This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - BrenMan 94
Pages: 1 ... 424344 4546 ... 63
1291
« on: January 02, 2015, 06:59:34 AM »
Stayed up all night playing EU4. >_>
Goddamnit.
1292
« on: January 02, 2015, 03:40:58 AM »
By using government services, regardless of your wish to use someone else's, and not paying the taxes due as proportional payment for them, you're stealing from every other citizen in the country. Your argument is circular, tautological, and self-refuting. So denying a thief their toll means you're stealing from every person that thief has ever stolen from? wat By claiming 'taxation is theft' and going no further in justification than a generic definition is profoundly arrogant. Taking something without someone's consent is wrong. Shooting someone or kidnapping and imprisoning them because they don't pay you money is wrong. That deep enough for you? You can claim that taxation is not right, and that it should be changed; you're welcome to use whatever platform you wish to attempt to convince the rest of society of that. But since the society has agreed to the implementation of taxes as a means of spreading the general welfare, it's simply childish to continue saying it is theft. "If the majority supposedly consents to it then it must be the right thing to do!" Never heard that before. The fact is that by living on government-owned land and using government-provided services, you are opting in to the social contract and to taxes. How does the government own the land? What gives them the right to the land? Any capitalist would recognize this; even in a monopoly, if you use the goods and services of a firm or business, then you owe them a fee, regardless of how reluctant you are to use them. Failure to pay for what you use is theft. Except I have the option to not use Time Warner. I'm not compelled to pay them to send young adults into a desert to die in the name of democracy, or to spy on my fellow citizens. The argument of taxation as theft breaks down as soon as you look outside the individual So it's okay for a person to get fucked over in the name of not fucking everyone else over as much? (and fundamentally, the argument is purely selfishly motivated and stems from no altruistic goal) So I'm not an altruist because I don't support people getting money taken from them without their consent? You can't be fucking serious. seeing that refusal to pay tax is, in fact, an act of robbery on your own part.
That's perceived theft from society by a person with Stockholm syndrome. Taking money from someone without their consent is objectively theft.
1293
« on: January 02, 2015, 12:39:33 AM »
The retort has already been posted. Sorry if you're offended by being called out for spouting a child's view on taxation on a serious discussion board. >Out of arguments Taxes are part of the social contract of being privileged to live in a wealthy first world nation. You have an obligation to contribute to the general welfare of the country proportionally to your ability. Bringing up the social contract? The idea of a social contract is a paradox. A contract implies consent from all parties, without coercion. If you don't abide by the social contract of the state, you get shot or kidnapped. You want alternatives to government services? They exist. Private communities, reservations, and emigration are all options. Private communities fall under the jurisdiction of the state, as well as reservations. Emigrating from one state to another is not a solution. Obviously taxation is not theft. I've been robbed before, and I distinctly recall not getting stuff in return like roads, free education, or emergency services. So if the people who robbed you gave you a sandwich your view would be different? You may think you're taxed disproportionately, or desire to have services privatized (and subsequently see a decrease in taxes), but you can't with any credibility claim that taxation is theft. Theft - the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it. How the fuck is taxation not theft?
1294
« on: January 01, 2015, 05:02:53 PM »
herp derp ad hominem herp derp
If you have no rebuttal just say so. Trying to avoid extortion but still using the roads you are forced to fund, is hardly theft.
1295
« on: December 31, 2014, 10:45:17 PM »
Do you think perhaps, it being in a purse full of junk, that may have turned the safety off?
Or the kid could have on accident.
If it's a Glock then the safety is near the trigger, and is designed so that you can quickly switch it off and fire.
1296
« on: December 31, 2014, 09:27:57 PM »
Using services provided by the state and refusing to pay for them, regardless of whether an alternative exists, is tantamount to theft.
What happens if you're not using the service? Given that you have no option to not pay for these services, who is doing the stealing here?
1297
« on: December 31, 2014, 09:22:21 PM »
Mister Filch is evil.
1298
« on: December 31, 2014, 08:44:03 PM »
I plan on getting SR4, TC's Endwar and possibly YNaB tomorrow.
