[lvstealth]

wow! i think we should vote on pretty people.

or... maybe smart people...

or... smart pretty people...

oh! wait... we should vote on only our friends... or on our friends friends

i will vote on you if you vote on me!

[teh_masterer]

Quote: Originally Posted by tomandsusan

You must be from the "Land of OZ"!

Better than spending money without being able to pay for it. Most politicians make the mistake of continously lowering or maintaining tax levels in order to keep public support, whilst spending more or the same on defence, education, health care and pensions. This has resulted in an accumulation of national debt that is going to cripple government spending within the forseeable future. Although, I get the feeling you might be going for the 'starve the beast' effect tomandsusan

[psihog]

Chris Rock said it best..

"No normal decent person is one thing. OK!?! I got some shit I'm conservative about, I got some shit I'm liberal about. Crime - I'm conservative. Prostitution - I'm liberal." :DDD

[bane666]

deleted because i posted twice by mistake

[bane666]

Quote: Originally Posted by JointBuster

i dont care about other peoples rights. i care only about my rights

the government should direct its policy towards pluralism , instead of pure democracy.

the individual belongs to himself..and not to anyone else. in a Democracy, the individuals rights can be eroded

If you don't care about other peoples rights, why should they care about yours!!

there is a famous quote from nazi germany you may not be aware of:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.

also should an individuals rights be more important if those rights put other members of the community in danger?
I believe in gun control
I think the more guns there are in a community the more dangerous that community is for everyone.

If i were to play devils advocate and take your argument of "individual rights over others rights" to the extreme, then you would be ok with slavery?

[teh_masterer]

Quote: Originally Posted by bane666

If i were to play devils advocate and take your argument of "individual rights over others rights" to the extreme, then you would be ok with slavery?

That's what I was thinking when I was the post. It's important to ensure that people are all treated fairly and the majority do not impeed on the rights of the minority, just because they are fewer in numbers (ie. less represented in democratic systems). For example, Proposition 8 was passed in California, which impeeded in the rights of a minority group because the majority of Californians voted to pass the bill.

[bane666]

Quote: Originally Posted by teh_masterer

Definitely not mine. I would rather have fairly high taxation so long as it is fairly implimented and straigtforward, with no hidden taxes. There are some services that I would never want to be in the hands of private industry, specifically the military, emergency services, healthcare and education. With services that people's lives are reliant on, it's nice to be able to kick out the current government if they are doing a lousy job. If capitalism worked the way it is meant to, with competition forcing industry to provide a good service, these would be fine in private ownership, but sadly all too often a whole industry will work together to cooperate and prevent competition, or act anti-competetively. This can leave the consumers with none of the choice and good service that capitalism is meant to bring, so you are left paying through the teeth for a poor service (or not being able to afford it) just so that people can make a buck of a service that everybody needs. I'm not trying to make a general argument against capitalism here, as it works really well in most industries, but can be so easily abused when the spirit of competition is not embraced, and especially when politicians are payed off to maintain corperate interests.

Also, the promise of economic growth usually means lifting regulation that is intended to prevent unsustainable or unstable growth. I would prefer to have steady growth with considerations made to environmental changes, maintaining high employment and competition in the global market, specifically not being overcompetetive with 3rd world industry.

And of course, I would want specifics on what exactly you planned to do to achieve these goals. Who's taxes would you cut? What would you have to do to progress the US economy.

smart man
privatisation relies on competition, which means that essential services should not be privatised
Here in melbourne public transport has been privatised, now if my train is late every day (which it is) I don't have the option of catching a different one run by a different company
where as something like say....a supermarket....if i get bad service, or don't like the prices I can go somewhere else to do my shopping- thats competition, thats choice
privatisation of essential services has no competition or choice.

as for economic growth
why not try for economic stability
growth assumes that there is always space to "grow" into
the roman empire was built on growth and grew so big it collapsed
just like putting to much air into a balloon- POP
and lets face it, the western world for about 40 years now has been going through a cycle of:
constant growth-economic "POP"-repression-recovery-(and back to the start with) constant growth

[lgbnaf]

People vote for their wallets and hide behind what sounds good. Concern for a persons actions that affect no one but that individual is beyond me. Politicians are what is wrong with Democracy, they get where they are by money and who they know, not education, or acts of humanity. They have the money in their friends and family and that is what is wrong with democracy.

