|
|
moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
posted November 06, 2010 03:13 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But your other neighbour doesn't feel the need to pay for the military. He is, for example, rich enough to protect himself, or for some reason doesn't want to be protected. Why should, by your logic, he be forced to do it? What about his economic liberties?
Hypothetically, we have two cases here:
a) Everyone gives a little cash for common security since there are people who don't have enough money to defend themselves,
b) Everyone gives a little cash for public healthcare since there are people who don't have enough money to pay the medical bills.
You see what I'm saying? Stick to your principles.
What principles? We already knew he didn't have any. And you pretty much nailed it in this quote, by the way. You should be given a QP for this.
____________
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted November 06, 2010 03:27 PM |
|
|
All of the nations without a military force are so tiny that bothering to have a defense force is rather silly; it would be like buying a crowbar just in case an Imperial Star Destroyer shows up. Also most of those island nations have bartered deals to have the US Navy as an auxiliary force, or they're city-states in Europe that receive protection from their neighbor. I'm not sure if even one of the countries has no protection without any deal being struck also. Probably the closest example among those countries is Costa Rica, which is indeed an awesome motherloving place, but they still live under the shadow of the US.
The US and USSR were both built up and on steroids throughout the Cold War, but the USSR collapsed and the US sat around with a whole bunch of **** that it didn't know what to do with, and more importantly, it was sitting around with a large job market related to the military that it wasn't sure what it was going to do with. The USSR collapsing ushered in an uncomfortable transition for the US, and it still hasn't fully adjusted to that change. Some people did lose their jobs and they had to look elsewhere, but the military remained fairly large, and it has been diligent in keeping itself busy. It acts as an auxiliary or support force for several nations and has also engaged in some invasions in the ME since then. I don't think the wars in the ME were deliberately initiated simply to keep the military-industrial complex rolling for the sake of the market, but I do believe it has been a passive agent in those decisions. If you have something, you're inclined to use it, otherwise more and more people still start questioning why so much is being invested in it.
It's all very unfortunate.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
|
posted November 06, 2010 03:33 PM |
|
|
Because anyone in this day and age can get away with "conquering" a country and owning it?
____________
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted November 06, 2010 03:34 PM |
|
|
Seriously, Elodin, if you really give 50% of your income to charity then you have my utter respect; but like I said and as Moonlith quoted, military and healthcare taxes function rather similarly. By participating in military taxation, you're effectively using the "charity" of taxpayers; you can't provide for your own defence and security, so everyone chips in and everyone's "protected". Is it that hard to understand that a similar system, just used for healthcare instead of military protection, is ethically on the same (or arguably higher) level? Sure, paying your own medical bills is cheaper than providing your own private military, but it's still not cheap, and some impoverished people just don't have that kind of money.
In the end, it's not "charity" if you benefit from it all as well, and by getting healthcare in return for your tax money, you're certainly benefiting from it.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted November 06, 2010 03:59 PM |
|
|
Why only military spending? Why stop there? What about the money that's spent trying to find out if there is life on Mars when life is slipping here? I don't want another penny spent trying to determine if water has been on Mars, when we have problems concerning Earth's water. People walk around hungry and cold right here. Save all that taxpayer money too and feed and clothe people that...once upon a time, used to be taxpayers, before the power behind the thone decided to send all work overseas.
Greed is the enemy of life. I have to add stupidity too. The American taxpayer has paid more for the aid of other folks around the world than any other country and yet that same tax-base has/is been/being leveled?
Someone mentioned Japan. Let's look there from the eyes of Am. taxpayers. Japan starts a war. Taxes for an army to defeat it. Japan defeated. We dictate "you will have no military past your version of boy-scouts" We supply defense of that nation for many years(20?). All the while Japan without any real need for military spending "rebuilds". American companies set-up shop. All the while the Marshall plan is in full swing around the World doing the same thing (giving tax money)in several large countries. Japan emerges far stronger in the MFG. sector (steel etc.). Japan kicks old "made in Japan" slam-dunk, by making good stuff in the 70s, and partly through the help of Am. "Quality Guru, Deming". Fast forward...Japan ends up owning several U.S. Banks.
