Hi Dilip:
Pargat marches to his own drummer.......sometimes we agree.....sometimes not.
Libertarianism
Progressive Taxation is NOT "Legal Theft".....it is the WILL of the Majority. If the obscenely wealthy don't like progressive taxation, then let them try to get more control of the system than they already have, and get it deleted from the law.............and Natural Law is first and foremost "BALANCE".......I happen to know something about "Natural Law"........Natural Law will never allow the current Capitalist Wage Gap!!! And your Libertarianism has given no indication of how it (A Capitalist system from my point of view & Wikipedia's - see below) will prevent the necessary growth of the wage gap without any kind of regulation. Libertarianism and Natural Law are in contradictory modes - there is an internal contradiction in Libertarianism!!
You need to read up on your Libertarianism:
Wikipedia
"Libertarianism (from French: libertaire, 'libertarian'; from Latin: libertas, 'freedom') is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as a core value.[1][2][3][4] Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and political freedom, and minimize the state's encroachment on and violations of individual liberties; emphasizing the rule of law, pluralism, cosmopolitanism, cooperation, civil and political rights, bodily autonomy, freedom of association, free trade, freedom of expression, freedom of choice, freedom of movement, individualism, and voluntary association.[4][5] Libertarians are often skeptical of or opposed to authority, state power, warfare, militarism and nationalism, but some libertarians diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing economic and political systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power. Different categorizations have been used to distinguish various forms of Libertarianism.[6][7] Scholars distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital, usually along left–right or socialist–capitalist lines.[8] Libertarians of various schools were influenced by liberal ideas.[9]
In the mid-19th century,[10] libertarianism originated as a form of left-wing politics such as anti-authoritarian and anti-state socialists like anarchists,[11] especially social anarchists,[12] but more generally libertarian communists/Marxists and libertarian socialists.[13][14] These libertarians sought to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, or else to restrict their purview or effects to usufruct property norms, in favor of common or cooperative ownership and management, viewing private property as a barrier to freedom and liberty.[19] While all libertarians support some level of individual rights, left-libertarians differ by supporting an egalitarian redistribution of natural resources.[20] Left-libertarian[26] ideologies include anarchist schools of thought, alongside many other anti-paternalist and New Left schools of thought centered around economic egalitarianism as well as geolibertarianism, green politics, market-oriented left-libertarianism and the Steiner–Vallentyne school.[30] After the fall of the Soviet Union, libertarian socialism grew in popularity and influence as part of anti-war, anti-capitalist and anti- and alter-globalisation movements.[31][32]
In the mid-20th century, American right-libertarian[35] proponents of anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted[13] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.[36] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States.[34] "
Bob A (DM'er)
COVID-19 ... how we cope :)
Collapse
X
-
Bob,
It seems you have hired the nasty trolling services of Pargat to not have to yourself respond to posts which expose the stupidity of DM... you need to admit that legal theft is immoral, when there are other fair ways to avoid unfair exploitation of the 'not so wealthy'...Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Saturday, 23rd September, 2023, 04:13 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View PostCovid-19 - Uptick Expected with the Fall
[Trying to get the thread back on message]
Americas - USA
Biden Administration Announces $600M to Produce No-Cost COVID Tests
https://time.com/6316160/covid-tests...lctg=206908353
Bob A (Position: It is not a Higher Authority plot to achieve depopulation; it is a biological warfare "Oops")
Bob A, I am truly sorry that Dilip continues trolling this Covid-19 thread and many other threads launched by you that are NOT about political systems.
He calls me a nasty troll, yet he continues to invade all these non-political threads with his Libertarianism BS. If anyone should be banned from posting here, it should be Dilip.
I contributed here by responding to his latest gibberish .... but I suppose a Covid-19 thread cannot help but be transformed into a political thread .... ?
Any kind of worldwide pandemic is definitely going to cause deep political ramifications. But Dilip's trolling is really getting shrill and he just seems to be losing control of himself. He's so desperate to be rich! LOL
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Dilip Panjwani View Post
Of course Libertarianism will soon be having its small step beginnings in Canada with our next Prime Minister Pierre P!
And I do not answer questions from nasty trolls generally, for obvious reasons...
So here's a tough question for you: you are quoted in a later post here writing:
"Why do you (Bob A.) not go for a system which gives everyone access to capital? Even laborers can join hands and become entrepreneurial laborers, if they are not happy with what their employer is offering them as wages..."
Excuse me, but this is EXACTLY what started to happen with the dot-com boom in from the mid-90s to about 2002. I think it was March 2002 or thereabouts when the dot-com bubble burst with a tremendous implosion.
