@soothfast saidI strongly disagree, and tattooing it on my forehead will only serve to anger me.
This really needs to be tattooed in mirror-writing on the forehead of every right-winger here.
I think that people with the talent to run a business have every bit as much right to do so as a speaker has the right to speak.
1 edit
@earl-of-trumps saidWhat if that business is selling Tranq?
I strongly disagree, and tattooing it on my forehead will only serve to anger me.
I think that people with the talent to run a business have every bit as much right to do so as a speaker has the right to speak.
Sean Atwood became a millionaire smuggling ecstasy to Arizona.
Jordan Peterson became a millionaire selling low quality stocks to rich people.
Are you in favor of those businesses having no government oversight or regulation?
1 edit
@earl-of-trumps saidYou need to work on your reading comprehension.
Well, that ends it.
You insist on saying America's middle class is impoverished.
@jimmac saidSo it’s your fault?
I just love the default " blame someone else " mantra. Come on, like, get real.
For my money its more likely that the general confusion surrounding who and what we, as individuals, are to blame, than the economic policies. Not saying it is, saying it is more likely.
Or are you blaming someone else?
@athousandyoung saidI differ here with the typical libertarian.
What if that business is selling Tranq?
Sean Atwood became a millionaire smuggling ecstasy to Arizona.
Jordan Peterson became a millionaire selling low quality stocks to rich people.
Are you in favor of those businesses having no government oversight or regulation?
I believe that you can take all the drugs you want if you can show that you can pay your own bills as you get sick.
Otherwise, it would be very much against the law and punished severely. That explains my stance on regulation of drugs.
Selling stocks: We are too tight with regulations. Insider information should be usable in determining stock transactions
@athousandyoung saidI'm surprised at you.Free market never said you have the right to hurt other people. It has been agreed
for the longest time that dangerous criminals go to prison. I in no way wish to challenge that.
You are aware that government oversight is how "dangerous criminals" are defined, captured and imprisoned right?
Everything I say, you try to inject something into it that changes the meaning. And we never can progress.
@earl-of-trumps saidIt sounds like you are in favor of criminalizing risky behavior unless you are rich. Does that extend to overeating? Smoking tobacco? Bungie jumping?
I differ here with the typical libertarian.
I believe that you can take all the drugs you want if you can show that you can pay your own bills as you get sick.
Otherwise, it would be very much against the law and punished severely. That explains my stance on regulation of drugs.
Selling stocks: We are too tight with regulations. Insider information should be usable in determining stock transactions
1 edit
@earl-of-trumps saidI am not "injecting" anything. I am simply pointing out the logical consequences of what you say.
I'm surprised at you.
Everything I say, you try to inject something into it that changes the meaning. And we never can progress.
Think about it. What is a "criminal"?
Slavers weren't criminals until slavery was outlawed. Cocaine users weren't criminals until cocaine was outlawed. Wife beaters weren't criminals until domestic violence was outlawed. Murderers of American Indians weren't criminals until killing American Indians was outlawed. Immigrants who didn't get government approval weren't criminals until the government outlawed immigration without government permission. Don't you see the pattern here?
Some people call Trump a criminal. And what is the response every time?
"Trump wasn't convicted of anything [by the government] so he's not a criminal".
Let's talk about the "Free Market".
https://fee.org/articles/is-the-free-market-ethical/
Assuming we know what a “market” is, the question hinges on the word “free.” In the context of society, “free” means free from the coercion of others.
Unfortunately evictions are coercive market actions. So is putting someone in prison for drug use or prostitution. So the "Free Market" cannot exist at least in the sense meant by Libertarians and other economic conservatives. They need to twist and redefine words in strange ways to try to make it all work e.g. blaming the person who is being coerced by government men with guns.