This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Was Robin Hood a socialist?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
MyTie
Laihendi is going to assume you're middle class since something like paying car insurance is a somewhat bid deal to you. Laihendi doesn't believe the government should be redistributing your money, it's the multimillionaires and billionaires who are obscenely wealthy. No one should have that much money when there are people in the same country who are homeless and starving.
Laihendi... I'm gonna remind you of what I said, yet again.
1) We both believe in the redistribution of wealh
2) You trust government to do it
3) I think government, if trusted, will do a poor job, and eventually turn into a corrupt burocracy of theives.
BTW, Obama is to Robin Hood what Dr.Kvorkian is to Jesus.
Post by
Laihendi
And the money wouldn't be randomly taken. The money would be taken to be used for a greater purpose that the person hoarding it has.
Post by
Laihendi
Nothing wrong with mercy killings if done with the consent of the patient (as long as the patient is found to be mentally stable).
It's like putting your dog to sleep... if it's good enough for the animal that was a part of the family for 15 years why isn't it good enough for anyone else?
Post by
MyTie
...mercy killings...
...It's like putting your dog to sleep...
I think we have found another fundamental difference between Laihendi and I.
Post by
Laihendi
...mercy killings...
...It's like putting your dog to sleep...
I think we have found another fundamental difference between Laihendi and I.
How is it any different? When your pet reaches a point where it is so sick or so old (or both) that it can no longer find happiness or enjoyment in life, then you take it to the vet to be put to sleep... everyone does it. Laihendi has a 14 year old dog with the early stages of inoperable cancer. It hasn't gotten too bad yet, and she's still happy, energetic, and much like she was several years ago. However, eventually the cancer will spread to a point where she's miserable, and is always in a state of pain and suffering. Once she reaches that point she'll be put to sleep, because the worst thing imaginable for her would be to make her die of something like cancer.
Now, obviously doctors or family members shouldn't be able to decide that someone isn't happy so they should just kill them... that would be terrible. But if someone has a sickness that will cause a terrible, slow, and painful death, then they should have the right to legally choose a relatively painless alternative. It's the same concept, except one is practiced on people's pets, and the other is seen as wrong because it would be practiced on people themselves. Laihendi considers his pets family, and would never put them through something that he thought should never be done to himself.
Post by
MyTie
The problem Laihendi, is in one word.
legally
In that one word, you have given government the power to determine a circumstance in which it is legitimate to end the life of an innocent person not in a wartime circumstance. That sets a dangerous precident.
Do I agree that a life should end prematurely if it is doomed to a fate of pain? Ethically, prehaps. Do I agree that a human being should have the power to determine that? No, definately not.
Post by
266586
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Laihendi
Laihendi is going to bed and will read/reply to the wall of text tomorrow, good night :)
Post by
181961
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
People who insist socialism is a more effective economic system than capitalism are one or some of the below:
A) Ignorant to history (many socialists fit this one)
B) A greedy politician
C) Lazy pan handler (many more fit here)
D) Genuinely needy and naive person (a good portion here)
E) Desires totaltarian states of government
F) Doing what thier parents do (another big one)
G) Works in the social services industry, and desires job security
H) Lobbyist for a liberal group seeking kickbacks
I) Lobbyist for a conservative group seeking kickbacks
J) Relative to someone else in one of these options
K) Desires expansion of government power to meet a forced secondary goal that the general population normally would not accept (ie socio-cognitive reforms, religious restrictive laws, ethnic cleansing, etc.)
L) Business CEO or exec seeking security of taxpayer bailouts
M) Foreign entity seeking destabalization of local economy
N) Local entity trading against local currency seeking destabalization of local economy
O) Foreign sympathizer seeking destabalization of local economy
ok... I think that is all of them.
Post by
307081
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
122776
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Laihendi
People who insist socialism is a more effective economic system than capitalism are one or some of the below:
A) Ignorant to history (many socialists fit this one)
B) A greedy politician
C) Lazy pan handler (many more fit here)
D) Genuinely needy and naive person (a good portion here)
E) Desires totaltarian states of government
F) Doing what thier parents do (another big one)
G) Works in the social services industry, and desires job security
H) Lobbyist for a liberal group seeking kickbacks
I) Lobbyist for a conservative group seeking kickbacks
J) Relative to someone else in one of these options
K) Desires expansion of government power to meet a forced secondary goal that the general population normally would not accept (ie socio-cognitive reforms, religious restrictive laws, ethnic cleansing, etc.)
L) Business CEO or exec seeking security of taxpayer bailouts
M) Foreign entity seeking destabalization of local economy
N) Local entity trading against local currency seeking destabalization of local economy
O) Foreign sympathizer seeking destabalization of local economy
ok... I think that is all of them.
You said you were done with randomness. Liar.
Post by
Laihendi
I know someone that owns there own business they started from scratch they were poor but they didn't give up now they make over $250,000. Last year they paid over $70,000 in taxes and now Obama wants to increase that. How is that fair?
Because there are people who work more and harder for less?
WOAH WTF COMMON SENSE
Post by
122776
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
266586
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
240135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
122776
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
266586
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Laihendi
I know someone that owns there own business they started from scratch they were poor but they didn't give up now they make over $250,000. Last year they paid over $70,000 in taxes and now Obama wants to increase that. How is that far?
Because there are people who work more and harder for less?
No.
You're either working hard or hardly working. People that are working hard will succeed, it might take time but they will.Explain that to the millions of americans who have 2 or 3 jobs, but are poor, and their parents are poor, and their parents before that were poor.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.