We do? Its not really in the center in the standard authoritarian/libertarian vs conservative/progressive graph so it would seem like a bad label if that is the case (I'm not well versed on Australian political science), I'm rather curious how it came to be called that.
I agree with most of what you said though i dont know many conservatives who dont want privacy. Like Google and Facebook are companies run exclusively by left wingers and they collect and sell your information on.
I have also agreed with libertarians more than both liberals and conservatives. But I only disagree with #8 you mentioned, I see the liberals wanting to usurp privacy more than the conservatives do.
I am a registered libertarian and I can't understand why more people aren't. You don't have to agree with everything but if you agree with most then you should support them
If you do address the economics of libertarianism, please don't forget how to address Zipf's law, and the problem of the rich getting richer, until they control the society, as is happening until Trump.
Who said libertarians weren't empathetic? They just see the bigger picture, and realize that comforting someone for the moment is often doing them great harm in the long run, and that sometimes "tough love" is the only thing that will really help someone.
Take a drug addict. Few addicts want to go to rehab - they're going to suffer mightily when they're detoxing and they'll be miserable for a while, and they know it. But in order to not kill themselves with drugs, that's almost always what has to happen. No one likes seeing them in pain, but the pain serves a much larger purpose.
Too much empathy could (in this example-as-metaphor) lead someone to get a drug addict more drugs so they felt better temporarily - which it would - but would only make the addiction, and all its associated problems, worse. In the long run, that's far more cruel, even if it seems kind in the moment, and you did it with the best of intentions.
Exactly. My family is in the top 1%, and I had to watch as under Obamacare our health bill went up to several hundred thousand. Why the hell should I have to pay for you?
@VaIiant boohoo, wealthy people had to pay more so people who weren't born with a silver spoon in their asshole and need healthcare and can't afford it could get some
@VaIiant why? Because while life isn't fair doesn't mean we should try to make it so. In country with the largest economy there is no universal health care like the rest of the western world? That people die of treatable diseases because they can't pay? Including fucking children? Why should you because human life and society are worth more than keeping the wealthy as wealthy as possible.
@VaIiant and what's really funny is that people like you claim that those who support universal health care and such are entitled while you have never had to work for a thing in your life
@Waffles731 ok, first off, don’t assume you know ANYTHING about me. Is my family wealthy? Yes. Am I extremely grateful to have grown up with a roof and food and other things? Absolutely. But I worked my ASS off for everything, my dad grew up poor and worked his way up and decided I should do the same. I work two jobs to put myself through one of the top universities in our country, which I got into because I worked damn hard in school. The government has no place to take such a large chunk of money from my family just because you think they should. Tell you what, go earn a bit, and then tell me how YOU feel when someone takes it all to pay for people who’ve never earned it.
@VaIiant and The reason I didn't answer your question, is because its utterly pathetic when the wealthy claim, 'why should i help people who aren't wealthy through my taxes whaaa,' when there are people who work three jobs just to scrape by on food and rent and can't afford things like healthcare amd other necessities
@VaIiant but you go on keep being a whiny little rich girl. What's good is that this country particulary my generation has decided that enough is enoug
It’s more then taxes. Three years ago when Obamacare was in act, our health care bill was around 200k. How the fuck is that acceptable when others are paying nothing?
@VaIiant ky claims have been backed up by proof, France has universal health care, The W. H. O rates them as the number one system in the world. And how is that acceptable? Because some people despite working their asses off can't afford to pay for themselves or their kids. Don't claim that its unfair when people die because they or, their parents can't pay for proper treatment
@VaIiant and what's really fucking ironic is people like you call yourselves christians when your views on those less fortunate are, Fuck you got mine, and the environment are, who gives a fuck about the earth
@Waffles731 France has had a reliable health care system for years. Unlike the former health care plan, it’s actuallu decent and covers the wealthy as well. Hah, I might despise Trump but Obamacare is flailing under his presidency. It won’t last another 2 years. Have fun with your little “waaahhh I’m poor everyone should be responsible for me!!” Tirade. The pendulum is swinging back to conservative, and my family won’t have to cover your ass. Have fun with your liberal ideals.
@VaIiant actually no its not, the fact is that my generation is rhe largest and extremely liberal. And when the baby, boomers finally do the world a favor and start dying things are going to be different
God never said “if you make $$$ pay for the peeps who don’t” Don’t try and bring religion into an argument about politics. That’s petty, and shows just how immature you are.
@VaIiant God did, say this according to your religion Ezekiel 16:49-50 declares, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me.
@Waffles731 we’re part of the same generation, you realize? The second OUR generation starts making money, they won’t be so liberal. You know what they say. “If you’re a conservative in your 20’s, you have no heart. If you’re a liberal in your 40’s, you have no brain.”
@VaIiant “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 4 Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. 5 Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. 6 Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled. 7 Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy. 8 Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. 9 Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God. 10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
@VaIiant right you mean the quote that no one can trace the origins of and no, this generation has been shown to be way more liberal than rhe past ones. Things like the recession caused by conservatives and corporate greed have had their effect
@Waffles731 I never said I was Christian. Why are you bringing religion into an argument about POLITICS? Yes, you can google bible quotes, good job. Goddamn you’re moronic. I’m not going to change your views I’m not going to change mine. You’re not worth my time. Thought we could have a good debate, you googled some bible quotes. Have fun being poor because you think we should all pay for you. Cya.
@VaIiant I've seen you post that you are Christian, And me, I work and go, to school am I poor? No, I'm going to school to be a PI But unlike you whiny little rich girl, I give a shit about people other than myself
@VaIiant if you're that wealthy, be grateful for what you have. Not everyone is born as fortunate as you. And in the situations where parents are poor, it's children who suffer most. You not being able to buy your 3rd vacation home is a lot less dire than children suffering from diseases because their parents cannot afford health care.