I Have no idea where Japan is now, financially. The same Greed started happening there and the rest of S.E. Asia has been on the rise to where we now have China and all that goes with that....i.e."dictating money conditions in their trade deficit with us" and "American jobs being sent there over the last decade or more, and of course the loss of that same tax base that has truly, helped the world.
And the beat goes on.
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted November 06, 2010 04:27 PM |
|
|
Outsourcing labor is not a bad thing; it's an almost natural occurrence and it allows products to become more affordable for more consumers, which will in turn increase the demand for it while still allowing it to stay relatively cheap. The American job market gradually will (and has) transferred to being service and development oriented. The same thing will happen to China eventually, which will pose more opportunity for African nations willing to take the brunt of their current manufacturing. There are some conservatives that whine about it because there aren't as many manufacturing jobs around, and there are some social democrats that whine about it because the people in poorer countries aren't being paid enough to drive around in a Lexus, but ultimately, it is a good thing for everybody.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted November 06, 2010 06:36 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Why only military spending? Why stop there? What about the money that's spent trying to find out if there is life on Mars when life is slipping here? I don't want another penny spent trying to determine if water has been on Mars, when we have problems concerning Earth's water.
Because, unlike another Abrams tank, space science may bring some good. Another tank, jet or destroyer will just bring more destruction and death. Who needs that and why to agree to pay for that? Militarists should donate the army, and pacifists shouldn't be forced to pay for something they detest.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted November 06, 2010 06:54 PM |
|
|
To go briefly back to the subject of Palin, I found it lultastic that even George W Bush is dissing her 
George W Bush rips on Palin
She is so hot though. omg.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted November 06, 2010 07:00 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Why only military spending? Why stop there? What about the money that's spent trying to find out if there is life on Mars when life is slipping here? I don't want another penny spent trying to determine if water has been on Mars, when we have problems concerning Earth's water. People walk around hungry and cold right here.
The money invested in NASA has been repaid many times over by the breakthrough technologies that have had other applications. Space exploration should continue instead of being downsized like the current administration is doing.
What if there were once life on Mars and we discover a treasure trove of ancient tech there? You never know what lies out there. I had thought as a child that I would live to see a colony on Mars. I doubt now that that will happen in my lifetime. But perhaps a manned research base. It has already been established that there is water on Mars by the way.
Oh, there will always be the poor for a number of reasons, including:
1) Lack of a work ethic;
2) Oppressive rulers--the primary reason for poverty in third world nations. Often the tyrants confiscate aid that groups send in and distribute the confiscated goods to their own supporters or use it to enrich themselves;
3) unfortunate circumstances;
Private charity, not the government stealing money from people, is the way to address poverty. Private groups can hold people accountable for their actions and make sure aid goes to those who actually can't work, not to the lazy who won't work.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. Assuming the man is not to lazy to fish.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 06, 2010 10:41 PM |
|
|
bak:
If he doesn't want to be defended, then he's asking to be robbed. He clearly has something wrong with him and so can't be considered a responsible decision-maker.
If he's rich enough to defend himself, it doesn't matter because even if he can afford to pay for security, it still makes him better off to pay less to receive better defence. If he can pay $40 in tax instead of $80 to the company, he's going to choose the $40. And it makes me better off too, because I'd be getting better defence for $40 instead of having to pay the relatively high (and potentially unaffordable) $80.
Quote:
a) Everyone gives a little cash for common security since there are people who don't have enough money to defend themselves,
b) Everyone gives a little cash for public healthcare since there are people who don't have enough money to pay the medical bills.
The difference is that it's in people's self-interest to pay for security. It has nothing to do with people who "don't have enough money". It's not in people's self-interest to pay for other people's health care (at least not to the extent that nationalised health care advocates are saying).
That said, the US is definitely spending too much on the military.
DF:
That's somewhat disingenuous. Who'd want to invade Kiribati? It has nothing of value. The US is quite different.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted November 06, 2010 11:40 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Private charity, not the government stealing money from people, is the way to address poverty. Private groups can hold people accountable for their actions and make sure aid goes to those who actually can't work, not to the lazy who won't work.
While that is true, I still fail to see what the difference of a commission under the goverment and a private interest group when it comes to being responsible for spending money quite poorly.
