end result of choice. Ron Paul is against democracy by being pro-electoral college.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
"Nobody can vote away the rights of others in a democracy, this would imply that not everyone is on an equal footing, which is antithetical to the very basic principles of democracy where there's universally recognised rights and universal suffrage."
Any bailout (such as the one currently underway) is a prime example of the voting-away of someone's rights (each taxpayer) to their own property. No straw man intended, or even present, in this case.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
- Ron Paul is anti-abortion, and anti-abortionists are wankers, it's hardly securing personal freedom.
- He's against the birthright citizenship position, and is generally very anti-immigration.
- He's pro capital punishment.
- He was supportive of Texas' right to sodomy laws.
Man, I could go on and on about this. I hate that guy.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
"- Ron Paul is anti-abortion, and anti-abortionists are wankers, it's hardly securing personal freedom."
Agreed.
"- He's against the birthright citizenship position, and is generally very anti-immigration."
Please provide proof.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
"- He's pro capital punishment."
Agreed.
"- He was supportive of Texas' right to sodomy laws."
Agreed, providing that you provide proof.
"Man, I could go on and on about this. I hate that guy."
Please, by all means, go on. I really am open to being corrected.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
- Ron Paul has been embraced by the White Supremacist movement, Bill White has written about Paul's presence at Stormfront, American Renaissance and other WS meetings.
- Ron Paul accepted donations from KKK members David Duke and Don Black.
- There was the issue with the racist and homophobic leaflets that he was apparently unaware of.
- Ron Paul is entirely reactionary, treating the Consititution as the sole truth in some strange worldly hall of mirrors out to deceive the people.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
"- Ron Paul has been embraced by the White Supremacist movement, Bill White has written about Paul's presence at Stormfront, American Renaissance and other WS meetings."
Ron paul isn't responsible for the igorance of others, Period.
"- Ron Paul is entirely reactionary, treating the Consititution as the sole truth in some strange worldly hall of mirrors out to deceive the people."
That document's merits are self-evident. Sticking to your guns doesn't make you reactionary.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Well, when I said that he has been embraced by the movement, I wasn't implying that they've kidnapped his ideology against his will and are entirely excluded from him in their reverence, I meant that he's been an active presence within the movement, just keeping it relatively secret because he's as obsessed with PR as every other politician.
The Consititution certainly has merit, but how far can we take it as an infallible guide to a just system? The Electoral College is constitutional.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
"The Electoral College is constitutional."
Very good point. The constitution is, however, one of the most moral and logical documents ever written. It does have its flaws, and it was built with mechanisms to correct its mistakes.
However, if you are claiming that Ron Paul is some sort of underground supporter and "active presence" in radical hate groups, you had better be prepared to present some solid evidence for that. Why exactly do you believe that? Please, share it with me.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Things I don't like about Ron Paul:
-Supportive of 'Don't ask, don't tell' position within military, evidenced by the Republican debate.
- Laissez-faire libertarianism is for the same naive rich kids as Objectivism, "if you're poor, the only person that could POSSIBLY to be blame is yourself, so let's fuck you over for all you're worth."
- Ron Paul voted against the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, which extends the vote to blacks in the Southern states.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
"-Supportive of 'Don't ask, don't tell' position within military, evidenced by the Republican debate."
Agreed.
"- Laissez-faire libertarianism is for the same naive rich kids as Objectivism, "if you're poor, the only person that could POSSIBLY to be blame is yourself, so let's fuck you over for all you're worth."
No, you are missing the point of that completely. Read "Economics in One Lesson" (free link provided in sidebar of this video).
abortedsoul 3 years ago
I read section one and immediately found what I hate:
"do not the idler and the spendthrift know, even in the midst of their glorious fling, that they are heading for a future of debt and poverty? "
Capitalism is not a straightforward meritocracy. The opportunities that present themselves to the poor, the reasons why they are there in the first place and the ability of the aforementioned poor to take those opportunities are rooted in many things seemingly imperceptible to the Randroid glance.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
Any business venture (either self-employment or working for another) involves a certain level of risk. Each is in command of his or her own situation, however. You choose which risks to take or not take, and you take responsibility for the outcome. How else would someone like it to be?
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Nobody is in complete control of their situation. Capitalism isn't a system where the slate is wiped clean each generation, nobody is born on a totally equal footing and nobody is presented with the same opportunities as someone else. It's remarkably easy for the rich to say that they have earned their riches, but often, the only reason that someone wins in this game is that someone else started out at a disadvantage. If you are born into a poor area with poor education, it's hard to succeed.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
I was born into a poor family, in a poor neighborhood. I started supporting my family from a very early age, and have never needed a hand out.
