How do you justify this lunacy?

#77
#77
emainvol said:
Is it not my right to be a socialist if I damn well please?

Just curious as to what this argument is about.

For the record, I support Obama because I agree with him on almost everything. Why do I agree with it? Because I think it can work, if it doesn't, oh well, I was wrong. It happens. I don't have to justify myself.
Click to expand...

You have the right to be a socialist.... I have the right not to want government expansion and expulsion of personal liberty that comes with it.

:hi:
 
#78
#78
emainvol said:
Is it not my right to be a socialist if I damn well please?

Just curious as to what this argument is about.

For the record, I support Obama because I agree with him on almost everything. Why do I agree with it? Because I think it can work, if it doesn't, oh well, I was wrong. It happens. I don't have to justify myself.
Click to expand...

Socialism and freedom cannot coexist in the same system. You can believe in Socialism all you want, but actually putting Socialism into practice involves taking away the freedoms of the people in that system. I object to Socialists trying to take away my freedoms.
 
#79
#79
OrangeEmpire said:
You have the right to be a socialist.... I have the right not to want government expansion and expulsion of personal liberty that comes with it.

:hi:
Click to expand...

I only feel that the government has the responsibility to create an even playing field for everyone. It's a socialist ideal, yes, but I don't think it is a horrible idea. If they can't do that, what the hell good are they?
 
#80
#80
jamesd1628 said:
Socialism and freedom cannot coexist in the same system. You can believe in Socialism all you want, but actually putting Socialism into practice involves taking away the freedoms of the people in that system. I object to Socialists trying to take away my freedoms.
Click to expand...

Great, good to see you feel that way. I go back to my original point, I am under no obligation to justify my beliefs. They are my beliefs.
 
#81
#81
emainvol said:
I only feel that the government has the responsibility to create an even playing field for everyone. It's a socialist ideal, yes, but I don't think it is a horrible idea. If they can't do that, what the hell good are they?
Click to expand...

That is not the role of government....... government will never ever be able to accomplish that.

Utopias are a dream.

The world will never be like Star Trek.
 
#82
#82
how is that utopian philosophy? I only said the government should create an even playing field, what one does with it is his own responsibility.
 
#83
#83
emainvol said:
how is that utopian philosophy? I only said the government should create and even playing field, what one does with it is his own responsibility.
Click to expand...

Correct, but that is not practical because government will always want more power given to them at the expense of the citizen.
 
#84
#84
Socialism = Utopia........

That is why Gene Rodenberry created Star Trek as a Utopia.......... it was supposed to be a prediction of our future.
 
#85
#85
OrangeEmpire said:
Socialism = Utopia........

That is why Gene Rodenberry created Star Trek as a Utopia.......... it was supposed to be a prediction of our future.
Click to expand...

Again, you are basing this argument on the assumption that I agree with socialism as a whole, which I don't. It has its flaws just like everything else.
 
#86
#86
emainvol said:
I only feel that the government has the responsibility to create an even playing field for everyone. It's a socialist ideal, yes, but I don't think it is a horrible idea. If they can't do that, what the hell good are they?
Click to expand...

Socialism does the exact opposite of creating an even playing field. It takes from those who have earned and gives to those have not. That creates an uneven playing field in favor of the non-earners. As Bastiat put it over a 150 years ago:

Here I encounter the most popular fallacy of our times. It is not considered sufficient that the law should be just; it must be philanthropic. Nor is it sufficient that the law should guarantee to every citizen the free and inoffensive use of his faculties for physical, intellectual, and moral self-improvement. Instead, it is demanded that the law should directly extend welfare, education, and morality throughout the nation.

This is the seductive lure of socialism. And I repeat again: These two uses of the law are in direct contradiction to each other. We must choose between them. A citizen cannot at the same time be free and not free.
 
#87
#87
emainvol said:
Again, you are basing this argument on the assumption that I agree with socialism as a whole, which I don't. It has its flaws just like everything else.
Click to expand...

I never said any thing about how you feel about any thing.

I am just stating that it is impractical to think you can be half conservatve or half socialist.

That is not how things work....... either crave power which means less liberty for the people.

That is my gripe with any thing.....
 
#88
#88
OrangeEmpire said:
I never said any thing about how you feel about any thing.

I am just stating that it is impractical to think you can be half conservatve or half socialist.

That is not how things work....... either crave power which means less liberty for the people.

That is my gripe with any thing.....
Click to expand...

We can agree there. Honestly, any sort of political thought is impractical at it's very core. No matter what you believe in, there is a large number of people that disagree with you.
 
#89
#89
emainvol said:
We can agree there. Honestly, any sort of political thought is impractical at it's very core. No matter what you believe in, there is a large number of people that disagree with you.
Click to expand...

That is why the founders wanted a two party system with checks and balances.... generally speaking the compromise is the best option for every one.
 
#91
#91
allvol123 said:
Like non smoking and smoking sections in a restaraunt type compromise.
Click to expand...

I do not know why you make this hard......

It benefits me...... I am human......

It does not directly harm my liberty.......

I dunno what is so hard about that....
 
#92
#92
emainvol said:
I only feel that the government has the responsibility to create an even playing field for everyone. It's a socialist ideal, yes, but I don't think it is a horrible idea. If they can't do that, what the hell good are they?
Click to expand...
the gov't has no such obligation, explicit or implicit. The gov't functions are reasonably defined in the constitution. Neither taking or giving away my money is anywhere in that document. Nothing about level playing fields either. Nothing about federalized healthcare.

I like the Utopian ideal, but asymmetrical weighting of the burden is inherently socialist. Moving further in that direction hastens us toward the European model, and that's a disaster.
 
#97
#97
allvol123 said:
Just going by your criteria.
Click to expand...

No you are not.

I simply said I understand the argument and for selfish reasons and nothing else I am happy with it because I do not like smoking on personal level.

That does not make it right but I like it........
 
#99
#99
OrangeEmpire said:
No you are not.

I simply said I understand the argument and for selfish reasons and nothing else I am happy with it because I do not like smoking on personal level.

That does not make it right but I like it........
Click to expand...

So you would not like free medicine on a personal level?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top