The private group is only liable for whatever terms they break on the contract, the commission is only liable for what it fails to do of the assigned job. Both will result in major consequences, providing the organs that supervise is actually watching.
The goverment only "bad side" is that its the top of the control set, which is why its such a major problem in any society: It needs something to keep the power in check to make sure thats derail in a effective way, and not in a ineffective corrupt way.
Which again brings us back to my main point: A group commissioned by the goverment will still suffer the exact same problems as a private group, if it fails to do what it was suppose to do.
So... besides the top level, why is the private groups more accountable?
____________
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 07, 2010 12:36 AM |
|
|
Quote:
If he doesn't want to be defended, then he's asking to be robbed. He clearly has something wrong with him and so can't be considered a responsible decision-maker.
really? by being defended he clearly shows he owns something of value, and clearly shows he doesn't trust people around him. and when you absolutely want to see the worst in people (that they could be thiefs for example) don't expect them to show their best.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 07, 2010 12:40 AM |
|
|
A thief isn't going to care what I think about him. He's only going to worry about two things - how much valuable stuff I have and how difficult it is to get.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted November 07, 2010 01:09 AM |
|
Edited by baklava at 01:15, 07 Nov 2010.
|
Come on, MVass, you can do better.
If someone's an irresponsible decision maker - it will just bite him in the back; you mentioned that yourself a hundred times as a virtue of the capitalist society.
If you, for example, want to sell a car, you're legally allowed to hang a sign that reads "I took a crap on the front seat every week for the last three years" on it and set the price to 5 million dollars. No one is going to buy it, but that's your own problem.
Same should, in a society that values economic freedom more than anything else, apply to protection. If I don't care if I get blown up by Al Qaeda, annexed by the Chinese, pillaged by the Huns and abducted by sentient refrigerators from Alpha Centauri, I shouldn't be forced to pay for the bloody military. Whatever happens to me is my own fault. I decide what's in my best interests, not you or anyone else. No one has the right to make me pay for something I don't want. Right?
Also everything else you said applies to healthcare, too. Now you're going to say, nuh-uh, I get better protection for less money if I'm protected by the public military, while I get better medcare if I pay for it myself.
First of all, the military is currently sending you and your kids (well, not you or your kids if you're rich enough, but an ordinary taxpayer isn't) to fight Iraqis who, by now, have no way of harming the US, in the name of spreading democracy to them. Before that, they were sent to Iraq (again), Afghanistan, then Yugoslavia, Vietnam and other countries which had nothing against you in person, simply under the motive of Helping The Oppressed Over There (or at least, that's the attitude they took once they found out there was no real threat to the USA there). In fact, many people in those countries, now that the Americans have intervened, currently HAVE something against ALL AMERICANS in person. How is that in your personal interests, or for your own protection?
As I see it, the way things are now, there are two kinds of people - people who pay for the military, and people who control it. The people who pay for it, or ordinary people, don't control it, and vice versa. You're paying to depend on someone else's private army, and like you said, you're making it cheaper for them.
Secondly, I don't see anyone complaining about the north European healthcare, for example. And imagine using ONE THIRD of what you give to the military for the public health system. It'd be far better and more efficient, and you wouldn't feel any change in terms of "protection", except that the new depleted-uranium bombs reserved for some people with towels on their heads would get researched a few months later.
Well, that's the gist of it. Geez, haven't written long posts in the OSM for a while. Kinda tiresome.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted November 07, 2010 01:33 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Why only military spending? Why stop there? What about the money that's spent trying to find out if there is life on Mars when life is slipping here? I don't want another penny spent trying to determine if water has been on Mars, when we have problems concerning Earth's water.
Quote:
Because, unlike another Abrams tank, space science may bring some good. Another tank, jet or destroyer will just bring more destruction and death. Who needs that and why to agree to pay for that? Militarists should donate the army, and pacifists shouldn't be forced to pay for something they detest.
While I agree with your thinking, how does that feed someone? Why are certain programs beloved and untouched at times of crisis? Why cannot things be halted for time to improve things where needed? Etc.
Oh well, I am a fish out of water. I don't get this world at all anymore nor the way choices are weighed.