1299
« on: December 31, 2014, 08:41:23 PM »
>2014/2015
>Using discs
1300
« on: December 31, 2014, 08:39:15 PM »
RollerCoaster Tycoon 2
1301
« on: December 31, 2014, 03:01:49 PM »
I know you're not supposed to blame the victim, but this didn't accomplish anything. Sure they got a headline, but a few days from now they'll just be another statistic.
1302
« on: December 31, 2014, 12:55:45 AM »
>Darwin Awards
1303
« on: December 31, 2014, 12:45:20 AM »
Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you drive on city-maintained streets or use city-owned sewage systems.
Pretty sure driving on the sidewalk or off-road on private land is illegal (meaning you'll be put under arrest and possibly shot if you resist). And you typically have to buy a permit to put a septic tank on your property (or you could just not buy a permit, in which case you'll be fined, arrested [if you refuse to pay the fine], or shot [if you resist arrest]). The whole "obey the state or get shot" line isn't an exaggeration. Failure to cooperate with the state on some level WILL get you killed or imprisoned.
1304
« on: December 31, 2014, 12:38:23 AM »
Weather effects and night/day cycles can really affect the balance of a map. Having the sun at high noon instead of early morning/evening could make it exponentially easier for snipers since the distance of cast shadows is greatly reduced (for example).
1305
« on: December 31, 2014, 12:31:34 AM »
I just use the Kinect. Compared to navigation on my gaming rig everything else is slow. The fact that it takes 1-3 seconds to load an app irks me to no end.
1306
« on: December 30, 2014, 06:31:34 PM »
Shut the fuck up about the fucking golf course for fuck's sake.
Fuck me.
Fuck.
Fuckin' fuck.
Fuckity-fuckity-fuck-fuck-foom.
OT: Obama didn't personally know about it, and the wedding got moved to a nicer location at the same time. 10/10 le ebin conservative clickbait.
1307
« on: December 30, 2014, 06:23:38 PM »
I feel the same about divorce as I do about abortion. I don't care if it happens, but I consider it undesirable.
1308
« on: December 30, 2014, 06:21:44 PM »
It's not circular at all. The State has a right to enforce itself as the State because it has the power backing it. The power of wealth, law and ideology. Rights don't exist, they're just an expression of whatever force is most powerful within a society.
It doesn't have the right to enforce itself. It just does. I don't understand why we see corporations as entities that need to be regulated by the state for "the public interest" but the state gets a pass because there's an illusion of choice when it comes to our self-described masters. If you stop buying a company's products, they'll go out of business. If you stop paying the state protection money, you'll either be forced to or you'll be imprisoned/killed. Hell, the mafia has this exact same business model and it's seen as a great evil.
1309
« on: December 30, 2014, 06:17:44 PM »
I believe it's wrong to have children if you're financially unable to support them. The whole area of anti-natalism is relatively new to me. It also brings up some contradictory arguments for/against.
Is it considered an act of aggression to bring a child into the world, given that you haven't gotten their consent to be born? Is it coercion to raise them according to your ethics?
On the other hand:
How would you go about enforcing anti-natalism? Would you even enforce it? Is it a passive moral stance or an active one? If you enforce it, would it not be an act of aggression to restrict a mother from bearing a child?
Granted this is all looking through the eyes of an AnCap. It's an interesting philosophical quandary, and one that honestly makes my head hurt.
1310
« on: December 30, 2014, 06:10:18 PM »
the cool thing is voluntaryism and lefty anarchism can coexist No, they can't. Left anarchism (anarcho-communism) is incompatible with a voluntary society because anarcho-communism doesn't allow for hierarchies of any sort. That includes the entire employer/employee business structure. the cool thing is voluntaryism and lefty anarchism can coexist Well, they can't.
Because neither of them can or will exist in the first place.
Seasteading is becoming less and less of a pipe dream. Most seasteaders and companies funding seasteading projects are self-described libertarians and voluntarists. Also, in the event that the state collapses there will be a short window to establish a voluntarist society (albeit a small one). So you're looking at society from an obscure, non-logical view and coming to a radical conclusion.
tell me on what grounds the state has a right to force my participation
Ha.
Why don't you go and ask the State what right it has to force your participation? You'll find your answer there.
