Statism "works"

That's what is implied.

Slightly over half of all Americans 52.6 percent now receive significant income from government programs, according to an analysis by Gary Shilling, an economist in Springfield, N.J.
(originally from Stefan Molyneux's video "Blood milk addiction")

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• statism
• freedom
• libertarian
• anarchy
• anarchist

[miserkocho]

if it works,it does so because we make it work...but it doesnt.

[bjarnet3]

I agree with you on everything you say... But I have to adresse a subject. We need to understand why freedom and liberty is so hard to keep,, and why socialism and force always so easily gain ground.

First you have to look at the families,, because mothers and fathers sacrifices time and effort so they can provide free food and free shelter for their kids... They prohibits them, for their own sake and well being... They force them to do things they don't want, for the same reasons.

[FearsEdge]

@ru

We are done. We are just going to have to agree to disagree, since you believe that using violence to control other innocent people who are not hurting anyone is okay. I do not. I don't want any part of it, which is sad considering that I go to work full time and some of those resources get taken from me upon threat of force and go to blowing people up, and putting innocent people who didn't hurt anyone in cages. But because of this system you love so much, I can't stop it. I'm finished.

[FearsEdge]

@rugbyguy59

"I don't think it wise to just allow people anywhere to just play on their own terms. It sounds like a great idea but it's fantasy."

Yes, it is a fantasy. That's why I was not talking about it. How does "the initiation of force is wrong and we should strive voluntarily to help others instead of hurt them, and to respect people's self ownership and sovereignty " become "everyone does whatever they want"? If someone is victimizing someone else, that's a whole other matter.

[FearsEdge]

@rugbyguy59

"they'll all be forced if they have a basic government"

Unless they aren't. There are ALL KINDS of groups and associations that are not forced and participation is voluntary.

"Regardless of group size I think it is better that we have running and consistent constitutions that can be amended by the people living there to this day. "

And how well is that working? The constitution either got us to where we are, or was powerless to stop it. Either way I am not impressed.

[FearsEdge]

@rugb

Again, you seem to forget the entire purpose of this video.

Your system doesn't just leave a possibility of these things happening, as would be the case without a system, but it GUARANTEES that the strong take advantage of the weak and the wealthy take advantage of the poor. Who do you think is going to pay the national debt? The coming pension bubble? The young people who can't vote, some who have not even been born. And the rich have a much easier time passing costs on to everyone else

[FearsEdge]

@rugbyguy59

"Natural resources removed by force from the people who owned them."

I don't see how this is relevant. It doesn't change where the wealth came from. I never said I approved of imperialism. or taking people's land by force. In fact I said I was against it, if anything.

"The freedom didn't help much as the colonies lacked gold. So they issued fiat money."

and guess who benefited most? the people with the printing press, obviously.

[FearsEdge]

@rugbyguy59

I don't care what resources are represented by paper. I don't care how people choose to pay each other and barter. That is there business, not mine. It so happens that gold and silver are great stores of value and mediums of exchange. My problem is with forcing people to accept pieces of paper with ink on them as if they were actual resources. Or forcing someone to take payment in any one thing.

[FearsEdge]

@rugbyguy59

"If you refuse to pay legally assessed taxes and resist the legally conducted arrest with violence then you initiate the violence. "

Nope. Sorry. Calling it "legally assessed" does not change who came to mess with whom. If I went to your house and started stealing your stuff, and then inflicted violence on you when you resisted, no one would have any doubt who initiated force. Somehow you think that them being state employees changes this, that it becomes legitimate.

[FearsEdge]

@rugbyguy59

"If so a relative voluntarily made the contract"

Tell me what other facet of life this logic applies. Tell me how I can enter other people into binding contracts. Oh, and it's only binding for them, I'm not bound by it, just like the state. Even if this bullshit concept of a social contract actually applied, I would argue that the other side of the contract is not being honored anyway, and it's void.