[GFX010]

The left and right paradigm is an illusion of choice just like Coca-Cola and Pepsi. In actuality Coca-Cola and Pepsi (or Republican/Democrat) are different sides of the same coin.

That's why the two party system was invented, so we can vote for puppet A or puppet B, but never have an honest president.We're not supposed to have a two party system with no third party candidate ever standing a chance. Thinking in terms of labels is what we have been marketed to do, every thing we have seen in main stream politics in the last 40 years has been handed to us with standard marketing techniques.

[JointBuster]

Quote:

If you don't care about other peoples rights, why should they care about yours!!

let me make it short and clear for you:

screw any collectivism that democracy creates, long live pluralism!!!!

i hope that is more clear. if not, i will have to expand :(

Quote:

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me

alright, i agree with such philosophy. i dont want any social obligation to carry on my shoulders. i think there is a large social network for me to carry, and i would rather drop all the weight.

Quote:

also should an individuals rights be more important if those rights put other members of the community in danger?

if they do so, it isnt liberalism.
you are not aware of the philosophy of liberalism. here is a vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z1buym2xUM

Quote:

I think the more guns there are in a community the more dangerous that community is for everyone.

the guns has no mind, the person does.
In UK, east Anglia, the illegal gun ownership is high, but no one uses it.
you use it when it is necessary. i dont trust the governments facilities (police) to defend me and my loved ones. i am sorry to disappoint you

Quote:

If i were to play devils advocate and take your argument of "individual rights over others rights" to the extreme, then you would be ok with slavery?

are you nuts?

who said individual rights over others? . ..in democracy you have individual rights over others. cause in democracy there is no pluralism, the decisions of the majority rule.


i have no idea what you harp on ... come back when you know enough about:
Pluralism, Liberty/Liberalism and Democracy

[bane666]

Quote: Originally Posted by JointBuster

let me make it short and clear for you:

screw any collectivism that democracy creates, long live pluralism!!!!

i hope that is more clear. if not, i will have to expand :(

very strange

Quote: Originally Posted by JointBuster

alright, i agree with such philosophy. i dont want any social obligation to carry on my shoulders. i think there is a large social network for me to carry, and i would rather drop all the weight.

you have a choice, you can be a part of society, or apart from society.
and I'm not talking about conforming to any sense of fashion or philosophy
I'm talking about helping others and others helping you,

Quote: Originally Posted by JointBuster

if they do so, it isnt liberalism.
you are not aware of the philosophy of liberalism. here is a vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z1buym2xUM

I know what liberalism is, and i believe in the rights of the individual, I'm a firm believer in the freedom of the individual to believe in what they want, to dress however they want etc etc

but
you also have to take into account the rights of other in our society (as well as individual rights)

for example, I have no problem with gay marriage, it doesn't hurt anyone, its a personal choice, I understand some people don't like it because of their religious philosophy or whatever, but that shouldn't impede on the individual rights of the gays who want to get married

but

If someone want to get blind drunk and drive down the road at 100km per hour, they endanger the lives of others

each member of a society has rights, but also responsibilities to others within that society

Quote: Originally Posted by JointBuster

the guns has no mind, the person does.
In UK, east Anglia, the illegal gun ownership is high, but no one uses it.
you use it when it is necessary. i dont trust the governments facilities (police) to defend me and my loved ones. i am sorry to disappoint you

tell that to the kids each year the accidental blow their heads off while playing with a parents loaded gun
tell that to the victims of the numerous school shootings
etc etc etc

I don't trust the cops either
but if I had a neighbour with a semi auto and no training I'd be afraid of stray bullets coming through my walls and windows if he ever thought he had need of using it
you may want to live in some idealised wild west parody but i don't

