Why are students so easy to manipulate?

mkpdavies · 25-11-2007, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Individual rights have to be balanced against individual responsibilites. One without the other is unworkable.

I agree. My definition of responsibility is that you don't hurt others. Anything beyond that, is no one elses business.

For_England · 25-11-2007, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

I didn't realise I was under obligation to answer anything. I often ignore the ranting drunken tramps in the street. Think of it a bit like that. I tend to answer people who I have an ounce of respect for more consistantly.

Just for you though, seeing as you are clearly getting angry (which I am ashamed to say makes me happy), I'll go back and answer a few more for you.

Don't waste your time on my account. It makes me a little angy whenever anyone is as ignorant and dismissive of others as you are, and takes obvious delight in it. But at the end of the day it will all come back to bite you in the a*rse, and I don't need to get bent out of shape trying to get you to see it. Just remember those words. I don't know what definition of distributionism you have if you think it uses tax revenue to fund anything economic - it's based upon decentralised control of the economy, and against concentrated economic power. If you were reasonable, and if you knew what you were talking about, you could not help but be more balanced and fair minded about the benefits of the system, but if you think it involves or necessitates the government transfer of wealth, then clearly you are arguing against things of which you know nothing, and since I am against the unnecessary transfer of wealth myself, why would I fight your tin soldier? But I'm not ever going to win an argument with someone as close minded as you are, no matter how reasonable the argument is, and that is really your loss, though you are oblivious to it.

mkpdavies · 26-11-2007, 12:10 AM

Chill out man! Just because I won't bow to your ideology, doesn't mean you have to throw all your toys out of the pram.

Quote:

But at the end of the day it will all come back to bite you in the a*rse

Oh will it now! How so?

Quote:

more balanced and fair minded about the benefits of the system

Any system based on the notion of stealing is a poor one in my opinion.

Quote:

I am against the unnecessary transfer of wealth myself,

And your definition of unecessary is things that you don't want. Some would say that is selfish. Me included.

Quote:

But I'm not ever going to win an argument

I'd already worked that out.

Quote:

and that is really your loss, though you are oblivious to it.

No loss to me. Rant all you want, it makes no odds.

girlfriday · 26-11-2007, 12:19 AM

Is the definition of "stealing" a swipe at taxation in general? If so, what WOULD you tax? If taxation is theft, then what on earth is charging more than one aquired goods and services for? Some call it "profit", others may see the word "profiteer".

Profit is not evil, neither is tax, each have their use in any community.

mkpdavies · 26-11-2007, 12:29 AM

Personally I wouldn't tax individuals anything, but I understand the collective will always demand some form of taxation or forced insurance as I like to call it. As I can't expect to have everything my way, I wouldn't be too upset with everyone paying a low flat rate.

Large corps would pay the most tax (still not excessive), then less for medium sized ones, then down to almost nothing for smaller ones.

Then in this more free, prosperous and productive society, I would predict people to look after each other more. Instead of wasting loads of money on trying to get freedom back for instance, people could help fund the truly needy.

For_England · 26-11-2007, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

Chill out man! Just because I won't bow to your ideology, doesn't mean you have to throw all your toys out of the pram.

That would be nice; if you ever get so far as to know someone elses ideology, let me know. But ignorant and opinionated misconceptions? no difference to you though, is there?

Quote:

Oh will it now! How so?

you'll learn.

Quote:

Any system based on the notion of stealing is a poor one in my opinion.

so any system involving taxation is socialist and left wing in your view is it? I oppose income tax, pretty right wing as far as things go.

Quote:

And your definition of unecessary is things that you don't want. Some would say that is selfish. Me included.

If you say so, it must be. Shame you didn't stop and ask for my definition though isn't it? Protecting the boarder, protecting the integrity of weights and balances,and punishing crime, are about it in my view.

Quote:

I'd already worked that out.

Yes, well you know yourself don't you?

Quote:

No loss to me. Rant all you want, it makes no odds.

Rant? Or is it that you just can't answer anything, and even your latest pathetic attempt has been riddled with tin soldiers. What little substance you have for such an opinionated and soulless individual. Still, I got you to come out of your shell for once - though I think I prefer the wallflower version of you.

mkpdavies · 26-11-2007, 09:17 AM

Quote:

no difference to you though, is there?

You are free to think what you want. I couldn't care less.

Quote:

you'll learn.

An ignoramous like me learn? How could that be?

Quote:

so any system involving taxation is socialist and left wing in your view is it?

Fundamentaly, yes. Again though, I accept a lot of people don't mind stealing as long as they think it goes to a good cause.

Quote:

Shame you didn't stop and ask for my definition though isn't it?

I based it on your previous posts. The few things you listed here doesn't really tally with what you said before.

Quote:

Yes, well you know yourself don't you?

Only as an aqaintance.

Quote:

Rant?

Yep Rant. Like a toddler spitting out his dummy in rage, for not getting what he wants.

Quote:

Or is it that you just can't answer anything

1) Can't doesn't = can't be bothered.
2) The answer being given not being exactly how you want it doesn't = can't.

Quote:

your latest pathetic attempt has been riddled with tin soldiers

Feel free to explain how, instead of going all red in the face and throwing a big sulky strop.

Quote:

What little substance you have for such an opinionated and soulless individual.

I've got soul, but I'm not a soldier. From you I take that as a compliment. A bit like a NOT gate.

Quote:

Still, I got you to come out of your shell for once - though I think I prefer the wallflower version of you.

Yes that was pretty impressive. I have a reputation of hardly posting on this forum. Many times people have felt frustrated at my lack of posts and unwillingness to mix it up. You truly have acheived something! Probably your finest acheivement ever! Well done! Make sure you tell your Mum and Dad, they will be so proud of you.

John Carter · 26-11-2007, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

Griffin is a lefty. Just not the brand of lefty that Gallofascist likes.

Correct.

It's a shame that even some of those who purport to be enlightened can't see it - there's no hope for the brainwashed masses.

John Carter · 26-11-2007, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by For_England

Or is it that you just can't answer anything

That's a phrase straight out of the leftist handbook. It's in the chapter entitled "If they don't agree with you, they must be ignorant and need teaching".

For_England · 26-11-2007, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Carter

That's a phrase straight out of the leftist handbook. It's in the chapter entitled "If they don't agree with you, they must be ignorant and need teaching".

well there's a simple solution for you and mkpdavis - answer my post on corporations, or my post here and actually define distributionism correctly. or maybe you 'can't be bothered' either.

26-11-2007, 12:29 AM	#15 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,183 Party: Libertarian Party	Personally I wouldn't tax individuals anything, but I understand the collective will always demand some form of taxation or forced insurance as I like to call it. As I can't expect to have everything my way, I wouldn't be too upset with everyone paying a low flat rate. Large corps would pay the most tax (still not excessive), then less for medium sized ones, then down to almost nothing for smaller ones. Then in this more free, prosperous and productive society, I would predict people to look after each other more. Instead of wasting loads of money on trying to get freedom back for instance, people could help fund the truly needy. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

26-11-2007, 12:19 AM	#14 (permalink)
girlfriday Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: england Posts: 238	Is the definition of "stealing" a swipe at taxation in general? If so, what WOULD you tax? If taxation is theft, then what on earth is charging more than one aquired goods and services for? Some call it "profit", others may see the word "profiteer". Profit is not evil, neither is tax, each have their use in any community.