I'm disgusted by all state actions and BS.
Hence why I advocate a stateless society......obviously stateless societ =/= != status quo, so I don't know why you'd confuse me with a corporate shill.....if I want to take away the corporate power base of subsidies and state given powers.

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Nov 8^th, 2013 at 11:46pm:


Am I wrong?
The nugget controversy etc

Vuk11 wrote on Nov 8^th, 2013 at 10:22pm:


Last night I outlined 3 sonarios and asked 4 questions intended to elucidate this grand non-aggression principle of yors but so far you have chosen not to answer. Until you do you cannot rely on it to justify anything since its validity remains under a cloud.   

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Nov 9^th, 2013 at 12:08am:


I replied many times to many questions largely ignored.
Above is a post with "." I wrote a big spiel but at the end of the day I realized it didn't matter.

No matter how many questions I answer there's still a disconnect with definitions of terms. I would like to have a proper discussion throw some questions back and forth but too much is being ignored and flooded with random posts that it just seems pointless now.

In the now deleted post I basically said apply the following to any questions I've missed: DRO's and credit rating agencies (this goes for fraud and even pollution as outlined in the one page article no one wants to read), people protect what they own (again on the pollution thing aswell) a respect for property rights and the NAP.

Apply the above and then we can find out what questions I really missed or ones that I need to expand on.

I was going to make another thread tomorrow or sometime and try to have a little bit of a structured debate but yesterday I pretty much game up trying to explain because the four of you wouldn't even clarify your stance on common terms that are being misunderstood, so what am I to do just be an internet library and answer question after question after question with people misunderstanding over and over?

Vuk11 wrote on Nov 8^th, 2013 at 11:14pm:

Quote:


Apologies I wasn't trying to do any double speak I though people would understand where I meant benefit/consequence in the negative sense. But you do understand because you have pointed out that the words should be detriment instead of consequence.

I'm basically first off showing the state immorality. But in that particular post it was mainly about misconceptions, people seems to go "jobs outsourced OMG" therefore capitalism = bad. When I can show that it comes back to states throttling peoples opportunity and ability to interact with each other. 


"slave trade slave wages slave labour", if you want to debate wage slaveries existence and more importantly it's cause I'm willing to do so. I was merely trying to clear up a misconception as above.

Would you not say to the Chinese worker that going from rural poverty to residential labour above poverty is beneficial?

Do you really think that if regulations are lifted children would just go work in factories for nike? Are you serious? Please tell me why this would happen? Just because you'd be allowed to doesn't mean anyone with any sense would do that. But maybe there's a homeless kid and maybe they have 0 family all dead but they can't get a job to feed themselves because it's illegal, so have to rely on charity/foster homes etc.

You guys fear way to much I really don't see any reason in debating people with a lack of imagination and worse yet a lack of logic, it's sadly like you guys are ruled purely by fear it's pretty worrying. You really think that if there weren't arbitrary rules there people would just all start doing ridiculous poo for the sake of profit.

Dude seriously please let's clear something up. Minimum wage for starters, do people earn above minimum wage or not? If so than the necessity of a minimum wage isn't there for anyone who earns above it, what in your view is making people get paid above minimum wage if there isn't a government to dictate it?

Also just a tiny little example but the logic of what I'm talking about:
Queue in a shopping center. Is there a law saying not to cut in queue? Well then why do people queue up? Because A. you'd be refused service and B. You'd be ostracized by the public. (of course this isn't absolute we've all seen rude pr*cks before)

My point is you don't have to have a law there to make sure something doesn't happen. Just think about this for 2 minutes, you're an employer, either spend a little bit of money on a safety auditor or run the risk of employees suing you for millions. Take the DRO idea I mentioned. Is it so hard to believe that there'd be a Claus in the contract stipulating health and safety that the DRO enforced on the employer? If not then is it so hard to imagine that an entrepreneur would come along and go "If I offer health and safety A. I won't be getting sued for million and B. all the skilled employees will flock to me and I can have the best of the bunch!". Remember in a free society there is no limited liability so it falls on the business owners, they can't hid behind the business name.

This is the type of thinking I wish you guys would get into, pretend you are an entrepreneur, look at what is really profitable and you will see how issues will be sorted out.

Also Spartcaus you said "he says we a lot" funny that.... in the quote you replied to I didn't say WE once. You said it 9 times?

Spartacus you seem to sort of want an actual discussion and not to troll.
Why don't you just take me up on my offer? Help me clarify some terms so I'm on the same page. List the questions I haven't answered and I would happily go through them and explain everything.

If you want an explanation of the Non-aggression principle I'd be happy to, are you also confused about property rights? Property is pretty simple - Self ownership, ownership of actions and the effects of these actions.

I'm willing to answer questions and fire some back, but I would ask some courtesy in that we clarify terms and perhaps if you could just read that one page so you can understand the logic behind the solutions. The solutions are basically how would you satisfy this demand as an entrepreneur.

I also want to get one thing straight. The reason why I'm against the state also is humility. No one knows how everything should be, no one has all the answers,  about how everyone should live, who should marry whom, how much work everyone should do etc etc. The point is I don't have to have all the answers to 1 million what if questions. The most important analogy to explain what I just said is the slave one:

I don't have to know how the cotton will be picked if there are no slaves I just no slavery is immoral and if people want shirts then they're going to find a way for the cotton to be picked.

However what I can do is shoot a few solutions and a few ideas to get that way of thinking across. I also challenge you guys to add to it, if I give a solution take it and say how you would improve on it. It takes the collective innovation of every human to solve complex social problems, not passing them on to "intellectuals" and asking them to tell us how to live.

You don't need a government to know a broken employee isn't as productive has a healthy one, to know not to cut inline at the shops, to know stealing is immoral etc etc.

Sadly there's no moderators to keep it on topic and civil etc. But if you want a proper discussion I'm definitely up for it over a period of time.