This is exactly the mindset I cannot get behind, which is why ill never be libertarian nor conservative again.
@BuchitaBuchys I already said I was extremely grateful for being born into a wealthy family. We also lived below our means, and "vacation home" who do you think I am? Warren Buffet? I'm perfectly fine with giving hundreds of thousands away by myself. If the charity is honest, and actually helps people in need, I fully support it. (I don't have that kind of money, but for my parents or others who do). But the government has no place in wealth distribution. That's the thing, *its my money*. There has to be a better idea for our country then taxing the shit out of the rich and taking 0% from others. In history, tax for the wealthy has gone up to 95%. Sometimes, its gone to 90% in recent years. How would YOU feel if, for every dollar you made, you got to keep 10 cents? Stop talking about OTHER people's money. What about yours? Are you willing to give every dime to the government without knowing EXACTLY what they're going to do with it?
@VaIiant I do pay taxes, as you do too. And I am not complaining about it. And you don't give every dime away. Neither do I. I don't feel entitled to anyone's money. We all pay our share, at least I know I pay.
You're only further proving my point, right leaning folk have less empathy. Hence, why I can't support it. The disregard for others, particularly those in need, is just not in me.
It's not "our share", when some people in this country pay several million dollars in taxes. Your words certainly seem entitled, since you believe other peoples money should pay for your health care/benefits. Yes, my heart goes out to the kids, and I would help them all if I could. But taking every dime from wealthier folk is not the way to go. (If you have health care that you pay for yourself, I take that last part back and apologize.)
@VaIiant I don't have healthcare actually. I'm not advocating for myself, since I don't really care about myself. I'm advocating for children who can't pay, who are paying for their parents misfortune, for disabled people who cannot work for their "share", for elderly who cannot. A libertarian society would weed off the "leaches", but it'll also hurt the vulnerable. While there are those who abuse the system - I fully support welfare reform to remove them; it does create a system of dependency, which, again, I'm fully against and would prefer be eradicated; and also reform on how the system itself is run since a lot of money is wasted on the paper pushing and bureaucracy, but it should still be in place as a safety net for those who cannot. I argue about this with my boyfriend all the time, he's libertarian, I wouldn't say I'm liberal, but I definitely agree with them more.
Trump once paid roughly $223 million in taxes. How is that okay? And yes, it will hurt the vunerable. Elderly have social security, but there should be some way to protect kids. But the 20 or 30 somethings who do literally nothing and expect to ride on the wealthy's back? There should be a way to protect the people who can't provide for themselves. But its not taking millions and redistributing it.
@VaIiant ok, but how much does he make though? Last I checked, he's a billionaire. 223 mil out of just 1 billion is a lot yes, but only a 22% tax rate. Which is actually less than what I pay, proportionately, in taxes. They take out about 24% in taxes and I'm nowhere near a billionaire, millionaire, not even a "thousandaire". So yes, you may pay more, Trump may pay more, but contrary to your prior statement, yes I am paying my share in taxes. Proportionately, obviously I cannot afford to pay the exact same as you or Trump, but nearly the same percentage is taken from our checks.
If welfare isn't the solution, which guess what, is not just coming from rich people like you, since I also pay, what is your proposed solution?
It wasn’t a year when he made a billion. He made 470 mil that year. They took 223 mil out of it. I truly don’t think there is a foolproof solution. The world is unfair to a degree. But that degree crosses the line when the government is literally robbing people.
@VaIiant then, yes, that's problematic. Taking nearly half is ridiculous. Ok, what is your solution, even if it isn't foolproof? All I hear from libertarians and conservatives is eradicating, but nothing to replace it. I'd concede with welfare reform. In Maryland I think it was, they changed the requirements in that if you're able body, you have to work at least part time. Otherwise, you cannot receive benefits. I fully support that. But they still are giving help to even those that work but cannot afford groceries, healthcare etc. Especially those with families.
I don't think universal healthcare is viable for the US. I'd be more likely to support a free market, truly free market, healthcare. But I still think there should be a safety net for those who even then wouldn't be able to afford it. Hence, why I can't be libertarian.
I’ve always thought that if you were a certain age (say, below 18) you could qualify for some kind of health care, but the problem with that is people always find a way around that. Maybe free health care would work, if it was truly free and was extended to all people in the US. For instance, under Obamacare, my family didn’t get “free health care”. Quite the opposite. It’s not free, it’s just other people paying. That was always my issue with it.
@VaIiant they have/ had kids care from what I remember. But that was back then. But only for low income. Not sure how it's like now. Nothing will ever be truly free. But seeing it as "why do I have to pay for others?" Will surely make the more fortunate feel resentment towards the poor.
I really don’t think there is. Libertarian isn’t so much about weeding out the vulnerable rather as believing the government has no place controlling our finances/benefits/being so integrated into our lives.
Neutral means not playing the game. Vote with your dollar, invest in technology, and wait for The Singluarity. Not that it matters. It's coming. But you can be part of the wave if you like.
Not necessarily. It will just be delegated to the States or the private sector, per the 10th Amendment. With all the schools becoming private schools competing with each other, the price of education should fall & a great variety should be available instead of the Fed. 1-size-fits-all. (In my country of birth, where education is mostly private, you can choose from all sorts of academic approaches: science-based, non-denominational Christian, Catholic Jesuit, Catholic Franciscan, Catholic Dominican, Chinese-Catholic, R. O. C. Chinese, P. R. C. Chinese, S. Korean education, Japanese, Indian, American, etc. with the foreign systems under both our Dept. of Education AND the other nation's min./dept. of education, so the it's recognized in both countries. So, imagine being a foreign exchange student, minus the expensive travel!) For infrastructure, either they'll become private with fees/tickets (which sucks, yes) or they'll be run by the States as they had been before the Fed. takeover.