I've never been rich, and every dime that I posses is a dime that I have earned.
The idea behind capitalism is mutual benefit from consensual co-operation (also called "trading").
abortedsoul 3 years ago
If capitalism is mutual benefit, how come you started off in the shitter? Capitalism has winners and losers. When capitalism privatises everything; education, food, healthcare, nobody should be supportive of this winners-losers system, these things are too important to lose. Mutual benefit and consensual co-operation is something for free societies, and I don't mean free in the skewed Anarchocapitalism sense, I mean anarchist communism, communities supporting each other, no victors or victims.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
My life started out in the shitter because my parents didn't work hard enough to give me a better start.
What you are proposing is that the productive, hard-working members of society should be obligated to babysit and provide for the people who aren't? The productive members get no benefit, and there is no penalty for being lazy. That is a cannibalistic society where the weak are entitled to eat food off of the plates of those who actually earn it. No victims? Justice is a victim.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Was it immoral for you to support your family?
proudfootz 3 years ago
Poor people work harder than the rich people born with silver spoons in their mouth. The elitism of objectivists based upon the naive assumption of poor being synonymous with laziness is the worst form of oppression: an opression that masquerades as justice for the hard-working. There is no need for victory or for victims, money is not the barometer of social virtue, but of social discontent and malice. Cooperative existence trumps winners.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
I think the ultra-rich feel guilty over their unearned prosperity and hire hacks like Ayn Rand to 'justify' the inequities of the system that puts them on top and keeps them there.
Objectivism is so full of holes it makes swiss cheese look solid.
proudfootz 3 years ago
this would make a great story for cnn.
rextony22 2 years ago
"- Ron Paul voted against the renewal of the Voting Rights Act, which extends the vote to blacks in the Southern states. "
Provide a bit of evidence and background for this, or at least a link to the information.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
When you become a bit more focused, calm down and substitute, "umm," for fuck you'll be one hell of a news anchor. If you stay...passionate the next O'Reilly. Wait this is your therapy.
Imvelo 3 years ago
Fuck Ron Paul and fuck these neoliberal capitalist scumbags stealing libertarianism from the anarchists. I mean, Ron Paul is a racist, woman-hating, nationalist piece of shit too, but I can't forgive the neoliberalism bullshit that people eat up out of his ass as if it's the definition of freedom to be completely at the mercy of your bourgeois slavekeepers.
RichardBeddard 3 years ago
That sounded more communist than anything. I think that "bourgeois slavekeepers" gave it away.
Please, present some evidence to support your claims against Ron Paul.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Great rant! LOL You verbalized exactly why I'm a libertarian.
teewillis1981 3 years ago
Glad I could be of service.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
"Behind every great fortune there is a crime."
Are you claiming that the only moral standpoint in life is to be poor? That is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in quite some time.
If you want to be rich, go get rich. The world is made of money. If you only want to make enough to get by, that's fine too; it's all up to your own personal choice.
"starvation is not exactly a 'non-coercive' environment."
Are you trying to claim that need provides a fair claim to someone else's property?
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Wealth is no measure of virtue - even by Randian standards - because it is not necessarily 'earned'.
Plenty of people work hard and create but do not get wealthy or powerful.
A world where the wealthy can coerce the not-so-fortunate with starvation is not a moral society - it is barbarism.
proudfootz 3 years ago
"Plenty of people work hard and create but do not get wealthy or powerful."
That is a problem due the injustices like government and parasitic "need = entitlement" philosophy.
Starvation has always been a threat. How you deal with that problem is, and always has been, a personal choice.
It isn't barbarism, it's reality. This is the world that we live in. The alternative is absolute folly; need does not entitle anyone else to someone else's property. It's absolutely illogical.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
The fact remains many of the wealthy have done nothing to earn their privileged postions, while many hardworking people are in poverty through no fault of their own.
It is unjust for the rich parasites to prosper while the hardworking individuals go hungry.
Nothing 'parasitic' about searching for a way to address the injustice of this.
proudfootz 3 years ago
"...many of the wealthy have done nothing to earn their privileged postions, while many hardworking people are in poverty through no fault of their own."
Nobody (except the government, both in theft and in subsidizing large corporations) is stopping those hard-working people from earning their fair due.
Just because someone succeeds and becomes wealthy you consider them parasites? I would refer you to the hordes of social welfare recipients, in case you forgot what a parasite looked like.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Some people do earn their wealth, but many do not. That is just a historical fact.
If everyone started on equal footing maybe Randian anarchy would work.