Quote: Originally Posted by JointBuster

are you nuts?

who said individual rights over others? . ..in democracy you have individual rights over others. cause in democracy there is no pluralism, the decisions of the majority rule.


i have no idea what you harp on ... come back when you know enough about:
Pluralism, Liberty/Liberalism and Democracy

the point i was trying to make was that individual rights need to be balanced with the rights of others.
I'll try not to use big words in the future so as not to confuse you

:P

[JointBuster]

Quote:

I'm talking about helping others and others helping you,

that is called socialism/collectivism and it leads to social obligation. = i am strongly against it.

i dont want to help anyone, in any context. you dont like me for that, it is your problem, then

Quote:

each member of a society has rights, but also responsibilities to others within that society

no!
the only responsibility that an individual has got is not harm the individual and not restrict the freedom of the other individual.

in law, it is called "Duty of Care" (Tort Law)

Libertarian dont dispute that tenet of Tort Law.

Quote:

If someone want to get blind drunk and drive down the road at 100km per hour, they endanger the lives of others

your term of "responsibilty" is epitomized by that example. Liability or Duty of Care, obliges you not to harm those that surround you. - again Libertarians arent against that tenet (watch the vid in the link again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Quote:

tell that to the kids each year the accidental blow their heads off while playing with a parents loaded gun
tell that to the victims of the numerous school shootings
etc etc etc

it is parents responsibility to watch their kids= LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY. you are going into a discussion which isnt even political

Quote:

the point i was trying to make was that individual rights need to be balanced with the rights of others.

balance of rights is only achieved if you usher in more liberal civil laws into the constitution. that can lead to pluralism.

in Democracy , the rights lay in the majority, cause their votes outnumber the votes of the minorities. also in Democracy, only the ruling Elite has the country . That ruling elite is called the "Knowledge Elite"

google: Sociology + Knowledge Elite

















About Me:

For:
Maximum level of Information Disclosure, High Schools ruled by Market Forces, National Health Care Insurance, Capital Punishment, Cold/Warm Weapon Ownership, Criminal Rehabilitation, Marijuana, Free University for the smart ones, Meritocracy.

Against:
Collectivism, Religious Extremism, Social Obligations, Goofy Laws, Inappropiate Corporate Governance and Economic Interest, Illegal Immigration, Militarization, Biometric control (apart from CCTV), Too Arbitrary Legal System, Oligarchy & Oppressing Political Regimes.

[teh_masterer]

Quote: Originally Posted by JointBuster

About Me:

For:
Maximum level of Information Disclosure, High Schools ruled by Market Forces, National Health Care Insurance, Capital Punishment, Cold/Warm Weapon Ownership, Criminal Rehabilitation, Marijuana, Free University for the smart ones, Meritocracy.

Against:
Collectivism, Religious Extremism, Social Obligations, Goofy Laws, Inappropiate Corporate Governance and Economic Interest, Illegal Immigration, Militarization, Biometric control (apart from CCTV), Too Arbitrary Legal System, Oligarchy & Oppressing Political Regimes.

Quote: Originally Posted by JointBuster

I am generally republican..cause i believe that the state belongs to the people, and to each individual in that group. the groups rights shouldnt erode on the individuals rights, like in some democracies.

I have no idea why you would consider voting for the republicans then. Much of the Republic image is a facade used to gain unconditional support. The Republicans have tried to link their party into patriotism, military support, the christian faith and feedom. In reality their socially conservative policies limit the rights of minority groups and their war on terror has lead to a huge loss of individual freedoms. Market freedoms have resulted in economic disaster that the whole country will be paying for throughout the coming years. I would consider much of Republican policy to be a complete disaster, especially neoconservatism which is probably closer to collectivism than you would ever see from the Democrats. It's disapointing that a party can be so resistant to giving all American's healthcare because it's too expensive and limits choice while supporting neoconservative policies that are enourmously expensive and arguably to little to help or even disadvantage the countries that are being 'liberated'.

