• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

United States Election: Nov 6, 2012 |OT| - Barack Obama Re-elected

Status
Not open for further replies.
hokahey said:
Wow. You sound like those neo-cons talking to war protestors in the Bush years.
Click to expand...
If you're so far gone as to question the ethics of basic taxation, the system by which every civil society in history has operated, it's hard to know what approach to take. It's wackadoodle talk.
 
hokahey said:
Please state the circumstance in which it is ethical for you to take my money to pay for something for yourself, that you couldnt work just as hard to have for yourself.
Click to expand...

To be clear, are we talking about the real world or are we doing a thought experiment?

In thought experiment land, this is trivially easy. Do you really need examples?

In the real world, health care costs are an easy example, if I live in a society where it's not possible to get reliable insurance with a preexisting condition. I'm not taking only your money to pay for it, of course. That's a pretty clear case of self-defense.

Edit: If you're looking for general principles then I'd basically refer you to Rawls. There's also a difference between working within an existing process or institution and going around taking money at gunpoint. Both because they're in-principle different things and because the latter is much more likely to actually cause more harm than good.

And I'd still like to know why anyone would think it's generally unethical.
 
hokahey said:
Strawman.

The question was is it ethical to forcibly take money from someone to pay for services of someone else?

And any good liberal decries the military industrial complex right?

Damn the man! Give him all your money!
Click to expand...

Damn, you Americans do realize pretty much every other MODERN 1st world country does this right? Do you think places like Canada are like some kind of crazy communist wastelands? America is the outlier here.
 
Samyy said:
Damn, you Americans do realize pretty much every other MODERN 1st world country does this right? Do you think places like Canada are like some kind of crazy communist wastelands? America is the outlier here.
Click to expand...

Thankfully, fantasy land libertarians are also outliers in America
 
Gary Whitta said:
If you're so far gone as to question the ethics of basic taxes, it's hard to know what approach to take. It's wackadoodle talk.
Click to expand...

It's easy to avoid a question and use ad hominem attacks. It's another to break it down to the basics and actually debate the ethics of the system at it's core.

P.s. Loved Book of Eli. ;)
 
hokahey said:
Depending on the service, it's often a private firm. But yes, as it stands, the local police would eventually become involved.
Click to expand...
And if the culprit for the alarm is a thief, and if he is caught, how is he brought to justice? I assume you hire a private firm to have him assassinated?
 
hokahey said:
Please state the circumstance in which it is ethical for you to take my money to pay for something for yourself, that you couldnt work just as hard to have for yourself.
Click to expand...

Please go to Somalia right now, and don't come back until you admit that socialism is a good thing.
 
cackhyena said:
You are completely out of your element here, guy. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Click to expand...

Im sorry you dont like my dissenting point of view. That doesnt mean I wont express it simply because Im outnumbered here. I guarantee youd be considered as embarrassing yourself amongst a number of economic scholars I know.

You see, there are valid approaches on both ends of the spectrum. Its okay to be open minded and not insulting.
 
jbug617 said:
First votes in the US in Dixville Notch just came in

5 Obama
5 Romney

First tie ever in this precinct.
Click to expand...

GREAT! Now this is going to be the story! Someone call Donna and tell her to call up the Murphy's, she's got to convince them to vote for the president!
 
hokahey said:
Im sorry you dont like my dissenting point of view. That doesnt mean I wont express it simply because Im outnumbered here. I guarantee youd be considered as embarrassing yourself amongst a number of economic scholars I know.

You see, there are valid approaches on both ends of the spectrum. Its okay to be open minded and not insulting.
Click to expand...
So what's the other end of the spectrum? No government services, no taxation, everyone just sinks or swims? Are there any examples in world history of a civilization that's flourished or even survived that way?
 
hokahey said:
It's easy to avoid a question and use ad hominem attacks. It's another to break it down to the basics and actually debate the ethics of the system at it's core.