We are not starting from any kind of 'equal' footing - many have advantages and many have dis-advantages because of past coercion. Why should thieves decide whether hardworking people should starve or live?
proudfootz 3 years ago
"Nothing 'parasitic' about searching for a way to address the injustice of this. "
There is something very parasitic about obtaining the spoils of others by force and then giving it to those who had no hand in the making of their wealth. Please, explain this mechanism that wealthy people use to mystically steal from the poor? I'd bet quite a bit that it is a direct result of government interfering in free-market economics.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
If you study history you might find that armies invade other countries, slaughter the people and take the land. They are the Powers that now 'own' the land and that is the basis of wealth. Nothing mystical about it.
How did 'free non-coercive market' get Europeans to control all of North America?
Better to read history books than turgid novels.
proudfootz 3 years ago
The people that did that invading are now dead. Is this "power" that you talk about some sort of self-aware force that is beyond the people involved? Is it a religious belief or something?
"How did 'free non-coercive market' get Europeans to control all of North America?"
Wait, ok. So now the societies that are prominent because of ancient historical injustices have something to do with free markets? I'm not really catching your drift here. Ancient theft. That is completely off-topic.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Off topic?
There seems to be some idea that 'wealth' is self-created, when history shows it is often the result of coercion.
There seems to be some idea poverty is the result of lack of virtue, when it can be shown to be the result of coercion.
Does Objectivism want to create level playing field so real merit can be rewarded and encouraged? Or just confirm the results of theivery of the past?
proudfootz 3 years ago
"There seems to be some idea that 'wealth' is self-created, when history shows it is often the result of coercion."
Yes, that is true. The government exists, and has wealth, but creates none. I'm glad we can agree.
"There seems to be some idea poverty is the result of lack of virtue, when it can be shown to be the result of coercion."
Doubtless some poverty exists as a result of coercion. I would say that a much more prevalent reason would be laziness as a result of previous handouts.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
"Does Objectivism want to create level playing field so real merit can be rewarded and encouraged? Or just confirm the results of theivery of the past?"
I'm simply making the case that someone should keep the spoils of their work. Just answer me this- if I earned my money, fairly, is it just for a government to steal that from me and give it freely to those who haven't earned it?
abortedsoul 3 years ago
It's only 'stealing' if you wish to see it that way.
Think of it as an agreement - the fee for living in a civilized society that makes wealth possible.
One is always free to refuse to participate - go on strike!
proudfootz 3 years ago
You could say the same thing about mob "protection" rackets. Giving up your business isn't the only means of resistance.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
What other 'means of resistance' did you have in mind?
proudfootz 3 years ago
If you choose, with the vast wealth available to you (such as owning an internet connection and a personal computer) to try and make things better for the less productive/fortunate, great. That is all well and good. But do not expect, or demand (especially with force), to be able to steal from those who have to give to those who don't. Theft is one of the easiest crimes to understand, and right to the fruits of your labor is one of the easiest forms of justice to grasp.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Yes, theft is one of the foundations of wealth and privilege. That's how some become 'haves' and those they steal from 'have-nots'.
To pretend there is some superior morality in allowing the thieves to enjoy their booty in peace while their victims starve is absurd.
proudfootz 3 years ago
So you are saying that no one in the history of human society has ever established themselves fairly, from their own labor and ideas? I wonder how much "wealth and privilege" you have seen in your life that wasn't government sponsored.
Victims? How exactly are they being victimized?
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Yes, much 'wealth and privileged' is gov't sponsored.
How does Randian anarchy address this?
Will there be a fair and just redistribution of wealth and privilege to correct past wrongs?
Will everyone start on a level playing field?
Or will she allow the thieves enjoy the booty they have stolen?
proudfootz 3 years ago
The alternative seems to be to continue to propagate this sort of misery, or compound it with socialist hand-outs. I don't think it would be just to punish people for the government's wrongdoings.
Here's an analogy- your neighbor (the government) steals your X-Box and sells it to your brother. Your thieving neighbor spends all of the money, and has no money left to pay you back. Should your brother have to return the X-Box?
abortedsoul 3 years ago
So my brother has the X-box and my neighbor has the money and I have nothing.
Under Randian principles I should be satisfied by this?
proudfootz 3 years ago
I don't know, are you a Randian?
I'm just saying that a justice difficulty exists. Of course I want it corrected, but I don't think coercion-based welfare is anywhere close to a just solution.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
I'm just pointing out that a justice difficulty exists with the proposal that the current unjust distribution of wealth should be ratified and accepted as if it were 'earned'.
proudfootz 3 years ago
I agree; did you read the article I sent you?
