Guard Dog

How does an economic system based upon private ownership of property(means of production) require personal freedom? China is operating under an economic system with private property and less state interference than the US, would you say they are doing well with personal freedom and individual liberty? You're essentially making the same argument that if you don't like the government, just don't participate in it. Personally I'd be more than happy to not deal with taxes or jury duty, but it shouldn't have to be explained we are under threat of force to do those things. To address your argument directly, what you are describing is some sort of ethical consumerism, not non participation. Non-participation would require not dealing with property(means of production) that were privately owned. With material conditions being what they are, the only ways to accomplish that are either through pulling a Crusoe(which realistically is not an option for many and has a low saturation point of people who can do it) or starvation. While you may view the choice of starvation or servitude as being freedom of the highest order, to others it is an implicit threat no different than the Soviet Union giving them the choice between compliance or death. You're conflating socialism with the welfare state. And we have that situation in the US with taxes already, if you don't think that's at gunpoint(ie threat of force) try not paying them. Every state is built around keeping citizens in line and protecting the interests of the ruling classes, some are just better at creating the illusion of freedom than others. I agree, but how can one live the life that suits them best if they are bound to a state which tells them to get inline or else? Or bound to an economic system that demands either servitude or starvation? Great argument and I'd like to answer in more detail but I'm leaving in 5 minutes so I'll have to do it later. I would like to make two quick points though. As a citizen we can be compelled to participate in the process of government. We are going to have to pay taxes, serve jury duty or even be drafted. But we can't be compelled to participate in the economy except by necessity. Yes it is unrealistic to expect the wistful communist living in a capitalist society to give away the money he does not use to cover basic necessities but when it comes down to consumption even the purchase of necessities benefits someone. Whether the groceries you buy were produced on a state run collective farm, a private family farm, or a large private agri-business the money earned buy the purchase will benefit someone other than the consumer. So the only benefit the consumer receives is the variety of choices (because of competition form multiple private businesses) and lower prices (because market forces set the price rather than an arbitrary cost point determined by people who had nothing to do with the production or consumption). So yes the wistful communist can't choose to purchase communally produced products as a rule but when you get down to brass tacks it really doesn't matter to them. My other point is to Namutree. Christianity is a faith that requires a certain behavior to follow. You can only be Christian by BEING Christian. It is not enough to say you are. In my opinion compelling someone to follow the Christian ethic by outlawing the temptations of "sin" (something the US has a sad history of doing) does not make them Christian. Jesus said "Behold I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hear my voice and open the door I will come in and sup with them and they with me". He didn't say "I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your doors in". And it is inappropriate for the government to do that for him as well. Well I wrote more than I meant to but that's my $.02

I could spend the day sitting beside the river fishing and contemplating deep philosophical issues like how to make the world a better place or I could go to the VFW where there will be beer, football and BBQ. I think I'll opt for the latter.

Well, I have little more to add to the arguments I made six years ago. Capitalism is neither Christian or un-Christian. Christianity is a code of belief that is (supposed to be anyway) a guideline for behavior. Capitalism is an economic system. You can follow or choose not to follow either as much as you please. They are both systems that can exist only in an environment of personal freedom and individual liberty. As I told our favorite troll favoring socialism/communism while living in a capitalist economy can also be a personal choice. If you don't like the capitalist system just don't participate in it. Don't buy things you don't need. Take the money you don't use and give it to someone else like a charity, or a candidate for office, or me if you're out of ideas. But you can make those choices only in a free/capitalist society. Turning a capitalist one into a socialist one makes the choice for everyone whether they want it or not. It imposes the will of those in favor on those opposed, usually at gunpoint. As I've said many times over the years how wonderful would the world be if we all just lived our lives in the way that suits us best and left everyone else alone to do the same.

I made jerky and watched college football.

Happy 2016 everyone. So far mine is.... complicated.

It would be nice if GreasyDogMeat, Musopticon, and Sand were still around. And I mean that literally in Sand's case,

That thread has a convergence of trolls not seen before or since! My favorite line came from me of all people: "Is it just me or does anyone get the impression that there have not been as many actual people participating in this discussion as user names?"

I was reading some old threads. Man the board is almost civilized now. We used to be NASTY to each other on some of those old threads: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/53916-capitalism-is-un-christian/page-1

I would stop you with my army of trained coyotes.

