Donald Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
ttystikk said:
It can't be taxed if it's illegal. Your argument makes no sense.
Click to expand...

If it IS taxed, it then becomes an example of the government taking away what is every persons right and morphing it into a permission based scenario.

Taxing weed, and jailing people for not complying is the act of a tyrannical government. It is just a softer whip than when it was prohibited. Paying for freedom is oxymoronic.
 
ttystikk said:
You're trying to hold ME accountable for insane federal legislation?

What are YOU smoking?
Click to expand...
I am holding you accountable for not knowing that the feds get their cut of the pie even though it is illegal. And you said my argument "makes no sense" but is you who it is sadly misinformed.
:bigjoint:
 
Last edited:
ttystikk said:
You're just jelly n butthurt that a republican can't match his economic performance WITH BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS AND A PUBLIC MANDATE.
Click to expand...

Why would I be butt hurt about everybody is back to work? We don't need to fix the jobs market, so whats next on the fucking list?
 
Rob Roy said:
If it IS taxed, it then becomes an example of the government taking away what is every persons right and morphing it into a permission based scenario.

Taxing weed, and jailing people for not complying is the act of a tyrannical government. It is just a softer whip than when it was prohibited. Paying for freedom is oxymoronic.
Click to expand...

All governments impose taxes. What are you, anarchist?
 
The_Herban_Legend said:
I am holding you accountable for not knowing that the feds get their cut of the pie even though it is illegal. And you said my argument "makes no sense" but is you who is sadly misinformed.
:bigjoint:
Click to expand...

You do a lot of name calling. You do next to no thinking about what others say. You're constantly calling some of the most astute political observers here misinformed.

It adds up to a pattern; perhaps it's not everyone else that's wrong?
 
The_Herban_Legend said:
All governments impose taxes. What are you, anarchist?
Click to expand...

If all masters whip their slaves, does the practice of whipping slaves then become acceptable by it's frequent occurrence?

Taking something from a person that belongs to them and doesn't belong to you without their permission is still stealing, regardless of how you spend the loot...it doesn't matter if you are an individual or a gang / government.

I am a peaceful, but hungry, Sasquatch that finds most humans to be a good source of food, when cooked properly.
 
ttystikk said:
You do a lot of name calling. You do next to no thinking about what others say. You're constantly calling some of the most astute political observers here misinformed.

It adds up to a pattern; perhaps it's not everyone else that's wrong?
Click to expand...

Oh really, are you now considered an "astute" political observer? Name calling? Citation please. Not knowing that the federal government taxes dispensaries really shows just how "astute", you are. lol
 
Rob Roy said:
If all masters whip their slaves, does the practice of whipping slaves then become acceptable by it's frequent occurrence?

Taking something from a person that belongs to them and doesn't belong to you without their permission is still stealing, regardless of how you spend the loot...it doesn't matter if you are an individual or a gang / government.

I am a peaceful, but hungry, Sasquatch that finds most humans to be a good source of food, when cooked properly.
Click to expand...

If taxes are mandated, for the collective good, where do you see it a problem? There has to be a logical amount of government to have a prosperous society.
 
The_Herban_Legend said:
If taxes are mandated, for the collective good, where do you see it a problem? There has to be a logical amount of government to have a prosperous society.
Click to expand...

The term "collective good" is arbitrary and flexible and often oxymoronic. It was once believed by a majority of voters that the "collective good" could be served by prohibition wasn't it?

If I, as an individual, should have no power to run your life for you or determine how much of your money to take from you under threat of force, how can a group of people have that right? They shouldn't.

Logic insists that if you have the right to repel individuals making threats against you or what you own, you would also have the right to repel a group or a gang (society, government, etc.) doing the same thing.

A society based in voluntary human interactions is infinitely more peaceful than one that is not. The collective good, if there even is such a thing, would be best served by leaving others alone rather than making their choices for them under threats for noncompliance.

The problem is the means used. You can't base an action in a threat and then point ONLY to the end result, all the while ignoring the means.
 
Rob Roy said:
The term "collective good" is arbitrary and flexible and often oxymoronic. It was once believed by a majority of voters that the "collective good" could be served by prohibition wasn't it?

If I, as an individual, should have no power to run your life for you or determine how much of your money to take from you under threat of force, how can a group of people have that right? They shouldn't.

Logic insists that if you have the right to repel individuals making threats against you or what you own, you would also have the right to repel a group or a gang (society, government, etc.) doing the same thing.

A society based in voluntary human interactions is infinitely more peaceful than one that is not. The collective good, if there even is such a thing, would be best served by leaving others alone rather than making their choices for them under threats for noncompliance.

The problem is the means used. You can't base an action in a threat and then point ONLY to the end result, all the while ignoring the means.
Click to expand...

I understand your position but the utopia you describe will never happen. Pick a country/civilization that you model this after, past or present.
 
The_Herban_Legend said:
I understand your position but the utopia you describe will never happen. Pick a country/civilization that you model this after, past or present.
Click to expand...

Any civilization that DOESN'T use what I propose as a baseline model isn't civilized...yet.

Humanity / civilization wise, the earth is still flat. Some of us can see the distant horizon though.
 
Rob Roy said:
Any civilization that DOESN'T use what I propose as a baseline model isn't civilized...yet.

Humanity / civilization wise, the earth is still flat. Some of us can see the distant horizon though.
Click to expand...

Can you give me an example of any civilization that comes close to your model? I am thinking 3rd world-ish.
 
The_Herban_Legend said:
Can you give me an example of any civilization that comes close to your model? I am thinking 3rd world-ish.
Click to expand...

The problem with your question is, it erroneously defaults to the idea that the prevailing government in a given area is also the "civilization" or source of civil behavior in a given area, when the opposite is often true.

To better answer your question, we would need to define or open up the parameters of what a civilized society is, or what it would look like. I'd say it is one where individual people are able to live their lives unmolested by malum prohibitum laws at a minimum, how about you?
 
Rob Roy said:
The problem with your question it erroneously defaults to the idea that the prevailing government in a given area is also the "civilization" or source of civil behavior in a given area, when the opposite is often true.

To better answer your question, we would need to define or open up the parameters of what a civilized society is, or what it would look like. I'd say it is one where individual people are able to live their lives unmolested by malum prohibitum laws at a minimum, how about you?
Click to expand...

Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Your deflection skills are uncanny. First, you know very well what a civilization or a country is. All I asked was for you to give me an example of one or the other, that fits your model, past or present. Answer that and then we can proceed. I never said civilized society. I said civilization.
 
nitro harley said:
You don't like our bill of rights we have now? What are the rights you speak of?
Click to expand...


I think the first line spells it perfectly, the "bill of rights" and "civil rights" are worlds apart. The pukes party love to prophesies about "freedom" and invoke the "constitution" yet they are the #1 proponants to rolling back bargaining rights in Wisconsin and making it the 25th state to have the right to FUCK YOU. Turning a 3 month project into a 1 year oddesey.

The "freedom" of choice, overturning rule 5 of the VRA of '65 thats how the pukes roll if they can't win an election on merits, cheat.

B4L
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top