Btw, about military spending. Have you read Pres. Eisenhower's farewell address? 1959? I think. There we had an ex-general warning of things to come. We've led the world in making weapons. Sell the old stuff and then wonder why the world is so combative? Hmmm?
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted November 07, 2010 02:03 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Why only military spending? Why stop there? What about the money that's spent trying to find out if there is life on Mars when life is slipping here? I don't want another penny spent trying to determine if water has been on Mars, when we have problems concerning Earth's water. People walk around hungry and cold right here.
Quote:
The money invested in NASA has been repaid many times over by the breakthrough technologies that have had other applications. Space exploration should continue instead of being downsized like the current administration is doing.
Maybe what American's need then is the right to say where "their" tax-dollars go. Let yours go to space. I'll send mine to Medicare, it's bankrupt..now. Fair enough?
Quote:
What if there were once life on Mars and we discover a treasure trove of ancient tech there? You never know what lies out there. I had thought as a child that I would live to see a colony on Mars. I doubt now that that will happen in my lifetime. But perhaps a manned research base. It has already been established that there is water on Mars by the way.
Ya know, I can think like that but not before things are straightened out here...now.
Quote:
Oh, there will always be the poor for a number of reasons, including:
1) Lack of a work ethic;
2) Oppressive rulers--the primary reason for poverty in third world nations. Often the tyrants confiscate aid that groups send in and distribute the confiscated goods to their own supporters or use it to enrich themselves;
3) unfortunate circumstances;
Private charity, not the government stealing money from people, is the way to address poverty. Private groups can hold people accountable for their actions and make sure aid goes to those who actually can't work, not to the lazy who won't work.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. Assuming the man is not to lazy to fish.
I know that quote. I said it a few times a long time ago. As
Dylan said "the times are a changin'" There are too few jobs...worldwide for the population that lives on it. One Arab leader says the best way he could stop terrorism was with...jobs. Half of his countries 20-30 year old males had no work. We've sent lots of ours to China and the far east, who will give the Middle-East the work they need? And so and so. i just saw a DvD about Scotland. All of their lighthouses are "automated". Where is this crap going to end?
Tech. is not all friend, by a longshot. It is replacing livelyhoods that used to be done with real people. Good grief look at gas stations, banks, stores etc. Gone are all kinds of jobs replaced with one person and a computer. Robots doing welding jobs and computers made to sound like some babe and taking away entire 'call centers. Good paying jobs too. Computers are being made to do the programming now. Just what is the hard-working man going to be doing in the next centuries after more good-idea-tech.? Everyone will be here playing HoMM23 because they won't have to work any more? Robots will do it all for them. Thank God. I'll never see the day. I miss splitting fire-wood.. with an axe, maul and sledge. I must be a certified lunatic.
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted November 07, 2010 03:04 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 03:06, 07 Nov 2010.
|
Quote:
Maybe what American's need then is the right to say where "their" tax-dollars go. Let yours go to space. I'll send mine to Medicare, it's bankrupt..now. Fair enough?
NASA is a matter of national security, welfare is not. Welfare should the be the domain of charity. Taxes should have nothing to do with it.
Quote:
Ya know, I can think like that but not before things are straightened out here...now.
Things on earth will never be straightened out until Christ returns. There will always be evil oppressive tyrants who keep their people in poverty and who want to conquer the world. There will always be people who will not work. There will always be unfortunate circumstances.
Quote:
One Arab leader says the best way he could stop terrorism was with...jobs.
But that is untrue. There are very well off and even wealthy terrorists. Terrorism is about an ideology, not poverty.
Oh, and the poverty in Arab nations has to do with oppression by tyrants. That is why there are no jobs there.
Oh, I agree that the globalists in charge of the US are responsible for exporting good manufacturing jobs to China. Nonetheless, there are in fact jobs in the US that are not filled. And I came out of deep poverty by working long, hard hours, several jobs at a time.
I've done a lot of that splitting fire wood myself.
I believe in charity. People helping people. Not the government stealing money from one person to give to another. People are ideally helped by their friends and family. Help should come on as local a level as possible, preferably by someone who gives a **** about the person and who will hold the person accountable for also trying to help himself.