@N192K001 Education already IS delegated to the states. As is most infrastructure. So if libertarians run the states too, what will happen to education? OK, so private schools will spring up to fill the need. But what if someone doesn't want to pay private tuition for their kid?
@zagor Yes, part of it is delegated to the States, but the Federal hand still grips it with the continued existence of its Federal Department of Education and Federal policies (like Bush's No Child Left Behind and Obama's Common Core), when its supervision should be by the States' boards of education alone, the private's means of regulation (fierce competition, parental vigilance, watchdog groups, industry guilds, etc.), or both. So, depending on the types of libertarians running in power, I would think either private school tuition would be the sole means of funding education since all schools are now private (and taxes have been adjusted downward accordingly), or purely State-run pubic schools remain and a voucher system is implemented for freedom of choice.
@zagor True, but the influence is still there, and its student loan programs are retarding the market, hence helping raise the tuition fees to unsustainably high levels.
Without government loans, decreasing enrollments would have forced the universities (now all private) to drop their tuition fees to more reasonable levels to secure more customers and better funding. Without the mass-promotion of student loans, other alternatives would be more widespread here like apprenticeships (pushed in Germany), vocational schools (Singapore), and studying abroad (where tuition is a faction the current U. S. cost, or even free!). Instead, we have a generation saddled with huge, avoidable (or "avoidably huge") debt (that even bankruptcy cannot clear) to start their adulthood.
It's that attitude that is allowing for these parties never being elected. Imagine if every student ganged up and mass voted a specific party. They would get in! I hate people like you... "Oh, I voted for a party I don't actually like because the person I wanna vote for will never get in".
@InTimoreDei it’s a numbers game, vaquero. You need a majority to win an election, and a presidential candidate needs to win the electoral college. That’s literally never going to happen for a libertarian or independent candidate.
If the only candidate you like is never going to win, why even bother voting in the first place? I mean, I'd rather vote for someone I knew would never win the election than voting for someone I despise. At least then I can stand for what I voted for.
@AD240pCharlie and that's how tyrants get elected - by people who would rather throw away their vote than vote for someone who isn't orange and insane.
If people dared to vote for a third party candidate, let's just say that Trump wouldn't have won. He just won because people saw him as the lesser of two evils, and the way he was treated by the media was what made people sympathize with him a lot more than Hillary.
It doesn’t matter if the person has little to no chance of winning. This is about ideology, I’m not going to vote for a political party I’m not enthusiastic about just because they have a higher chance of winning.
And it’s obvious you don’t care about the groups I mentioned. I believe everyone should be treated equally and fairly. You however believe certain people should have more privileges than others.
Calling something a fairytale just because you don’t agree with it doesn’t make it a fairytale, we’ve discussed this before.
You’re basically trying to force your views onto me, that’s exactly what us libertarians are against. You don’t have to agree with my political views but you still can’t force your views onto me.
In regards to your original comment, just because I’m libertarian doesn’t mean I have to always vote for a libertarian candidate, I can vote for a candidate of a different party that I believe has similar values to the candidate of my political party.
Except you do believe in fairytales. Heterophobia, for example, is a fairytale.
Voting for a libertarian candidate will never result in reducing discrimination of Asian people in America, because a libertarian candidate will never be elected to any meaningful office. So that’s also a fairytale.
You wouldn’t know what the truth was if it came up to you, introduced itself and bit you on the nose. Not that it would be able to reach your nose, given that your head is shoved so far up your own ass that I’m sure you can watch your own digestion.
There you again with your petty insults. Trust me, I have a lot of insults I could use as well but since I don’t want to break the rules of this website, I censor myself.
If you want to discuss serious topics with me, you should learn some manners first because I can’t take a person seriously if they stoop down to insults just because they disagree with something.
I can’t respect someone who makes a mockery of the scientific method, with no knowledge of or respect for academia and who uses big words to make himself seem intelligent. If you were half as smart as you pretend to be, you would get down off of your high horse and realize that the bullshit discrimination against straight people you literally made up because your feelings got hurt by a standup comedian wasn’t real.
But sure. Advocate for libertarianism. See if you get anywhere.
My friend was raped by a man back in 2016 and because of his trauma, he's disgusted with the idea of homosexuality. He doesn't think that they shouldn't have the same rights as everybody else and he would never judge anyone for being gay, but because of his PTSD, the thought of it makes him panic. Despite having an understandable reason, and despite not wanting to take away any rights for gay people, he's being labeled as a homophobe. Then there's another friend of mine, a female friend, who was raped by her ex-boyfriend. She used to identify as bisexual but after that experience, she cannot stand the idea of being in a heterosexual relationship and her trauma causes her to be very uncomfortable with the idea of any kind of heterosexual intimacy. But despite it being the exact same thing as my other friend, no one judges her for that. Which they shouldn't, because it's completely valid. So tell me, how is it NOT heterophobic to treat straight people worse than non-straight people?
Being "mean" to straight people is not heterophobia. Treating someone differently because they're straight, THAT'S heterophobia. The same way treating someone differently because they're gay is homophobia, treating someone differently because of their race is racism and treating someone differently because of their gender is sexism. It doesn't matter who it is against. If it's discrimination to do something to someone, then it's also discrimination to do the same thing to anyone else. If it's racist to say something towards one race, then it's racist to say the same thing to any other race.
@AD240pCharlie he literally wrote a take about how mean comedians are to straight people, and so suddenly heterophobia is a thing.
Listen, no one discriminates against you for being straight. You’re not denied jobs or housing or adoptive children or cakes or pizza or literally anything for being straight. I imagine your friend receives more flak for being a male rape victim than he does for being supposedly homophobic, given how narrow a lens through which our culture views masculinity. Having LGBT relationships on TV and comedians making jokes about straight people leaving babies in dumpsters is not discrimination. Not even close.
Astoriana Now you’re attacking masculinity. That’s yet another cue that I should stop replying to you. Also, let me clarify that I’m not a male rape victim.