Everyone and their grandmothers were starting their own dot-com business online. Laborers, you bet! They all wanted out of the factory or construction jobs and into the world of big business! Any old idea .... let's sell pet rocks online! Next thing you know, VC firms are putting money into it because it was the craze to do so, with almost no analysis of the underlying ideas.
The bubble had to burst, it is a model that cannot work. Libertarianism is fundamentally flawed. If you offer capital to all, then all will take it and .... almost none of them have an actual workable idea. What then happens to that capital? Poof! Vanished!
Why Dilip do YOU not go for a system in which you recognize that good ideas are few and far between and only those who actually HAVE them should be allowed access to capital? And when these few people with good ideas actually reach a pinnacle of success, and BEFORE they can use their profits to own multiple mansions and yachts and Lear jets --
all of which create a different and more obscene and threatening kind of bubble which takes much longer to burst but will burst with global depression implications, which we are on the cusp of right now and which we experienced in the 1930s --
you force them to give back PART OF their profits for the betterment of society at large?
As Bob Gillanders has written, there should be a reasonable limit on wealth. Bob G. uses an arbitrary value, but maybe it should be a percentage of GDP or something dynamic like that. In any event, it acts as a damper to prevent negative feedback.
Let me use an analogy from audio engineering: if a band is playing a song, and one particular frequency is allowed via feedback to soar in value far above all the other frequencies (analogous to some out-of-control capitalist whose net worth soars far above 99% of the other individual net worths), what do you get? A distorted sound where that one frequency dominates completely and makes everyone cover their ears. So an audio engineer dampens those frequencies having this feedback property. The analogy is not quite right, because the dampened frequency is not "redistributed" to other frequencies, but the principle is the same. Feedback generally needs to be limited.
You call this theft ... others call it redistribution ... it is really just dampening of undesired feedback with redistribution to the rest of the system. It is NECESSARY for the health of the system. In fact, the very reason it is taking SO LONG for this wealth bubble to burst is because we DO HAVE some feedback dampening via taxation ... so we have in fact stretched out the time it takes for the feedback to reach ear-piercing levels. What we DON'T have is the proper level of this feedback dampening. I believe this is what Bob G. is calling for, more dampening / redistribution.
So answer these questions if you can:
1. Why cannot Libertarianism allow limitation of access to capital to only those whose ideas pass at the very least a "smell test"?
2. Why cannot Libertarianism see that uncontrolled wealth needs to be dampened and redistributed for the good of the system, with the only constraint being that the entrepreneurs who achieved success are still rewarded sufficiently as to entice OTHERS with good ideas to follow in their footsteps?
Neither of these questions even addresses Natural Law, which has already been shown to be simply dictatorship in disguise, because SOME entity at the top decides exactly WHAT the Natural Law is that must be consistently pressed upon the entire society ... that is to say, what constitutes and what does NOT constitute the ephemeral concept of "fair competition".
It is the combination of this dictatorial Natural Law, together with the refusal to allow any feedback dampening and the idea that capital should be almost equally accessible to all. that damns Libertarianism to the political hinterlands.Last edited by Pargat Perrer; Saturday, 23rd September, 2023, 03:29 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View PostHi Guys:
The variety of individuals makes the world go round.......actually, I like individuals........I even have some individual friends....
What I don't like are:
1. systems that give individuals obscene influence/wealth for little reason (Inherited wealth = capital = advantage over labour).
2. Similarly I do not like it when one individual is obscenely wealthy from the system, yet the system demands a large pool of impoverished INDIVIDUALS to keep it running (Individuals who are in a couple, both working a few part-time jobs, and trying to raise two kids on minimum wage).
3. Individuals who are adamant about keeping the obscene wage gap between INDIVIDUALS around the world because they are winning (Due to advantages the system showers on them).
Yes, the common good should come before the individual......humans are a social species. But the rights of the Individual are also to be respected and protected from the tyranny of the majority, which can happen in any system.
Bob A (DM'er)
You are not the only one who hates a system that give individuals obscene wealth generation power just because they have exclusive access to capital; Libertarians hate Capitalism too.
But as a Marxist you decide to have even a worse system that robs even truly hard and smart working individuals, with legal theft (in Socialism the theft is partial, and in Marxism it is total!)
Why do you not go for a system which gives everyone access to capital? Even laborers can join hands and become entrepreneurial laborers, if they are not happy with what their employer is offering them as wages...