Interesting story, do you think a single coyote would kill one of your dogs in a fight? I guess I'm asking how dangerous are Coyotes? A coyote by himself is not dangerous at all. Even two or three together would not be a serious problem for Sunny & Tommy. It's when you get six, seven or more they are a real threat. But not to me. To get rid of them I walked out on the porch turned on the light and cursed them out... loudly. They scattered. But one coyote would easily eat both rabbits before I could do anything about it. They are more of a nuisance than a threat so I'm usually inclined to leave them be. but a few years ago they got really aggressive so one night I left my grill in the middle of the yard as bait and waited by the loft window. When they came around I shot the biggest one figuring he was the alpha. They stayed away after that. They live in Anderson Tully a management area real close to my house. I think there are two packs that come around periodically but I haven't seen them in a while. I hear them all the time though but they sound far away.

The coyotes are back. They tried to get into the rabbit pen last night. I "discouraged" them. Now to order some motion sensor lights from Amazon. A few years back they got really aggressive. I had to take out one or two of them. Hopefully we won't have to do that again. I'm more than willing if it's needed but I'd rather not. I do like listening to them do their thing at night.

HBO has been showing all five seasons of GoT. My couch has a indentation the shape of my rear end because of it. I've found if you watch this show for hours on end you feel very depressed. BSG was like that too. There ought to be a warning label. It's funny because the books didn't do that to me. /I guess there is a difference between what you see in your mind and with your eyes.

Now that is an afternoon well spent

If we had unlimited resources, what would stop us from creating artificial islands or colonizing Mars and the moon? More realistically, as realistically as immediate post-resource scarcity is at any rate, why would the response be to start killing rather than utilizing infinite resources to build new shelter or moving somewhere else? Especially considering that killing is the option with more negative consequences and effort involved. The standard response to the time machine is "kill Hitler". Just don't step on any butterflies while you are doing it

I'd use it to build a time machine and go back in time and tell Heijoushin to reword the OP to say "What would you do with yourself if time and money were not a problem". I think that was what he meant. Not that the ideas of benevolent dictatorships, robot space armies and harems haven't been entertaining though.

Ok assume then you referendum does not go the way you hope. After all there have been a number of mass shooting in the US and we (the majority of voters at least) are more against gun control than ever before. If the vote goes against you would you, who is in power with unlimited money and resources and a grand vision for a "just" society just say "oh well the people have spoken" and let it go? Or would you use that power to make that which you know to be right happen? I would absolutely respect it, in my ideal world something like gun control for citizens of a country like the USA has to ultimately decided by a referendum...this type of issue is not something I would be prepared to kill citizens for in a case of Feds coming to your farm to take your guns and you refusing to hand them over Remember my ideal world is not a dictatorship you guys think it is Just checking. Actually to have total gun control in the US would require a Constitutional Amendment not a referendum. It will never happen. Heller v Washington DC affirmed the originalist argument that gun ownership is an individual right. It did leave room for regulation which end the end is what we are all arguing about. How much we'll permit and what it will look like. If the government ever tried confiscation it would either Constitutional crisis, civil war, or both.

Ok assume then you referendum does not go the way you hope. After all there have been a number of mass shooting in the US and we (the majority of voters at least) are more against gun control than ever before. If the vote goes against you would you, who is in power with unlimited money and resources and a grand vision for a "just" society just say "oh well the people have spoken" and let it go? Or would you use that power to make that which you know to be right happen? I'll bet many if not most of the dictators who have committed the worst atrocities thought they were doing the right thing.

That would be the same private sector you are taxing out of existence to pay for all your social programs? Sure, can't see any problems there! To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher all that will work great until you run out of everyone else's money.

Bruce, in a world with unlimited resources don't you think that capitalism would kind of obsolete? The premise of the thread is unlimited resources for YOU

Anything by Karline. She seems to focus on game covers and fiction tribute songs by damn she does them well!

Guess who is in first place now: http://www.nhl.com/gamecenter/en/recap?id=2015020527&navid=nhl:topheads Alexsander Barkov is da man.

Well that is, of course, predicated on the idea that you know better than anyone what good governance is, which is where things start to get iffy. Of course, with unlimited time on your hand, there's nothing stopping you from figuring it out better than anyone ever did. LOL you beat me to it. Bruce would either be hung in the streets by his own people because you can't have freedom while repressing freedom or he'll be lining them up in prison camps to avoid being hung once he found out the only way to MAKE people behave the way you think they should is with brute force.

I'm cooking river speck for dinner with onions and potatoes.

Going fishing

I'd like to buy more land, hire staff and build a home/shelter for elderly homeless dogs. No dog deserves to be in a shelter but how much less so the elderly ones? Either lost or abandoned by their families they deserve a warm safe place to live out the time they have left. I always said if I ever won the lottery that is what I'd do. Of course I almost never play the lottery because... well I can do math.