If you had a username that was an actual word, I wouldn’t have to refer to you as a key smash, key smash boy.
You don’t really know how to read, do you?
When talking about the male rape victims, was I talking to you? Did you see me address you? No. Now, please, go be offended by comedians somewhere else.
Whatever you want to say, just don’t expect to change my political views because you will not succeed in doing so. This whole take was simply referring to ideology not who I choose to vote. Kind of ironic that you keep telling me to “learn how to read”.
If all you are going to do is insult someone just for having different political views, them don’t even bother commenting.
Wrong again girl, I never discussed who I would vote for on this take. I did reply that I can vote for someone who’s political views are close enough to a libertarian’s depending on the circumstances.
Here’s what you said to me, verbatim: “This is about ideology, I’m not going to vote for a political party I’m not enthusiastic about just because they have a higher chance of winning.”
They are fallacies that you keep using, if you want to me to stop pointing out your fallacies, then stop using fallacious arguments. As a matter of fact, just stop replying if you are not going to contribute anything to this conversation.
Again with the name calling. You know what, this conversation is over. If you want to have discussion with me, then you must first change that attitude.
Kind of funny how you question my credibility when all you’ve been doing is stooping down to petty insults instead of having a civilized discussion. And yes I did research prior to this take but I’m not going to plagiarize sources just to satisfy some self entitled individuals.
1. Just a quick comment, a university might not be the best place to get accurate information anymore considering the amount of propaganda being shoved down student's throats. 2. Actually, no one has judged him for being a male victim yet, with the exception of some feminists, of course, but that's a whole other story. The only thing people have judged him for is the fact that he, because of his trauma, cannot stand the thought of any kind of homosexual intimacy.
The problem is that students do not get to hear different perspectives so they cannot question them or find out how valid they are. Let's take one example from my third year in the Swedish version of college, we were writing an essay about how gender affects our behaviors. Now, my teacher had always been very keen on teaching us that gender norms are just the result of society and nothing to do with biology - despite most of the scientific community (with the exception of sociologists which is often not even considered a valid field to being with) disagreeing with that - and I included a short part in my essay where I briefly went through the biological and evolutionary traits associated with gender, and despite linking to multiple psychological, neurological and biological studies, he lowered my grade because of that part, and didn't even give me a reason. It wasn't until after I finished the year that I found out that I'm not the only one who has experienced something like this.
@AD240pCharlie so, you got a bad grade and you believe that’s censorship?
Oh, sweetie. You poor little snowflake.
The last PM of Canada made it literally illegal for federally employed scientists to publish any research related to climate change. They had to change conclusions to suit the Conservative Party’s agenda about how the oil industry was good. It’s not even much better now. That’s real censorship. That’s real propaganda.
If you read my comment properly, you'd realize that I never said "censorship", I said "propaganda". It's not censorship because no one stopped me from finding that information. But it IS propaganda because despite what I wrote being scientifically accurate, it wasn't accepted as such because it didn't fit the political agenda of the Swedish education system. And I never said that this is something that conservatives don't do, why do you think we even have this argument to begin with? It's because I hate both the liberal and the conservative agenda because both sides use flawed logic, unreasonable arguments and manipulative debate tactics.
This will lead to keyboard riots as everyone jockeys to be the most vehemently opposed to an ideology that doesn't scream a hate slogan at someone else.
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
49Opinion
I agree I am the same way. but also i try to stay out of politics mostly.
You avoided the main part of libertarianism which is economics. I don't agree with it, but it's a pretty major part of the ideology.
This whole take was solely focusing on society. I may write a take on economics later on.
Yeah I liked this argument. We in Australia call it centralism, I agree with everything you said.
We do? Its not really in the center in the standard authoritarian/libertarian vs conservative/progressive graph so it would seem like a bad label if that is the case (I'm not well versed on Australian political science), I'm rather curious how it came to be called that.
I agree with most of what you said though i dont know many conservatives who dont want privacy. Like Google and Facebook are companies run exclusively by left wingers and they collect and sell your information on.
I have also agreed with libertarians more than both liberals and conservatives. But I only disagree with #8 you mentioned, I see the liberals wanting to usurp privacy more than the conservatives do.
I am a registered libertarian and I can't understand why more people aren't. You don't have to agree with everything but if you agree with most then you should support them
If you do address the economics of libertarianism, please don't forget how to address Zipf's law, and the problem of the rich getting richer, until they control the society, as is happening until Trump.
"Liberals" in the US are really progressives in the rest of the world and libertarians or probably more like liberals in the rest of the world.
Just a reminder to all the US people that they use different words to everyone else.
I can't be libertarian. I can't just give up my sense of empathy.
Who said libertarians weren't empathetic? They just see the bigger picture, and realize that comforting someone for the moment is often doing them great harm in the long run, and that sometimes "tough love" is the only thing that will really help someone.
Take a drug addict. Few addicts want to go to rehab - they're going to suffer mightily when they're detoxing and they'll be miserable for a while, and they know it. But in order to not kill themselves with drugs, that's almost always what has to happen. No one likes seeing them in pain, but the pain serves a much larger purpose.
Too much empathy could (in this example-as-metaphor) lead someone to get a drug addict more drugs so they felt better temporarily - which it would - but would only make the addiction, and all its associated problems, worse. In the long run, that's far more cruel, even if it seems kind in the moment, and you did it with the best of intentions.
@MrOracle they lack empathy. Tough love is just am excuse to be a dick to your loved ones
Sorry I don’t have empathy for the slackers and moochers of this country.
@VaIiant exactly what I'm talking about.
Exactly. My family is in the top 1%, and I had to watch as under Obamacare our health bill went up to several hundred thousand. Why the hell should I have to pay for you?