My recommendation would be to support the liberatarian party based upon you're for and against list. At least they have strong principles that are consistent throughout their policy. But of course it's all up to you.

[bane666]

Quote: Originally Posted by JointBuster

let me make it short and clear for you:

screw any collectivism that democracy creates, long live pluralism!!!!

i hope that is more clear. if not, i will have to expand :(



alright, i agree with such philosophy. i dont want any social obligation to carry on my shoulders. i think there is a large social network for me to carry, and i would rather drop all the weight.



if they do so, it isnt liberalism.
you are not aware of the philosophy of liberalism. here is a vid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z1buym2xUM

the guns has no mind, the person does.
In UK, east Anglia, the illegal gun ownership is high, but no one uses it.
you use it when it is necessary. i dont trust the governments facilities (police) to defend me and my loved ones. i am sorry to disappoint you




are you nuts?

who said individual rights over others? . ..in democracy you have individual rights over others. cause in democracy there is no pluralism, the decisions of the majority rule.


i have no idea what you harp on ... come back when you know enough about:
Pluralism, Liberty/Liberalism and Democracy

Quote: Originally Posted by JointBuster

that is called socialism/collectivism and it leads to social obligation. = i am strongly against it.

i dont want to help anyone, in any context. you dont like me for that, it is your problem, then


no!
the only responsibility that an individual has got is not harm the individual and not restrict the freedom of the other individual.

in law, it is called "Duty of Care" (Tort Law)

Libertarian dont dispute that tenet of Tort Law.


your term of "responsibilty" is epitomized by that example. Liability or Duty of Care, obliges you not to harm those that surround you. - again Libertarians arent against that tenet (watch the vid in the link again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)



it is parents responsibility to watch their kids= LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY. you are going into a discussion which isnt even political


balance of rights is only achieved if you usher in more liberal civil laws into the constitution. that can lead to pluralism.

in Democracy , the rights lay in the majority, cause their votes outnumber the votes of the minorities. also in Democracy, only the ruling Elite has the country . That ruling elite is called the "Knowledge Elite"

google: Sociology + Knowledge Elite

















About Me:

For:
Maximum level of Information Disclosure, High Schools ruled by Market Forces, National Health Care Insurance, Capital Punishment, Cold/Warm Weapon Ownership, Criminal Rehabilitation, Marijuana, Free University for the smart ones, Meritocracy.

Against:
Collectivism, Religious Extremism, Social Obligations, Goofy Laws, Inappropiate Corporate Governance and Economic Interest, Illegal Immigration, Militarization, Biometric control (apart from CCTV), Too Arbitrary Legal System, Oligarchy & Oppressing Political Regimes.

if i had to put myself into a political box it would "socialist with some libertine tendencies"

I don't think socialism is a bad word, although most american seem to because they have been brainwashed to think it means communism
which it doesn't

why do i like socialism?
very simple- people should not go without education or health care because they (or their parents) are poor.
if you believe that everyone is equal (as far as human rights is concerned) then everyone should have the right to education and health care
every child should have an equal start, and be able to achieve based on their ability and efforts.
and some form of unemployment benefits are also important.
with the fragile economic situation we have today its not uncommon for people to find themselves out work for reasons that are not their fault
I'm not saying give hand outs willy nilly, as that creates its own problems
but its important to avoid a repeat of the great depression
and authors like john ralston saul believe that the main thing that has kept us out of a repeat of the great depression (since the 70's oil embargo) has been social structures that help people to keep their head above water
and i agree with him
and with these social structures there is less reason for people to turn to crime
this saves money in the long run

why am I a libertine?
because i don't care what religion you are
or how you vote
or your sexuality
or what music you listen to
or what clothing you wear
or who you sleep with
etc etc
as long as your choices don't effect me or my life (or the structure of society in general)
and i have the right to choose what i believe in
and be who i want

you live your life and i'll live mine
if you don't f**k with me then i want f**k with you

I also believe (sadly) that too many people buy into what they have been told while growing up (mainly by their parents) and don't ever bother to learn to think for themselves