Subject:
|
Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Jan 2000 16:43:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3032 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John DiRienzo writes:
> I think you believe you have a right to some of Bill Gates money because he is
> so successful. Or that you have a right to mine. I don't believe that,
> myself.
I don't believe that myself either, in fact I've no idea where it came from! Do
you believe that just because I don't agree 100% with you that automatically
makes me socialist, communist, or any other leftist label?
I'm tired trying to argue against things that I haven't thought said or
implied. If you want to claim victory by the fact I'm giving up on this
argumentative thread then fine - you win by default, you get all the points.
I call you on your offer to become serious - debating shouldn't be about
'winning' anyway, or being right - at least that shouldn't be the motivation.
Richard
> > Sadly, as the wages go up, teachers who care less will be attracted the the
> > profession. Not that teachers shouldn't be paid more, it's just a problem
> > to keep in mind I guess!
>
> Your posts are moving from annoying to hilarious. What have we got now?
> Teachers who could care less! Why? I care about kids, and I know most
> people do. I know most people can't live off a teacher's wages the way
> they'd like to (well that definitely applies to me anyway).
>
> > > There will be some kind of correctional system, funded by fees to
> > > property owners who wish to keep the crooks of the street at worst. In
> > > order for this correctional system to operate the most efficiently, it
> > > must do more than simply warehouse the crooks. It will (over the long
> > > term) find the most cost effective amount of education to give to
> > > produce the most income from the crooks. Those crooks who are not
> > > "lifers" will leave with a usefull skill, and in many cases will have
> > > paid off any financial debt they owe.
> >
> > Has anyone ever sat down and calculated the number and extent of
> > third-party fees? I mean, would people rather pay 100+ bills per month, or
> > would they just organise a monthly lump payment. And then, isn't that just a
> > customised tax?
>
> I guess you could look at it that way. But here are the advantages:
> You can choose who you buy your service from.
> The competition causes you to pay less.
> You pay the actual cost instead of some arbitrary number.
> If its too much for you, you can choose another provider (for whichever
> service) or you can always move.
>
> And here are the disadvantages:
>
> > Things like security would have to be financed by *everyone* in the street, • so
> > some of these taxes would stop being optional?
>
> If you mean social security, it would fall under insurance, as would
> unemployment. Insurance companies, being both accountable for their actions
> and competitive would be much for useful and affordable than they are today.
>
> If you mean security, as in police protection, this is one of the few
> things that is within the proper scope of the government. It supports
> itself the way it does now, through court costs, bribery, whoops, just
> kidding. The user fees are paid by those who break the law and "use" the
> courts and jails - the criminals, otherwise they can't eat. NSTAAFL
>
> > Also, as each of these individual services is a profit-making company • trying to
> > compete (and spending millions on advertising doing so), then is there much
> > reason to believe that the total would be much less, if not more?
>
> If they want to stay in business they will have to remain affordable, or
> else lose all there revenue to competitors. For you, if you make $30,000 a
> year, these actual costs added all together might be more. For an
> entrepreneur or someone like Bill Gates these costs would be a fraction of
> what they are currently paying. I think you believe you have a right to
> some of Bill Gates money because he is so successful. Or that you have a
> right to mine. I don't believe that, myself. In fact, I don't think that
> encourages success, at all. Just think, though, if your making $30,000 now,
> and you actually work for it, you'll probably make quite a bit more in a
> Libertarian society.
>
> > Richard
>
> --
> Have fun!
> John
> The Legos you've been dreaming of...
<Nitpick> The LEGO Bricks that you've been dreaming of...</Nitpick>
Tomato/Tomato.
> http://www114.pair.com/ig88/lego
> my weird Lego site:
> http://www114.pair.com/ig88/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
209 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