@VaIiant boohoo, wealthy people had to pay more so people who weren't born with a silver spoon in their asshole and need healthcare and can't afford it could get some
@MrOracle you did not jusr compare fiscal conservaticism to drug rehab.
No one could be that ignorant
@Waffles731 how should my family be responsible for everyone else? That’s ridiculous. We earn our money. You should try it.
@Waffles731 you also didn’t answer. Why should I be responsible for paying for people I don’t know and don’t care about.
@VaIiant why?
Because while life isn't fair doesn't mean we should try to make it so.
In country with the largest economy there is no universal health care like the rest of the western world?
That people die of treatable diseases because they can't pay? Including fucking children?
Why should you because human life and society are worth more than keeping the wealthy as wealthy as possible.
@VaIiant and YOU didn't earn your money, if your family is that wealthy you won't earn anything in life, its all been handed to you
@VaIiant and what's really funny is that people like you claim that those who support universal health care and such are entitled while you have never had to work for a thing in your life
@Waffles731 ok, first off, don’t assume you know ANYTHING about me. Is my family wealthy? Yes. Am I extremely grateful to have grown up with a roof and food and other things? Absolutely. But I worked my ASS off for everything, my dad grew up poor and worked his way up and decided I should do the same. I work two jobs to put myself through one of the top universities in our country, which I got into because I worked damn hard in school.
The government has no place to take such a large chunk of money from my family just because you think they should. Tell you what, go earn a bit, and then tell me how YOU feel when someone takes it all to pay for people who’ve never earned it.
@VaIiant and The reason I didn't answer your question, is because its utterly pathetic when the wealthy claim, 'why should i help people who aren't wealthy through my taxes whaaa,' when there are people who work three jobs just to scrape by on food and rent and can't afford things like healthcare amd other necessities
@VaIiant you are 19 and claiming you worked your ass off to get there, give me a fucking break
@Waffles731 you’re 23 and claiming you know what to do with everyone else’s money. Give me a break.
@VaIiant but you go on keep being a whiny little rich girl.
What's good is that this country particulary my generation has decided that enough is enoug
It’s more then taxes. Three years ago when Obamacare was in act, our health care bill was around 200k. How the fuck is that acceptable when others are paying nothing?
@VaIiant ky claims have been backed up by proof, France has universal health care, The W. H. O rates them as the number one system in the world.
And how is that acceptable?
Because some people despite working their asses off can't afford to pay for themselves or their kids.
Don't claim that its unfair when people die because they or, their parents can't pay for proper treatment
@VaIiant and what's really fucking ironic is people like you call yourselves christians when your views on those less fortunate are, Fuck you got mine, and the environment are, who gives a fuck about the earth
@Waffles731 France has had a reliable health care system for years. Unlike the former health care plan, it’s actuallu decent and covers the wealthy as well.
Hah, I might despise Trump but Obamacare is flailing under his presidency. It won’t last another 2 years. Have fun with your little “waaahhh I’m poor everyone should be responsible for me!!” Tirade. The pendulum is swinging back to conservative, and my family won’t have to cover your ass. Have fun with your liberal ideals.
@VaIiant actually no its not, the fact is that my generation is rhe largest and extremely liberal.
And when the baby, boomers finally do the world a favor and start dying things are going to be different
God never said “if you make $$$ pay for the peeps who don’t”
Don’t try and bring religion into an argument about politics. That’s petty, and shows just how immature you are.
@VaIiant we already elected a democrar in fucking Alabama
@VaIiant not immature at all, want me to start quoting your holy book?
@VaIiant
God did, say this according to your religion
Ezekiel 16:49-50 declares, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me.
@Waffles731 we’re part of the same generation, you realize? The second OUR generation starts making money, they won’t be so liberal. You know what they say.
“If you’re a conservative in your 20’s, you have no heart. If you’re a liberal in your 40’s, you have no brain.”
@VaIiant “Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4 Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5 Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.
6 Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.
7 Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8 Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
9 Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called children of God.
10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
@VaIiant not a very good Christian are you
@VaIiant right you mean the quote that no one can trace the origins of and no, this generation has been shown to be way more liberal than rhe past ones. Things like the recession caused by conservatives and corporate greed have had their effect
@Waffles731 I never said I was Christian. Why are you bringing religion into an argument about POLITICS? Yes, you can google bible quotes, good job. Goddamn you’re moronic. I’m not going to change your views I’m not going to change mine. You’re not worth my time.
Thought we could have a good debate, you googled some bible quotes. Have fun being poor because you think we should all pay for you. Cya.
@VaIiant I've seen you post that you are Christian,
And me, I work and go, to school am I poor? No, I'm going to school to be a PI
But unlike you whiny little rich girl, I give a shit about people other than myself
@VaIiant and as for the good debate?
That was never going to happen since I simply don't like you
@VaIiant if you're that wealthy, be grateful for what you have. Not everyone is born as fortunate as you. And in the situations where parents are poor, it's children who suffer most. You not being able to buy your 3rd vacation home is a lot less dire than children suffering from diseases because their parents cannot afford health care.
This is exactly the mindset I cannot get behind, which is why ill never be libertarian nor conservative again.
@BuchitaBuchys I already said I was extremely grateful for being born into a wealthy family. We also lived below our means, and "vacation home" who do you think I am? Warren Buffet?
I'm perfectly fine with giving hundreds of thousands away by myself. If the charity is honest, and actually helps people in need, I fully support it. (I don't have that kind of money, but for my parents or others who do). But the government has no place in wealth distribution. That's the thing, *its my money*. There has to be a better idea for our country then taxing the shit out of the rich and taking 0% from others. In history, tax for the wealthy has gone up to 95%. Sometimes, its gone to 90% in recent years. How would YOU feel if, for every dollar you made, you got to keep 10 cents? Stop talking about OTHER people's money. What about yours? Are you willing to give every dime to the government without knowing EXACTLY what they're going to do with it?