How many times does someone have to remind you that legal theft is wrong when there are other fair ways to provide good opportunities to all (in which even the lazy bums would realize that they need to develop themselves and work to survive, and maybe start making a decent effort...)?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View PostHi Peter:
Thanks.
1010??
Bob A
Leave a comment:
-
Covid-19 - Uptick Expected with the Fall
[Trying to get the thread back on message]
Americas - USA
Biden Administration Announces $600M to Produce No-Cost COVID Tests
https://time.com/6316160/covid-tests...lctg=206908353
Bob A (Position: It is not a Higher Authority plot to achieve depopulation; it is a biological warfare "Oops")Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Friday, 22nd September, 2023, 04:25 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Hi Guys:
The variety of individuals makes the world go round.......actually, I like individuals........I even have some individual friends....
What I don't like are:
1. systems that give individuals obscene influence/wealth for little reason (Inherited wealth = capital = advantage over labour).
2. Similarly I do not like it when one individual is obscenely wealthy from the system, yet the system demands a large pool of impoverished INDIVIDUALS to keep it running (Individuals who are in a couple, both working a few part-time jobs, and trying to raise two kids on minimum wage).
3. Individuals who are adamant about keeping the obscene wage gap between INDIVIDUALS around the world because they are winning (Due to advantages the system showers on them).
Yes, the common good should come before the individual......humans are a social species. But the rights of the Individual are also to be respected and protected from the tyranny of the majority, which can happen in any system.
Bob A (DM'er)
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Dilip Panjwani View Post
Bob, you should know that Fascism is: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.
Marxism does often directly lead to Fascism as History shows us...
They are so very very committed.
Truly afraid of the Individual and what can be achieved by the Individualist spirit.
And that's a cray thing!
How can you unionize an idea? Only by force ... sigh.
Bob A. and his ilk, are truly afraid of the Individual ... and that Dilip is a very tragic thing.
Last edited by Neil Frarey; Friday, 22nd September, 2023, 01:50 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View PostDilip
You do know that on the political spectrum, according to definitions generally accepted, Marxism and Fascism are polar opposites?
I'd prefer you disparagingly refer to DM as "Authoritarian Marxism", if you really intend in future to continue damning DM. Much preferred to "fascist DM systems (Your words)"
Bob A
Marxism does often directly lead to Fascism as History shows us...
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Pargat Perrer View Post
He never provided answers (other than technobabble) to any questions addressed to him about Libertarianism,
Fortunately, there is no Libertarianism on the horizon so we can safely ignore him.
And I do not answer questions from nasty trolls generally, for obvious reasons...
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View PostDilip
You do know that on the political spectrum, according to definitions generally accepted, Marxism and Fascism are polar opposites?
I'd prefer you disparagingly refer to DM as "Authoritarian Marxism", if you really intend in future to continue damning DM. Much preferred to "fascist DM systems (Your words)"
Bob A
I think it is now very apparent that Dilip has no clue. He never provided answers (other than technobabble) to any questions addressed to him about Libertarianism, then he turns around and says you guys won't answer HIS questions. He is always the pot calling the kettle black. Whenever anyone should put the foot down on his fantasy Libertarian idealist notions like his undefinable Natural Law, he screams "Troll!"
He wants to be a rich man with no limitations placed on him by society or the government. He sees Libertarianism as the pathway to his fantasy. He sees judges and police as incorruptible, yet lawyers are all liars and scumbags -- this is the hallmark of one who desires a pure police state.
Fortunately, there is no Libertarianism on the horizon so we can safely ignore him.
Leave a comment:
-
Dilip
You do know that on the political spectrum, according to definitions generally accepted, Marxism and Fascism are polar opposites?
I'd prefer you disparagingly refer to DM as "Authoritarian Marxism", if you really intend in future to continue damning DM. Much preferred to "fascist DM systems (Your words)"
Bob A
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bob Gillanders View Post
You are a wise man Fred. I am glad to see your posts were reinstated.
I am happy to be one of the silent observers, but you know, it is tempting.
I like to think that my previous post was more akin to turning the garden hose on them from a safe distance.
I see Dilip's reply to both of us is quite lame, best just to leave it hanging out there.
Have a nice day.
What else could one expect of folks who enjoy oil companies or the hard and smart working being put into unnecessary trouble by fascist DM systems...?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Fred Harvey View Post
What is the old saying? Don't mud wrestle with pigs, because the pigs will enjoy it.......
I am happy to be one of the silent observers, but you know, it is tempting.
I like to think that my previous post was more akin to turning the garden hose on them from a safe distance.
I see Dilip's reply to both of us is quite lame, best just to leave it hanging out there.
Have a nice day.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: