Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

the more powerful a government is, the less accountable to the people it will be.

The point of a government is to be the champion of the people. That is why it is there.

Regarding my proposals, note that I described exactly what I believe should be done but not why. If there are any doubts about specific proposals, first try to guess the "why".

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

I will say Aestu, I love the idea of getting rid of farm subsidies. Ever since my first Econ class in college I've known how retarded they really are.

That's only true when the people have an enemy, such as when the government provides for the common defense. Who are "the people" to which you're referring, and who or what is the "enemy" the government is supposed crush as the "champion" of the people? The answer doesn't matter. For all your bluster about how witty and clever you are, deep down you're same stupid sheep you look down your nose at everyone else for being. The idiocy inherent in this "champion of the people" nonsense is the same idiocy that has allowed people to be manipulated into granting despots and charlatans power since time immemorial. It's the mindset that brought us McCarthy, the Patriot Act, and this new NDAA in the USA.

All your thinking leads to is dividing people into groups and using the government to oppress the group of which you're not member. That's not justice, that's petty tribalism.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

This is the most spot on thing I've heard all month.

Also,



What the hell does 'be the champion of the people' mean?

If you're trying to say 'government is legitimized force with the purpose of protecting us from illegitimate force and fraud', then you're right.

Also also,



That, and the EEOC part, were the good parts of the economic section. Though I would go as far to say ending all subsidies.

And 'throttle the money supply', assuming he means refraining from creating fiat money, is also a good part.

I thought about asking "Isn't this the same thing true with corporations?". Then I thought how your answer would be plugging your ears and screaming "FREE MARKET", as if such a thing could exist in this day and age of international megacorps.

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

No, it's exactly the sort of thing corporations do.

Simple question:

If people "doing things for themselves" gets shit done, why doesn't that work in third world countries? Why is it that all the most advanced countries are also those with the most proactive governments?

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Are you suggesting the governments in charge in places like Sudan aren't proactive?

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

Proactive about killing people? Sure. Proactive in the matters of contention? You tell me.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Except when they collude, buy out their competitors, or try to sue anyone who comes out with a better product than them into the ground. You can go ahead and enjoy your illusion of choice though, sort of like how there's hundreds of different types of sodas out there and the vast majority of them are owned by either Coke or Pepsi.

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

Thats why I drink water, and not that bottled shit.

You have your answer and are too oblivious to see it.

The majority of the third world states you'd refer to as not being "proactive" aren't concerned with basic matters of justice and the rule of law. The industrial nations you point toward at least put up a pretense of concern for these matters. Where do you think business is more likely to flourish, in the country where the merchant is likely to beaten/robbed/murdered by his government for belonging to the wrong ethnic/religious group, or the one where the merchant's rights are actively protected not just from the government, but from any criminal element?

The only thing surprising about your contention is that it's an admission that government shares culpability for our current state of affairs. This is the reason guys like Weena argue for restricting the power of government. You and certain others view this as a call to not allow for the regulation of business, which is not the case. When the government is allowed to do many of the things our government currently does, and gets into the business of picking winners and losers (we'll bail out this guy but not his competitor), you come to the situation we have now. When government's powers are restricted to the basic regulatory functions necessary to protect the rights of business and consumers and prevent fraud, those problems are greatly diminished.

The proactive nature of the governments you suggest is only indicative of the type(s) of corruption that have felled great powers in the past. They may be beneficial in the short-term, but they always lead to dire consequences.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

Yeah, and?

You know why Coke and Pepsi make millions? Because millions like what they do.

You know why a lot of regulations occur? Because a lot of politicians and close business friends make bank on it.

http://www.amazon.com/Throw-Them-All-Pe ... 0547573146

This is really the operative phrase. "Where do you think..." The correct phrasing would be, "where do you see...". What is happening is, ideological inference is being substituted for objective reality.

America has one of the highest crime rates in the world. Jim Crow/Trail of Tears neatly debunks your "ethnic/religious" argument. Criminal justice systems are ubiquitous and have been for millenia. You don't think that Victorian England had a functioning criminal justice system? Or the USSR? Or any other utterly inequitable society?

If people could "do things for themselves" in a vacuum, the world would be a lot better off than it is, and it wouldn't have taken us thousands of years for a very few societies to make dramatic progress.


Americans in 2011 arguing that libertarianism will increase freedom are like Soviets in 1981 arguing that Communism will improve the quality of consumer goods. It's ideological hypocrisy - a basic failure to identify cause and effect.

Nature abhors a vacuum. If the political system is weakened that means that the powerful in the private sector will be all the more able to do as they will. Crony capitalism works precisely because the government here is so weak compared to most other countries. If what you say is true then the countries with strong proactive governments (the EU and basically the entire Western world other than America) would be far worse off so far as personal, political and economic freedoms go.

That isn't the case, because it's hogwash, and libertarianism is simply a philosophy of willful ignorance.

There is a reason that this philosophy is only seen as anything other than crazy in America and only amongst those who know almost nothing about the world outside America.
Honest question: why do you think that is?

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.