If the answer is no, and you feel entitled to other peoples hard earned money because you breathe, then this argument is pointless.
@VaIiant I do pay taxes, as you do too. And I am not complaining about it. And you don't give every dime away. Neither do I.
I don't feel entitled to anyone's money. We all pay our share, at least I know I pay.
You're only further proving my point, right leaning folk have less empathy. Hence, why I can't support it. The disregard for others, particularly those in need, is just not in me.
It's not "our share", when some people in this country pay several million dollars in taxes. Your words certainly seem entitled, since you believe other peoples money should pay for your health care/benefits. Yes, my heart goes out to the kids, and I would help them all if I could. But taking every dime from wealthier folk is not the way to go.
(If you have health care that you pay for yourself, I take that last part back and apologize.)
@VaIiant I don't have healthcare actually.
I'm not advocating for myself, since I don't really care about myself. I'm advocating for children who can't pay, who are paying for their parents misfortune, for disabled people who cannot work for their "share", for elderly who cannot.
A libertarian society would weed off the "leaches", but it'll also hurt the vulnerable. While there are those who abuse the system - I fully support welfare reform to remove them; it does create a system of dependency, which, again, I'm fully against and would prefer be eradicated; and also reform on how the system itself is run since a lot of money is wasted on the paper pushing and bureaucracy, but it should still be in place as a safety net for those who cannot.
I argue about this with my boyfriend all the time, he's libertarian, I wouldn't say I'm liberal, but I definitely agree with them more.
@VaIiant and stop saying every dime is being taken, it's obviously not. You still get to keep a lot if not most of your money
Trump once paid roughly $223 million in taxes. How is that okay?
And yes, it will hurt the vunerable. Elderly have social security, but there should be some way to protect kids. But the 20 or 30 somethings who do literally nothing and expect to ride on the wealthy's back? There should be a way to protect the people who can't provide for themselves. But its not taking millions and redistributing it.
@VaIiant ok, but how much does he make though? Last I checked, he's a billionaire. 223 mil out of just 1 billion is a lot yes, but only a 22% tax rate. Which is actually less than what I pay, proportionately, in taxes. They take out about 24% in taxes and I'm nowhere near a billionaire, millionaire, not even a "thousandaire". So yes, you may pay more, Trump may pay more, but contrary to your prior statement, yes I am paying my share in taxes. Proportionately, obviously I cannot afford to pay the exact same as you or Trump, but nearly the same percentage is taken from our checks.
If welfare isn't the solution, which guess what, is not just coming from rich people like you, since I also pay, what is your proposed solution?
It wasn’t a year when he made a billion. He made 470 mil that year. They took 223 mil out of it. I truly don’t think there is a foolproof solution. The world is unfair to a degree. But that degree crosses the line when the government is literally robbing people.
@VaIiant then, yes, that's problematic. Taking nearly half is ridiculous.
Ok, what is your solution, even if it isn't foolproof? All I hear from libertarians and conservatives is eradicating, but nothing to replace it.
I'd concede with welfare reform. In Maryland I think it was, they changed the requirements in that if you're able body, you have to work at least part time. Otherwise, you cannot receive benefits. I fully support that. But they still are giving help to even those that work but cannot afford groceries, healthcare etc. Especially those with families.
I don't think universal healthcare is viable for the US. I'd be more likely to support a free market, truly free market, healthcare. But I still think there should be a safety net for those who even then wouldn't be able to afford it. Hence, why I can't be libertarian.
I’ve always thought that if you were a certain age (say, below 18) you could qualify for some kind of health care, but the problem with that is people always find a way around that. Maybe free health care would work, if it was truly free and was extended to all people in the US. For instance, under Obamacare, my family didn’t get “free health care”. Quite the opposite. It’s not free, it’s just other people paying. That was always my issue with it.
@VaIiant they have/ had kids care from what I remember. But that was back then. But only for low income. Not sure how it's like now.
Nothing will ever be truly free.
But seeing it as "why do I have to pay for others?" Will surely make the more fortunate feel resentment towards the poor.
What solution is there? Even if not foolproof?
I really don’t think there is. Libertarian isn’t so much about weeding out the vulnerable rather as believing the government has no place controlling our finances/benefits/being so integrated into our lives.
anyone in general who is into politics is stupid
its not real
it does not matter
they will never do anything the people
bunch of satanist that need to be killed
Neutral means not playing the game. Vote with your dollar, invest in technology, and wait for The Singluarity. Not that it matters. It's coming. But you can be part of the wave if you like.
I agree with a lot of the social aspects, I just feel like infrastructure and education would go to hell if libertarians ran the country.
Not necessarily. It will just be delegated to the States or the private sector, per the 10th Amendment. With all the schools becoming private schools competing with each other, the price of education should fall & a great variety should be available instead of the Fed. 1-size-fits-all. (In my country of birth, where education is mostly private, you can choose from all sorts of academic approaches: science-based, non-denominational Christian, Catholic Jesuit, Catholic Franciscan, Catholic Dominican, Chinese-Catholic, R. O. C. Chinese, P. R. C. Chinese, S. Korean education, Japanese, Indian, American, etc. with the foreign systems under both our Dept. of Education AND the other nation's min./dept. of education, so the it's recognized in both countries. So, imagine being a foreign exchange student, minus the expensive travel!) For infrastructure, either they'll become private with fees/tickets (which sucks, yes) or they'll be run by the States as they had been before the Fed. takeover.
@N192K001 Education already IS delegated to the states. As is most infrastructure. So if libertarians run the states too, what will happen to education? OK, so private schools will spring up to fill the need. But what if someone doesn't want to pay private tuition for their kid?
