Introducing social programs in a post-cold war america

You know, Demon, you're right, but it's always better to direct criticism at the reds. Attacking libertarians only serves to let those subhuman scum think they win by proxy.

That's your job you lazy bum.

I suppose you're right but I was using government and state as a synonym, although I probably shouldn't.

I don't think you quite know what free enterprise is. None of those things are "free enterprise," they're rights. Free enterprise is a capitalist having the ability to conduct business anyway they want and having the market regulate itself.

How are tariffs and subsidies necessary? Subsidies merely give businesses that shouldn't exist in this economy the staying power to exist. Tariffs are hurting international trade and restricting free enterprise.

Usury didn't what? Go free, or exist? Obviously, usury can exist without a state so I don't know what you mean. I don't understand what you mean by witchhunt. Do you honestly think that people would form mobs in the street to punish someone who they think committed a murder, even though a neutral court of law says otherwise?

Yep, just like in Syria and Libya. I'm glad the US is held in such high esteem that whenever there is a riot against the unjust government, the government can then send men with guns to kill us.

Communists would be just as ignored in Anarchy as they are in Statist times.

Those rights enable free enterprise. Without them, it would be impossible.

Free enterprise is the ability to conduct capitalist ventures in the market as well as make choices regarding purchases. Regulation does not invalidate this.

They keep America in the game as a prominent player.

The vast majority of those 'pre-civilization' societies did not practice any form of blind justice is what I'm getting at.

You're naive if you don't. Emotional people do emotional things, and unopposed demagogues are the worst dictators.

Because the US government is totally the equivalent of a post-cold war Middle Eastern dictatorship.

I'm glad you place so much value in the community's ability to destroy private property.

Collectivism is ignored presently because it is invalidated by our healthy mix of statism and capitalism. Every modern communist's wet-dream is the absolute destruction of the state as an instrument that allows for capitalism's unopposed existence.
Just ask @ComradeLer

I would argue certain points with duke but since it's 11 o clock and im not inclined to go three the mess that is quoting individual parts of the posts on a phone I will just say I am completely amazed by how ridiculous your views are.


There are two things of like to bring up though. By stage a coup I mean the companyvwho controls the military' would realize hey we control the military do we can do anything we want and nobody can say otherwise, let's start a military dictatorship. Also how can you come to the conclusion that monopolies can't exist in a pure spies list society when they did at a time all you rob Paul loonies wanna send us back to, when railroad and oil barons dominated America?

Yes it does. Check this: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/free enterprise?s=t

How does making the economy worse by restricting businesses and propping up bad/unnecessary companies keep America a prominent player?

Now that we're advanced enough that objective judges and juries can be brought in from outside a community that would be most affected by a murder, there can be blind justice, without a state to pay for it.

Then the target of their aggression can hire someone to protect him/her.

Relevant?

It is when they have to use guns to control their population

I would have to be stupid to ignore the potential damage a group of people can do.

Capitalism did that, not whatever regulations and oppression that statism enforced on a country.

When has the us had to shoot people to control the population? The kent state massacre was not needed and was more of the fact that the national guard members panicked. Also , I really can't think of a situation where they have in the last 30 years unless you think ten killing the leader of al quaeda, al awaki, which would be ridiculous because he was the leader of the biggest terrorism organization on the hoddamned planet

On a side note, has anyone ever seen the movie Battle Royale 2? Its told from the perspective of a terrorist and was nearly banned in America for its anti-american message.

Unless you plan to make the argument that the US currently operates under a planned economic system where a state bureaucracy mandates what and how much gets produced, then both definitions in that link describe the state of the US economy perfectly.

They aren't "unnecessary", they're the backbone of our fucking economy.

We've already gone over this. You have no method of enforcement. Justice isn't blind when majority bias can override your objective judge's verdict.

You know what? The police does that shit for a fraction of the cost, and they can't turn me down. With the police I know I'll reach my trial, and should I be found innocent, they'll enforce the verdict.

Are we not still talking about a stateless society?

Right. There is totally zero disconnect between a police force preventing vandalism and a military using live rounds on protesters.

No. The welfare programs and business regulations of the state kept the working class contempt and cock-blocked would-be populist rabblerousers.
Marxism failed because representatives of the working class found common ground with the capitalist class.

I think it would be pretty silly to only hire one company for the entire military. Besides that, what stops the US military from doing that now? In a free market, another business can always start up and compete. You know what those railroad and oil barons did to ensure their monopolies? They broke the law by threatening their competitors. The US government didn't do a damn thing because they were being paid by those barons.

Shay's Rebellion, for one. Bonus Army if you want a more modern example.

What's stopping the us military now? Oh I don't know the fact that it's already controlled by the government and doesn't have a leader with any willingness and want to overthrow the current system. And by splitting the military up, how the hell is it supposed to cooperate?

On your second quote, really? The only thing you can come up with is a minor rebellion that occurred over 200 years ago, when America had just been founded? Also I said the last 30 years.

The grand American rebellion against the Military, we'll charge 'em with our hunting rifles and hand guns we will. All they got is some "tanks" and "jet planes" and "missiles that can hit within 10 feet of a target at the press of a single button" and "millions of automatic rifles" and shit. We got this.

You're being willfully dense. An armed populace isn't capable of resistance by virtue of the strength of its arms, but by virtue of its possession of arms. No military in the world has the capacity to subjugate the United States, and even our own isn't an exception.

Wow that was epic.
And our military isn't like that at all, not like Mali, Egypt, or Thailand.

God I hate dubstep with a passion...

DD pretty much said what I think, so I don't really feel like writing a huge post about this.

Man, that acronym in gonna stick with me for the entirety of my time here. Fucking Chelsea.

If its any consolation, i always reffered to you as Daze.

Dubstep is just an abomination.