Quote:
First of all, the military is currently sending you and your kids (well, not you or your kids if you're rich enough, but an ordinary taxpayer isn't) to fight Iraqis who, by now, have no way of harming the US, in the name of spreading democracy to them.
Utterly false. The US troops and Iraqis have been fighting side by side against terrorists who do in fact have ways of harming the US and who have done so before.
If you live in a nation you are protected by the military. You benefit from the military and the nation could not exist without the military. It is fair that some of your tax money goes to support the military.
The government can't solve every problem and make life a utopia for everyone. The government should be as small and as unobtrusive as possible. Which is one of the things the Tea Party is about.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted November 07, 2010 10:30 AM |
|
|
Quote:
DF:
That's somewhat disingenuous. Who'd want to invade Kiribati? It has nothing of value. The US is quite different.
Doesn't matter. An erroneous statement (no nation can exist without military) is still erroneous. Costarica has almost 5 million people so it's not a pea-sized country, too. I'm not trying to prove military is useless because Kiribati has none; merely that the statement was wrong.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted November 07, 2010 03:19 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But that is untrue. There are very well off and even wealthy terrorists. Terrorism is about an ideology, not poverty.
Oh, and the poverty in Arab nations has to do with oppression by tyrants. That is why there are no jobs there.
Still, the terrorists have to be recruited somewhere. They will have to had seen something which convinces them enough to ignore reality and do what they do.
The "high educated terrorists" are a minority who does what they do with passion, if just those was terrorists, they would be so short on manpower that they would never be able to do anything.
So... what we get is that you got a unemployed man somewhere, who has seen how snowty life is. He hears that the infidel Americans has been raping left and right, and going from what he sees, its actually somewhat true. The local milita is looking for someone to carry out acts of terror, the guy fits perfectly and is convinced.
Lets say the guy had a job, and there was no signs of infidel Americans raping left and right.... would he be a terrorist? Most likely not.
Then he would just be another peaceful muslim doing his work and praying once a day.
What a tyrant would do, is to make sure the signs are present, and that the kids will learn that the "infidel americans" made it happen. So that when things get snowty, or when manpower is needed for heists, the young ones are ready and fiercely devoted to the cause.
So.... then I would like to hear your argument on why jobs and prosperity does not stop terrorism.
Quote:
Oh, I agree that the globalists in charge of the US are responsible for exporting good manufacturing jobs to China. Nonetheless, there are in fact jobs in the US that are not filled. And I came out of deep poverty by working long, hard hours, several
jobs at a time.
You would never have came out of poverty is there was no jobs you could have filled or created which was profitable enough to get your out of the poor class of society.
You could have gotten stuck moving into a city, along with many many others, and gotten stuck in the slum, living snowty for your entire life.
Now..... the slums never remove themselves, and in all nations children WILL be working unless they are in middelclass or higher, unless the goverment makes laws that forces those children who should be at school and getting a proper education, instead of being sent to work, which again just ends up enforcing the status quo in the long run.
This of course implies that education is "good enough", and that we are all not just acting like idiots because we are living in the ghetto.
Quote:
I believe in charity. People helping people. Not the government stealing money from one person to give to another. People are ideally helped by their friends and family. Help should come on as local a level as possible, preferably by someone who gives a **** about the person and who will hold the person accountable for also trying to help himself.
My problem is that I do not believe in a ideal society, i do not see a single reason for that it would in the end work as intended without major aftereffects that hurts society as a whole.
Well, people work still help people, and they would help people that is out of job for a short while. So, that part would work. And I want society to be like that, because that part of society would actually work.
On the other hand, my problems with your view of the ideal is that it would collapse when we involve corporate private insurance services. A few would be able to afford them(from a relative point of view), and a few would be lucky enough to be on a good one when the accident would happen. And a lot of economic stuff that is really a pain to attempt to discuss, along with the fact that something can always fail no matter how good the idea is.
Doomforge & others: Lets replace "army" with "ability to strike back if attacked", and the example is valid. A country without that ability would be free for the taking, since humans are snows, and there is something over there that makes it worth attacking.
____________
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted November 07, 2010 05:05 PM |
|
|
Going for the strikebacks can only lead to humanity's demise. US is working on lots of purely offensive weapons instead of developing better ways to defend their land. Stealth bombers are an excellent example.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