The argument is circular. The State has the "right" to force your participation because it is the State. The other justifications are mostly utilitarian, with force being a justified means to having roadways and schools. >he thinks we can exist in a world without at least a modicum of taxation
I've become more of a libertarian myself, but the whole "no tax whatsoever" argument is retarded, and reads like something off a camnator post.
If you're for less government interference then the logical conclusion is for no government interference. I.e. if you believe that the government should stay out of marriage, then why shouldn't it also stay out of other social contracts? If you believe the government shouldn't classify the internet as a utility, then what's far-fetched about privatizing roadways (or at least putting their management under the authority of local municipalities). All that said my reasons for being an AnCap are strictly economic. Government intervention hinders technological progression and interferes with the free exchange of goods and services. As for the evils of the state, I give my platform to Chris Calton: If humankind is overall good, then government is unnecessary.
If humankind is overall evil, then it is too dangerous to grant any power to any member of humankind and call them "government".
If humankind is a mixture of good and evil, then it is completely naive to believe that positions of power will draw anybody other than the latter category.
1311
« on: December 30, 2014, 04:09:40 AM »
Do we know what the statue is of?
1312
« on: December 29, 2014, 02:46:58 PM »
1366x728 Dafuq resolution is this?
Standard laptop one <.<
15.6'' screensize >.>
My laptop is 1366x768.
1313
« on: December 29, 2014, 02:39:36 PM »
1366x728 Dafuq resolution is this?
1314
« on: December 29, 2014, 02:33:47 PM »
Rights don't exist.
So, no.
Alright. Then you are now officially my slave! Yea for no rights!
Yeah, well he still has the ability to ignore you, and thus making your statement worthless.
You have to give something of equal value for a human to listen to you when there's no law. His life would be something, but then it'd have to be threatened, and you're not really doing that.
You got me there. I'd have to use my own personal might and chain him, but then I'd be in the clear.
Assuming I haven't already paid a private security firm for protection.
1315
« on: December 28, 2014, 10:50:48 PM »
Rights don't exist.
So, no.
What exactly do you and Molyneux mean by this?
Nobody has the right to life? Nobody has the right to pursue their own destiny?
Is your right to life being violated if I kill you while you're attempting to rob me? If your destiny is to kill off an entire race, and others stop you from doing so, are they violating your right to your destiny? I guess you could say that your destiny violates others' right to life, which makes it invalid, but then that's society determining the boundaries of your "right", not nature.
Infringing on others rights is not a right. The first scenario abdicates my rights since I would be infringing on your property rights. The second scenario is once again, an infringement on the bodily autonomy of an entire race. Nice strawman.
But by whose authority are your rights abdicated?
1316
« on: December 28, 2014, 10:41:29 PM »
The college tuition bubble grows bigger and bigger. Dunno the effects on the American market when it pops.
1317
« on: December 28, 2014, 10:40:17 AM »
This page I have liked on Facebook uploads cool Halo pictures sometimes and this was one of them.
That usually means that they take images off the front page of /r/gaming and repost them to FB. When I screencapped Door's >Be Greybeard post from here and posted it to Reddit, it got over 3,000 upvotes. I saw it on almost every Skyrim related FB page over the next week. btw that Greybeard screencap has over one million views on Imgur.
1318
« on: December 28, 2014, 10:33:51 AM »
Rights don't exist.
So, no.
What exactly do you and Molyneux mean by this?
Nobody has the right to life? Nobody has the right to pursue their own destiny?
Is your right to life being violated if I kill you while you're attempting to rob me? If your destiny is to kill off an entire race, and others stop you from doing so, are they violating your right to your destiny? I guess you could say that your destiny violates others' right to life, which makes it invalid, but then that's society determining the boundaries of your "right", not nature.
1319
« on: December 28, 2014, 10:28:38 AM »
Rights don't exist.
So, no.
Alright. Then you are now officially my slave! Yea for no rights!
You only have as much power as I delegate to you. You can say you own me all you want, but what does that mean if I don't recognize your ownership?
1320
« on: December 28, 2014, 10:24:26 AM »
The gap between "poor + benefits" and "not quite as poor - benefits" should close.
Personally I'm for pumping as much money into it as possible.
Pages: 1 ... 424344 4546 ... 63
|
Show Posts