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Yes, I read the article.
It did not seem to address the issue about unjust distribution of wealth.
proudfootz 3 years ago
It certainly did; it described how large corporations are subsidized by theft-based funds provided by the government (for example, in the form of roads used in freight transportation). Also, you never responded to me about what you thought would be just in the X-Box situation. I'd love to hear your thoughts.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
a) Taxes are the fee for living in civilized society where social fictions like private property, inheritance & capitalism can flourish.
b) We all benefit from gov't projects like roads, dams, etc - not just corporations.
Long doesn't not address the unjust distribution of wealth under discussion: one's wealth/poverty is not wholly based on merit because the economic playing field isn't level and never has been.
Too many spoiled people, born on 3rd base, think they've hit a triple.
proudfootz 3 years ago
"a) Taxes are the fee for living in civilized society where social fictions like private property, inheritance & capitalism can flourish."
So is money taken as part of a mob-controlled protection racket.
"b) We all benefit from gov't projects like roads, dams, etc - not just corporations."
Yes, but not in the proportion that we pay into it.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Sorry, but taxes aren't theft. Poor analogy of 'democratic gov't = mob' makes your argument extremely weak.
Naturally, some benefit more from public works than others. But it's not just mega-coporations as claimed.
Things are only 'perfect' in theories not in real world applications.
proudfootz 3 years ago
Hopefully the United States isn't totally fucked. It is my wish that the country becomes aware of it before it falls apart at it's own hands.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
A vast amount of "thinking points".
denisespolly 3 years ago
I try :)
abortedsoul 3 years ago
so i'm guessing if u were at the bottom of a donor recipient list u wouldn't mind if u had to wait with the possibility that u may die before u obtain that much needed organ or/and pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for the surgery? dude that's cool, it would be nice because then it would save me and the rest of us money!! i wonder how much money we would save if more people were down to pay for shit out of pocket!
chibbistar 3 years ago
Donor recipient lists are a result of bureaucracy. How does the government somehow help with a donor list, exactly?
If you can't afford it, you shouldn't buy it. That goes for airplanes, new cars, kidneys, and food. If you need it, you had better work for it.
If I needed a kidney I would find someone who was matching, or find a place with a matching kidney available, and then pay them.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
dang!! talk about crazy! this was nuts! absolutely amazing!! great job. one of my favorite videos of all time for sure!
chick5581 3 years ago
Glad you liked it. :)
abortedsoul 3 years ago
you ask why america stinks!
BECAUSE OF THE MIDGET MAFIA AND THE GLASS-NINJAS
negerspaerm 3 years ago
... I wasn't asking; I was explaining why it is "sinking", not "stinking".
abortedsoul 3 years ago
I like these videos where you go off. I wholeheartedly agree. Fuck em lol
pajamadude15 3 years ago
Good. :)
abortedsoul 3 years ago
It's adorable that you crack up a little every time you mention deaths and tragedies. I'm serious.
tremoloblooz 3 years ago
I don't know about the economic situation in the US but I think the idea of money from the government is a good. I got unemployed myself a few years before due to a fusion. So I got unemployment pay until I found a new job and since then paying my stuff alone again. Sometimes situations like that happen and help should be offered. The problem is just that the services are misused and the money is badly shared.
mollie2810 3 years ago
"Sometimes situations like that happen and help should be offered."
Then you offer it, out of your own pocket willingly. It is not the responsibility of your countrymen to support you when your situation goes sour. Any amount taken to support you is stolen; only money given to you willingly (by a charity, a friend or a family member) would be clean money.
Your need does not entitle you to their money.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
Well, I couldn't have helped myself. I got money from my country, before and after I gave it back so that others can have it. I think that's what a society is. And it would be a loss for all society if someone with great abilities or skills can't render it's part because there was a problem. One single event shouldn't have the power to throw people out of the race. If all those people don't get support ... what then? Beggars? Prison? Shoot them?
mollie2810 3 years ago
"I got money from my country, before and after I gave it back so that others can have it."
I have no problem with that sort of framework. The problem with the government enforcing it is that you don't have a choice in the matter. It violates your right to your own property when someone forcefully takes it from you, even under the guise of trying to take care of you. If a private company offered you unemployment insurance, say, I wouldn't find a problem with that.
If you want security, save.
abortedsoul 3 years ago
"what then? Beggars? Prison? Shoot them?"
Let people live with the consequences of their decisions. Why would I advocate shooting them? If you haven't noticed, personal rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of property are self-evident, and I support nothing that violates these tenants unless it is in the plain and