@zagor Yes, part of it is delegated to the States, but the Federal hand still grips it with the continued existence of its Federal Department of Education and Federal policies (like Bush's No Child Left Behind and Obama's Common Core), when its supervision should be by the States' boards of education alone, the private's means of regulation (fierce competition, parental vigilance, watchdog groups, industry guilds, etc.), or both. So, depending on the types of libertarians running in power, I would think either private school tuition would be the sole means of funding education since all schools are now private (and taxes have been adjusted downward accordingly), or purely State-run pubic schools remain and a voucher system is implemented for freedom of choice.
@N192K001 Actually the federal influence on education is comparatively minor, relative to the states and local districts.
@zagor True, but the influence is still there, and its student loan programs are retarding the market, hence helping raise the tuition fees to unsustainably high levels.
Without government loans, decreasing enrollments would have forced the universities (now all private) to drop their tuition fees to more reasonable levels to secure more customers and better funding. Without the mass-promotion of student loans, other alternatives would be more widespread here like apprenticeships (pushed in Germany), vocational schools (Singapore), and studying abroad (where tuition is a faction the current U. S. cost, or even free!). Instead, we have a generation saddled with huge, avoidable (or "avoidably huge") debt (that even bankruptcy cannot clear) to start their adulthood.
So, essentially you waste your vote in every election by voting for someone who doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of being elected?
How completely in character and on brand.
It's that attitude that is allowing for these parties never being elected. Imagine if every student ganged up and mass voted a specific party. They would get in! I hate people like you... "Oh, I voted for a party I don't actually like because the person I wanna vote for will never get in".
@InTimoreDei it’s a numbers game, vaquero. You need a majority to win an election, and a presidential candidate needs to win the electoral college. That’s literally never going to happen for a libertarian or independent candidate.
If the only candidate you like is never going to win, why even bother voting in the first place? I mean, I'd rather vote for someone I knew would never win the election than voting for someone I despise. At least then I can stand for what I voted for.
@AD240pCharlie and that's how tyrants get elected - by people who would rather throw away their vote than vote for someone who isn't orange and insane.
If people dared to vote for a third party candidate, let's just say that Trump wouldn't have won. He just won because people saw him as the lesser of two evils, and the way he was treated by the media was what made people sympathize with him a lot more than Hillary.
@AD240pCharlie you don’t have the numbers, and your candidates still would not have won the electoral college
It doesn’t matter if the person has little to no chance of winning. This is about ideology, I’m not going to vote for a political party I’m not enthusiastic about just because they have a higher chance of winning.
How idealistic, key smash.
Tell me: how many people will suffer for your idealism?
Bad question. You don’t give a shit about other people. Just about your ability to make up bullshit fake discrimination.
And it’s obvious you don’t care about the groups I mentioned. I believe everyone should be treated equally and fairly. You however believe certain people should have more privileges than others.
No, I believe in using the system to meet goals instead of believing in fairytales.
Calling something a fairytale just because you don’t agree with it doesn’t make it a fairytale, we’ve discussed this before.
You’re basically trying to force your views onto me, that’s exactly what us libertarians are against. You don’t have to agree with my political views but you still can’t force your views onto me.
In regards to your original comment, just because I’m libertarian doesn’t mean I have to always vote for a libertarian candidate, I can vote for a candidate of a different party that I believe has similar values to the candidate of my political party.
Except you do believe in fairytales. Heterophobia, for example, is a fairytale.
Voting for a libertarian candidate will never result in reducing discrimination of Asian people in America, because a libertarian candidate will never be elected to any meaningful office. So that’s also a fairytale.
You sure like to attack the straw man don’t you.
And you sure like to use fancy words to make yourself look smart.
Doesn’t work though, key smash.
Don’t like to hear the truth do you.
You wouldn’t know what the truth was if it came up to you, introduced itself and bit you on the nose. Not that it would be able to reach your nose, given that your head is shoved so far up your own ass that I’m sure you can watch your own digestion.
There you again with your petty insults. Trust me, I have a lot of insults I could use as well but since I don’t want to break the rules of this website, I censor myself.
If you want to discuss serious topics with me, you should learn some manners first because I can’t take a person seriously if they stoop down to insults just because they disagree with something.
I can’t respect someone who makes a mockery of the scientific method, with no knowledge of or respect for academia and who uses big words to make himself seem intelligent. If you were half as smart as you pretend to be, you would get down off of your high horse and realize that the bullshit discrimination against straight people you literally made up because your feelings got hurt by a standup comedian wasn’t real.
But sure. Advocate for libertarianism. See if you get anywhere.
My friend was raped by a man back in 2016 and because of his trauma, he's disgusted with the idea of homosexuality. He doesn't think that they shouldn't have the same rights as everybody else and he would never judge anyone for being gay, but because of his PTSD, the thought of it makes him panic. Despite having an understandable reason, and despite not wanting to take away any rights for gay people, he's being labeled as a homophobe.
Then there's another friend of mine, a female friend, who was raped by her ex-boyfriend. She used to identify as bisexual but after that experience, she cannot stand the idea of being in a heterosexual relationship and her trauma causes her to be very uncomfortable with the idea of any kind of heterosexual intimacy. But despite it being the exact same thing as my other friend, no one judges her for that. Which they shouldn't, because it's completely valid.
So tell me, how is it NOT heterophobic to treat straight people worse than non-straight people?
@AD240pCharlie oh, no, key smash boy thinks that being mean to straight people is heterophobia
Being "mean" to straight people is not heterophobia.
Treating someone differently because they're straight, THAT'S heterophobia. The same way treating someone differently because they're gay is homophobia, treating someone differently because of their race is racism and treating someone differently because of their gender is sexism. It doesn't matter who it is against. If it's discrimination to do something to someone, then it's also discrimination to do the same thing to anyone else. If it's racist to say something towards one race, then it's racist to say the same thing to any other race.
@AD240pCharlie he literally wrote a take about how mean comedians are to straight people, and so suddenly heterophobia is a thing.