P.s. Loved Book of Eli. ;)
Click to expand...

debate the ethics? The ethics are pathetically easy. You promote an extremely selfish ethic of every man for themselves, which i guess is fine if everyone started out on an equal footing. Too bad that that is simple impossible in the real world. After that first generation though, you'll end up with a country with very little social mobility.

Taxation is necessary and ethical because it helps us build a stronger community and a stronger country. This will benefit everyone in the end, not just those few first generation people in your libertarian fantasy land that got insanely wealthy
 
hokahey said:
Im sorry you dont like my dissenting point of view. That doesnt mean I wont express it simply because Im outnumbered here. I guarantee youd be considered as embarrassing yourself amongst a number of economic scholars I know.

You see, there are valid approaches on both ends of the spectrum. Its okay to be open minded and not insulting.
Click to expand...
Yours isn't a valid approach. It borders on absurd. Please name these scholars for me.
 
hokahey said:
Please state the circumstance in which it is ethical for you to take my money to pay for something for yourself, that you couldnt work just as hard to have for yourself.
Click to expand...

Please state the circumstance in which it is ethical for you to use all that society has set up for you and become successful because of society but not give back what it needs in order to function and progress.
 
hokahey said:
It's easy to avoid a question and use ad hominem attacks. It's another to break it down to the basics and actually debate the ethics of the system at it's core.

P.s. Loved Book of Eli. ;)
Click to expand...

And once again it's ethical because everyone pays in and everyone then receives public benefits. It would be unethical if one small segment of the population took advantage of the system and benefited overwhelmingly, while a larger part of the population fought for the scraps.
 
Lathentar said:
He'll lose because people will not trust him anymore if he is off by a wide margin. Goodbye career.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree, but it shouldn't be the case, because if he misses, it just means that the polls were wrong. He makes no bones about the fact that he's mostly relying on polls to make his prediction, so if the polls are wrong he'll be wrong, too. People should be pissed that the polls are wrong, instead of turning on Nate Silver. But Polls are wrong sometimes. For example, Hillary Vs. Obama in New Hampshire. Everybody missed that. Some by a mile. There are always a few like that, and sometimes it's hard to understand why it happens.

And actually, I think Silver will take a lot of heat even if it is a narrow Romney victory, but he shouldn't, because all he's really saying is that Romney is a long shot, which is obviously true. Any reasonable minded person would have to say a Romney victory would be an upset based on the current polling. Romney would have to outperform the polls to win, thereby defying the odds But long shots occasionally win. Politics is like any sport, you can crunch numbers all day long and run simulated games, but at the end of the day, real people have to go out and take action, which introduces a level of noise and randomness that you can't totally account for when the margins are narrow enough.
 
hokahey said:
Im sorry you dont like my dissenting point of view. That doesnt mean I wont express it simply because Im outnumbered here. I guarantee youd be considered as embarrassing yourself amongst a number of economic scholars I know.

You see, there are valid approaches on both ends of the spectrum. Its okay to be open minded and not insulting.
Click to expand...


What factor determines if it's ethical or not? Serious question. You seem smart, so I'm open to being educated about a few things.
 
Earthstrike said:
Where in the world is this? Didn't realize votes are already starting to come in.
Click to expand...
It's a tiny precinct in NH, literally just a handful of votes, that always declares first, right at midnight local time on election day. It has about as much bellwether relevance as Groundhog Day in Punxsatawney.
 
Gary Whitta said:
So what's the other end of the spectrum? No government services, no taxation, everyone just sinks or swims? Are there any examples in world history of a civilization that's flourished or even survived that way?
Click to expand...

Was there ever an example of America before It was founded as it was?

Why would people sink without the government?
 
Maybe he has only driven on private roads, private highways, bought foods that wasn't transported by public highway, used gas that wasn't transported on public highways, gets his water from a private institution or all bottled, home schooled, never went to a public library, and etc.

