Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Politics' Official Eighteenth Thread


  • Please log in to reply
106 replies to this topic

#101
KaineParker

KaineParker

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2893 posts
  • Location:Houston, Texas
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

The heck does abolishing age of consent have to do with transactions between voluntary parties? There are limitations, mainly the age 18 thing and theres parental consent. I don’t see where you’re going with the second sentence.

 
He was poking fun at internet libertarians. It's kind of a meme.
Indeed.
e97.jpg

Edited by KaineParker, Today, 06:01 PM.


#102
smjjames

smjjames

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1015 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!
What’s the vertical axis? Authoritarian-egalitarian?

#103
Guard Dog

Guard Dog

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 577 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

 

 

Okay, so, correct me if I'm getting any of this wrong...

 

Your problem is that the government has the power to create legislation that unduly favors those with the power and influence to buy their favor, which the disempowered workers can't do.

 

Your proposed solution is to negate the government's ability to do so.

 

This would presumably bring about a change, because then the workers would still be without power and influence, but the rich would be... deprived from one of the vectors to exert theirs, leaving all the rest? How is that supposed to help?

 

Because what the government does is enforced by guns. The most powerful and wealthy corporation in the world could not take a penny from my checking account unless I willingly let them. The government can take all of it. Suppose for a moment your house is prime real estate and a developer wants it:

 

Developer: We want to buy your house

Aluminumtrioxid: It's not for sale

Developer: Fair market value is $100k, we'll pay $125k

Aluminumtrioxid: It's not for sale

Developer: Mr./Mrs. Politician here is a campaign donation of $125k

Politician: Thanks for your support, I won the election.

Developer: We want to develop the land Aluminumtrioxid's house is on. If we do the tax base will improve.

Politician: Aluminumtrioxid we are exercising Eminent Domain, and seizing your home. The taxable value is $60k but you haven't cut the grass in two days so we're offering you $50k. Take it or leave it.

Aluminumtrioxid: It's not for sale.

Politician: OK, we are condemning your property by Act and transferring ownership to the "public" (meaning us). You get nothing and can go f--k yourself if you don't like it. 

Aluminumtrioxid: I'll sue

Politician: Sure... good luck with that.

Politician: Hey Developer want to buy some land?

 

This EXACT scenario plays out here in the so called land of the free every year. Who is the bad guy here? Sure the "evil capitalist" initiated the whole thing but who actually took your home? Now, suppose the Politician does not have the power to take your home:

 

Developer: We want to buy your house

Aluminumtrioxid: It's not for sale

Developer: Fair market value is $100k, we'll pay $125k

Aluminumtrioxid: It's not for sale

Developer: Well, it's valuable to us so how about $150?

Aluminumtrioxid: It's not for sale

Developer: OK, $175k, that 75% more than market value.

Aluminumtrioxid: It's not for sale (or OK $175k)

 

Without the government to do their dirty work they cannot force you to do anything.

 

Here is another scenario:

 

Me: I want to by health insurance

Company A: We have a policy for $10k a year

Company B: We have the same policy for $9k per year.

Me: OK, I want company B

Politician: You can't have it. You HAVE to buy from Company A.

Me: Why?

Politician: Because we have decided Company A gets exclusive rights to your state.

Me: Company A supported your campaign!

Politician: That's none of your business.

 

Take the politician out and you get this:

 

Me: I want to by health insurance

Company A: We have a policy for $10k a year

Company B: We have the same policy for $9k per year.

Me: OK, I want company B

Company A: whoa we;re getting killed here. OK, we'll lower the price to $8800 per year

Me: Yay!

 

Simplified examples yes. But without the government circumventing the process what holds everything together is contracts. Company A agrees to to this if I agree to pay that. and if we have to go to court then we are equal before the law. Try facing the government at any level in court and you find out real quick you are far from equal.  

 

The government does not exist to serve anyone. It exists solely for it's own self perpetuation. But it does have a purpose to fulfill and we do need to to fulfill that purpose. But that s--t tends to get out of hand real quick if it's allowed to do so. We're well past that point here in the US but I'm always optimistic that it's never too late to turn back.  



#104
Guard Dog

Guard Dog

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 577 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

i hear you can make a killing by selling gunz.

Not since Obama left office. Gun sales are in the tank. That man could flat out sell guns. 


  • Hurlshot likes this

#105
Guard Dog

Guard Dog

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 577 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

 

If that is so it sounds like teachers should have a bit more leverage when negotiating a salary.


That sounds very pro-union from you. :p

They do have good leverage in states where unions aren't considered a dirty word. California gets bashed over the power of the CEA pretty regularly by Republicans.

 

I've got nothing against Unions. I do have a problem with compulsory membership in a Union. All associations should be voluntary. Of course, Unions can't FORCE you to join and pay them dues. But guess who can.... that's right, your old friend the government. Or the company your work for sometimes. But you can tell them to f--k off and go work somewhere else. The NLRA allows the government to create "Exclusive representation” (more accurately, monopoly bargaining) privileges for Unions. Which means they are empowered to negotiate for you whether you want the to or not. And as your government is so fond of saying you can go f--k yourself if you don't like it.

 

That is what I have a problem with. I am 100% in the Right To Work camp. Unions can do good for people who join them. But that stops when the government puts a gun to your head and says "join or else"



#106
smjjames

smjjames

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1015 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!
For the healthcare example when you take the politician out of the equation, hasnt that been tried and shown to utterly not work the way you say It would?

#107
Bartimaeus

Bartimaeus

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1684 posts
  • Steam:Ask!

i hear you can make a killing by selling gunz.

Not since Obama left office. Gun sales are in the tank. That man could flat out sell guns.


(...I think it was a joke in that guns are a weapon that can be used to kill.)

Edited by Bartimaeus, Today, 09:46 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users