GM, Bailout, Obama....

[z31maniac]

Well that whole idea is contradictory to capitalism. If people weren't constantly buying shit they didn't need then no one would be making any capital and the system would collapse.

Unsustainable growth and sustainable growth are two different things, people's greed and desire to keep up with the neighbors and "appear" to be wealthy is what lead to the unsustainable growth.

It's HYSTERICAL that you seem to think you are a libertarian, yet constantly embrace socialist/communist philosophies.

[DarkWing6]

Without regulation, people are allowed to agree to work long hours with little to no pay, in dangerous conditions and without benefits. Without regulation, entire species are hunted to or near extinction and natural ecosystems are destroyed unless people vote against that by not supporting, buying from or working for those responsible.

Fixed that for ya ;)

So I would have to ask you...where do we draw the lines on morailty? Where you think they should be, where I think they should be, or where the nut job down the street thinks they should be? Why not let us all decide by 'voting' with the medium we have all agreed to use as a basis for value?


I could go into this further but my lunch break is over. I've gotta get back to work so a percentage of my pay check can help pay some union labor to build crappy automobiles.

[h0lmes]

Unsustainable growth and sustainable growth are two different things, people's greed and desire to keep up with the neighbors and "appear" to be wealthy is what lead to the unsustainable growth.

It's HYSTERICAL that you seem to think you are a libertarian, yet constantly embrace socialist/communist philosophies.

It's hilarious that you have no idea what you are talking about. True Libertarianism, i.e. anarchy, which was using the term libertarian long before the bullshit American libertarian party was, is a branch of socialism. It is 100% identical to Marx but without the existence of the state.

Also, as I said before, economy isn't everything. Just because I believe that the economy should be regulated does not mean that I think the government should have any other sort of authority.

[h0lmes]

Fixed that for ya ;)

So I would have to ask you...where do we draw the lines on morailty? Where you think they should be, where I think they should be, or where the nut job down the street thinks they should be? Why not let us all decide by 'voting' with the medium we have all agreed to use as a basis for value?


I could go into this further but my lunch break is over. I've gotta get back to work so a percentage of my pay check can help pay some union labor to build crappy automobiles.

Have you ever heard of lobbying?

[Farbin Kaiber]

Oh, I can say this now. Fuck Obamafornia.

[mrsleeve]

WOW the hilarity that has become this thread.



thank you I needed this


You know who you are You tofu eating, communist, hippie.

[h0lmes]

WOW the hilarity that has become this thread.



thank you I needed this


You know who you are You tofu eating, communist, hippie.

I love my meat thank you. :)

[z31maniac]

It's hilarious that you have no idea what you are talking about. True Libertarianism, i.e. anarchy, which was using the term libertarian long before the bullshit American libertarian party was, is a branch of socialism. It is 100% identical to Marx but without the existence of the state.

Also, as I said before, economy isn't everything. Just because I believe that the economy should be regulated does not mean that I think the government should have any other sort of authority.

We both know that you are arguing semantics here. TRUE definitons of words morph and adpat to the times.

I see you still wish to define it by the traditional late 1800s early 1900s usage. Even though there have been multiple splits and "sects" if you will that have taken some piece of the original philosophy and changed it to suit their own needs.

So, yes, in today's view, I think most people would consider Libertarian to be someone who is fiscally conservative (small gov't, little to no regulation) and socially liberal (small gov't, no legislation on homosexuals, etc) to make another broad sweeping generalization such as you did regarding it's definition.

[Pinepig]

I love my man meat thank you. :)

I'm sure you do.

[h0lmes]

We both know that you are arguing semantics here. TRUE definitons of words morph and adpat to the times.

I see you still wish to define it by the traditional late 1800s early 1900s usage. Even though there have been multiple splits and "sects" if you will that have taken some piece of the original philosophy and changed it to suit their own needs.

So, yes, in today's view, I think most people would consider Libertarian to be someone who is fiscally conservative (small gov't, little to no regulation) and socially liberal (small gov't, no legislation on homosexuals, etc) to make another broad sweeping generalization such as you did regarding it's definition.

Well, even today's definition of Libertarian will tell you that it is wrong to infringe negatively upon the lives of other people. I think this definition should expand to include the environment as well. You really cant deny that the thirst for profit and wealth has destroyed the natural ecosystem of this planet. It's disgusting.

I'm sure you do.

Why else would I be so liberal?

[Farbin Kaiber]

Well, even today's definition of Libertarian will tell you that it is wrong to infringe negatively upon the lives of other people. I think this definition should expand to include the environment as well. You really cant deny that the thirst for profit and wealth has destroyed the natural ecosystem of this planet. It's disgusting.

I don't think you have the knowledge to prove this statement. The changes in the "ecosystem" could be natural cycles. And, furthermore, I don't think you should be defining the mission statements of other political groups of which you do not belong.

[h0lmes]

I don't think you have the knowledge to prove this statement. The changes in the "ecosystem" could be natural cycles. And, furthermore, I don't think you should be defining the mission statements of other political groups of which you do not belong.

Just because I do not belong to a certain political group does not mean I can't know what they stand for.

Also, clear-cutting forests, pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, hunting species to extinction, oil spills, and islands made out of garbage are not "natural cycles".

[Farbin Kaiber]

Also, clear-cutting forests, pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, hunting species to extinction, oil spills, and islands made out of garbage are not "natural cycles".

But earthquakes, volcano's, tsunami's, do the exact same thing. Fuck, even an meteorite can cause "clear cut" forrest issues, see the Tunguska Event. Nature as a whole can do much more than a lowly species of humans. Don't assume you are so important. You are not the center of the Universe.

[Ral]

But earthquakes, volcano's, tsunami's, do the exact same thing. Fuck, even an meteorite can cause "clear cut" forrest issues, see the Tunguska Event. Nature as a whole can do much more than a lowly species of humans. Don't assume you are so important. You are not the center of the Universe.

+1. Not to stray too far off topic, but the whole concept of "climate crisis" or whatever the catch phrase is now, and the movement behind it, is arrogantly self-serving. I completely agree with responsible stewardship of natural resources, but to think that the Earth, which has been around far longer than humans, and recovered from much greater upsets to the natural order of things is being ruined by one species is ludicrous. Volcanoes spill unfathomable amounts of the same gasses humans emit in a hundred years. Meteors hit, earthquakes cause shifts in the goddam continents, tidal waves, etc. To think that humans are single-handedly responsible for what appears to be a natural cycle is stupid. Mother Nature will not be that easily beaten. The whole scam is nothing more than a power grab an money-making scheme for a select few.

[metalix1021]

^^
It's continuation also has to deal with professors and grant money. Want to do research? What's the best way to get $$? Say it's for the alterentative energy, going green, etc etc......