Listen, no one discriminates against you for being straight. You’re not denied jobs or housing or adoptive children or cakes or pizza or literally anything for being straight. I imagine your friend receives more flak for being a male rape victim than he does for being supposedly homophobic, given how narrow a lens through which our culture views masculinity. Having LGBT relationships on TV and comedians making jokes about straight people leaving babies in dumpsters is not discrimination. Not even close.
@AD240pCharlie Are you saying that a person being mean to a gay person because they are gay isn’t homophobic?
Key smash: define being mean to a gay person for being gay.
Astoriana Now you’re attacking masculinity. That’s yet another cue that I should stop replying to you. Also, let me clarify that I’m not a male rape victim.
*sighs* for example calling them the “F” or “D” word depending on their sex.
PS just stop saying “Key smash”
If you had a username that was an actual word, I wouldn’t have to refer to you as a key smash, key smash boy.
You don’t really know how to read, do you?
When talking about the male rape victims, was I talking to you? Did you see me address you? No. Now, please, go be offended by comedians somewhere else.
Then word your sentences better.
Key smash, Charlie’s username was literally highlighted in blue at the beginning of my comment TO HIM. Learn to read.
Whatever you want to say, just don’t expect to change my political views because you will not succeed in doing so. This whole take was simply referring to ideology not who I choose to vote. Kind of ironic that you keep telling me to “learn how to read”.
If all you are going to do is insult someone just for having different political views, them don’t even bother commenting.
Except, key smash boy, you said that you don’t vote for people who have a chance of winning, only libertarians.
Wrong again girl, I never discussed who I would vote for on this take. I did reply that I can vote for someone who’s political views are close enough to a libertarian’s depending on the circumstances.
How short your memory is.
Here’s what you said to me, verbatim:
“This is about ideology, I’m not going to vote for a political party I’m not enthusiastic about just because they have a higher chance of winning.”
Such a Tu Quoque. Plus, do you know what exceptions are?
What have we discussed about using Latin terms that you don’t understand to make yourself look smart? How tiresome.
They are fallacies that you keep using, if you want to me to stop pointing out your fallacies, then stop using fallacious arguments. As a matter of fact, just stop replying if you are not going to contribute anything to this conversation.
But who will point out that you’re a self-important pretentious braggart if I don’t?
Again with the name calling. You know what, this conversation is over. If you want to have discussion with me, then you must first change that attitude.
If you want to do your research before you post your verbal diarrhea, then maybe we won’t have to have these little exchanges, key smash boy. 😜
Kind of funny how you question my credibility when all you’ve been doing is stooping down to petty insults instead of having a civilized discussion. And yes I did research prior to this take but I’m not going to plagiarize sources just to satisfy some self entitled individuals.
It’s not plagiarism when you cite your sources, key smash.
I guess university isn’t in your future.
You would never last in that kind of environment.
Except that I did cite my sources with links. When I gave a speech in my speech class, I cited similar sources and the professor said they are fine.
And no, we are not going to have this conversation again.
For a community college, I’m sure opinion pieces are fine.
But then again, “speech class” sounds like an art course. Hardly proof of your respect for the scientific method, key smash boy.
Sounds like an excuse to me.
1. Just a quick comment, a university might not be the best place to get accurate information anymore considering the amount of propaganda being shoved down student's throats.
2. Actually, no one has judged him for being a male victim yet, with the exception of some feminists, of course, but that's a whole other story. The only thing people have judged him for is the fact that he, because of his trauma, cannot stand the thought of any kind of homosexual intimacy.
@AD240pCharlie
And what do you consider academic propaganda? “Listen to different perspectives but verify that they are real”?
Trauma is complicated, and most people are assholes, irrespective of their unempathetic politics.
The problem is that students do not get to hear different perspectives so they cannot question them or find out how valid they are.
Let's take one example from my third year in the Swedish version of college, we were writing an essay about how gender affects our behaviors. Now, my teacher had always been very keen on teaching us that gender norms are just the result of society and nothing to do with biology - despite most of the scientific community (with the exception of sociologists which is often not even considered a valid field to being with) disagreeing with that - and I included a short part in my essay where I briefly went through the biological and evolutionary traits associated with gender, and despite linking to multiple psychological, neurological and biological studies, he lowered my grade because of that part, and didn't even give me a reason.
It wasn't until after I finished the year that I found out that I'm not the only one who has experienced something like this.
@AD240pCharlie so, you got a bad grade and you believe that’s censorship?
Oh, sweetie. You poor little snowflake.
The last PM of Canada made it literally illegal for federally employed scientists to publish any research related to climate change. They had to change conclusions to suit the Conservative Party’s agenda about how the oil industry was good. It’s not even much better now. That’s real censorship. That’s real propaganda.
If you read my comment properly, you'd realize that I never said "censorship", I said "propaganda". It's not censorship because no one stopped me from finding that information. But it IS propaganda because despite what I wrote being scientifically accurate, it wasn't accepted as such because it didn't fit the political agenda of the Swedish education system.
And I never said that this is something that conservatives don't do, why do you think we even have this argument to begin with? It's because I hate both the liberal and the conservative agenda because both sides use flawed logic, unreasonable arguments and manipulative debate tactics.
@AD240pCharlie please go whine about your grades elsewhere.
I’m not interested.
Privacy is already dead because we gave it away. No one took it from us.
Right Google? Right Facebook?
I dont have any party or veiws I'm just sitting in the middle of the fence watching the fires from both sides
Interesting read. Thanks.
I'm a conservative with libertarian leanings.
This will lead to keyboard riots as everyone jockeys to be the most vehemently opposed to an ideology that doesn't scream a hate slogan at someone else.
The libertarian party is good socially but their whole, fuck you got mine economic, policy is awful
Nice choice. I chose left wing raging feminist as my party.
I hate politics. I would spew all over if I had to choose it as a career choice.