The list is endless.
 
hokahey said:
As if I couldn't point to an extreme socialist state and tell you its your only choice for how it works? Terrible logic.
Click to expand...

You are advocating the total removal of taxation and government services. America has plenty of government services that benefit this country, but we also have to pay taxes. In Somalia, you don't need to pay any taxes nor do you get any government handouts. See? It's simple.
 
duderon said:
And once again it's ethical because everyone pays in and everyone then receives public benefits. It would be unethical if one small segment of the population took advantage of the system and benefited overwhelmingly, while a larger part of the population fought for the scraps.
Click to expand...

So its ethical if I take your property by force assuming I then distribute it in such a way I feel benefits the greater good?
 
hokahey said:
Please state the circumstance in which it is ethical for you to take my money to pay for something for yourself, that you couldnt work just as hard to have for yourself.
Click to expand...
It is ethical because the benefits greatly outnumber the disadvantages. Secondly, the argument in your latter sentence is one that holds no ground in reality. There are people working 2-3 jobs who still cannot afford basic necessities. I'm all for dissenting viewpoints as long as they are grounded in evidence and logic.
 
Crakatak187 said:
Maybe he has only driven on private roads, private highways, bought foods that wasn't transported by public highway, used gas that wasn't transported on public highways, gets his water from a private institution or all bottled, home schooled, never went to a public library, and etc.

The list is endless.
Click to expand...

American indian?
 
hokahey said:
Was there ever an example of America before It was founded as it was?

Why would people sink without the government?
Click to expand...

It'd be nice to get a positive argument from you. You talk about people jumping on you for your dissenting viewpoint, but I'm not sure you've actually even asserted that it is unethical to forcibly take people's money to pay for government services. And you've yet to even gesture at an argument for it.
 
What do the chances of Obama winning Florida look like right now? I'm messing with the NYT thing, and it looks like as long as Obama wins Florida, he's got this in the bag.
 
Might as well give my prediction now.

Going 347 for Bams. Come on, NC!

DopJa.png
 
Buenas noches damas y caballeros. Hoy quiero hacerles una propuesta. Mañana Es el dia de las elecciones de Los Estados Unidos y ustedes tienen la oportunidad de elejir a este caballo blanco, con especimen de cien dioses y Mexicano como su nuevo Presidente. Yo prometo darles Ciudadania absoluta a todas aquellas personas que imigraron a este pais a buscar un sueño. Un sueño de nunca regresar a la pobresa y echar hacia delante. Mucho mejor, propongo unificar a Los dos paises y llamar el Nuevo país, Los Estados Mexicanos Unidos de America. No habra distinccion ni habra racismo entre nosotros.

Segundo propongo a reducir $5trillones de dolares en la deuda nacional. Ese dinero vendra de un lugar májico en la cual Los impuestos de nosotros
los Ricos
pagariamos el minimo de impuestos and Matematicamente la economia del país va a florecer como nunca antes en la historia de mas de 230 años de existencia. Todo pasará el primer dia en la cual yo tome mi asiento en la Casa Blanca y empieze a trabajar con Los Congresistas de la nación.
mentira solamente trabajaré con Los republicanos pero el público no lo sabe

Finalmente gracias por elejirme como Nuevo Presidente, que Los mormones lo tengan a todos en la gloria de dios y que viva Mexico!!

bueno lo primero que dije de lo Mexicanos Es mentira pero ustedes saben no le digan a nadie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Adolf Hitler wins Namibia election
26
577
Thurible replied
Verizon apologizes for cell service across the United States failing all day yesterday
11
171
Dacvak replied
  • Locked
Canada's election results are in
8
591
Jaybe replied
  • Locked
Greenland considers joining the United States
7 8 9 10 11
507
31K
RoadHazard replied
White smoke emerges as a new pope is elected
2 3
132
3K
GateofD replied
Top Bottom