Jump to content

Welcome to our forums!

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums. By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Welcome!

Thanks for stopping by the Weather Forums! Please take the time to register and join our community. Feel free to post or start new topics on anything related to the weather or the climate.


Photo

Political Banter Thread for the West

* - - - - 1 votes

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked

#51
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:08 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Wow not at all true. This is so full of wrong I barely know where to start. :lol:

It's a shame because I was hoping for people to see my article and make some replies that are actually boderline thoughtful and not just kneejerk contrarian, but now it's buried in all of these garbage posts. You simply thrive off of arguments of this nature. It is your stock and trade. I always regret getting stuck in them.

 

 

I posted one article, not four, each of which was attached to a paragraph that simply exists as a point by point misinterpretation/misrepresentation of what the original article was trying to say in the first place.

 

You're the one with the knee-jerk response. I made a thoughtful, multi-faceted post (that apparently went right over your head), and you viewed it as nothing but an attempt to be contrarian and disprove your article? That 100% honestly was not what it was at all, in fact I agreed with some of what the author said and was simply trying to provide additional viewpoints on it.

 

Again, you are reading what I write through some sort of warped lens. 


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#52
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:10 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')
Sanders has always made it pretty clear that he is a Democratic Socialist. The fact that he has become so tied with pure socialism in the eyes of the public is more to be blamed on the media than anything.

#53
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:10 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

There you go again.


No, there you go. You've by far been the most inflamatory individual in any of these discussions. That has nothing to do with me. Be a big boy and take some ownership.

All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#54
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:10 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Sorry Jesse, I know you've been picked on at times, but this is one instance where someone was attempting to intellectually engage and you simply dismissed them due to your own preconceived notions. 

 

This one is on you.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#55
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:14 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

No, there you go. You've by far been the most inflamatory individual in any of these discussions. That has nothing to do with me. Be a big boy and take some ownership.

Mischaracterizing people in an attempt to get their goad is nothing more than a game to you. You don't take any of this seriously. Then, as a byproduct, people like Flatiron catch wind of the character you are trying to make out of me and think that is actually representative of my views/who I am. So I get these ridiculous responses to articles I post attempting to convince me that pure socialism is not the way when in fact I have never even supported such a thing. It is incredibly frustrating.

Be sure to post a reply to this that paints me as nothing more than an idiotic, blind Sanders supporter who had no ability to think for himself! It has been your schtick ever since the first day I mentioned that I am supporter him. Then everyone wonders why we can't have intellectual discussions here.

#56
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:18 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Mischaracterizing people in an attempt to get their goad is nothing more than a game to you. You don't take any of this seriously. Then, as a byproduct, people like Flatiron catch wind of the character you are trying to make out of me and think that is actually representative of my views/who I am. So I get these ridiculous responses to articles I post attempting to convince me that pure socialism is not the way when in fact I have never even supported such a thing. It is incredibly frustrating.

 

No. You're 100% wrong here. Dewey had nothing to do with my response to that article.

 

You are still refusing to reconsider your initial response to what I wrote, and that's pretty frustrating to me, because you completely misread it.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#57
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:21 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

No. You're 100% wrong here. Dewey had nothing to do with my response to that article.

You yourself said that you see me as someone who views the world in total black and white, Sanders or anti-Sanders with, no in between. That is very much what Dewey has been actively trying to paint me as for months now, and apparently he has been successful enough that people are actually starting to believe that that's how I am, despite my frustrated efforts to shake off this reputation.

Your response to my article was framed as if you were trying to respond on a calm, logical manner to a frothing at the mouth, blindly partisan Sanders supporter, which is what set me off.

#58
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:23 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Sanders has always made it pretty clear that he is a Democratic Socialist. The fact that he has become so tied with pure socialism in the eyes of the public is more to be blamed on the media than anything.

 

Agreed.

 

I'm shocked you didn't blame it on Dewey.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#59
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:24 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

Mischaracterizing people in an attempt to get their goad is nothing more than a game to you. You don't take any of this seriously. Then, as a byproduct, people like Flatiron catch wind of the character you are trying to make out of me and think that is actually representative of my views/who I am. So I get these ridiculous responses to articles I post attempting to convince me that pure socialism is not the way when in fact I have never even supported such a thing. It is incredibly frustrating.

Be sure to post a reply to this that paints me as nothing more than an idiotic, blind Sandes supporter who had no ability to think for himself! It has been your schtick ever since the first day I mentioned that I am supporter him. Then everyone wonders why we can't have intellectual discussions here.

 

So you think the fact we disagree on things causes reasonably intelligent people like Flatiron to completely misinterpret you?  

 

Thicken thine skin.  


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#60
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:26 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

You yourself said that you see me as someone who views the world in total black and white, Sanders or anti-Sanders with, no in between. That is very much what Dewey had been actively trying to paint me as for months now, and apparently he has been successful enough that people are actually starting to believe that that's how I am, despite my frustrated efforts to shake off this reputation.

Your response to my article was framed as if you were trying to respond on a calm, logical manner to a frothing at the mouth, blindly partisan Sanders supporter, which is what set me off.

 

Only because of your actions. You repeatedly overreact negatively to someone who presents a different viewpoint than what you're trying to get across. Even if it's only subtle differences.

 

As far as my response, I said nothing about you in it and wasn't trying to, so what set you off was all in your head, I'm afraid.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#61
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:26 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

You yourself said that you see me as someone who views the world in total black and white, Sanders or anti-Sanders with, no in between. That is very much what Dewey has been actively trying to paint me as for months now, and apparently he has been successful enough that people are actually starting to believe that that's how I am, despite my frustrated efforts to shake off this reputation.

Your response to my article was framed as if you were trying to respond on a calm, logical manner to a frothing at the mouth, blindly partisan Sanders supporter, which is what set me off.

 

Talk about mischaracterization.  You have by far been the most polarized figure in these discussions.  I'm not your fingers.  


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#62
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:27 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

So you think the fact we disagree on things causes reasonably intelligent people like Flatiron to completely misinterpret you?

Thicken thine skin.


It's the fact that we disagree on things and you find it good sport to quickly resort to ad-hominem attacks or characterizing me as some archetypical naive college liberal.

My views are probably a lot more balanced than anyone here even realizes. I feel like I said this before, but just because I am a Sanders supporter doesn't mean I think he can do no wrong or that none of any of the other candidates have anything to offer.

#63
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:33 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

I also find it interesting that the author does not address the elephant in the room: if life was so great in Finland, why did he/she leave? And apparently things aren't going so great in Finland right now, to the point where they're looking at going more socialist to try to fix things: http://www.fastcompa...-work-in-the-us

 

I want to come back to this, because I think it's kind of important. Finland has had some past successes in the socialist-lite model, blending capitalism with expansive social programs. However, lately they've been struggling, and it looks like they're trying to fix things by moving in a much more true-socialist direction.

 

I think this is what some Americans fear: once you start heading down the socialist slope (even if it's Democratic/capitalist socialism at first), it could make it easier to slip into full-blown socialism in the future. Which I think we all agree has never worked out well and leads to tyranny.

 

Just to make sure it's abundantly clear - this doesn't mean I'm saying a vote for Bernie is a vote for tyranny. 


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#64
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:35 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

Talk about mischaracterization. You have by far been the most polarized figure in these discussions. I'm not your fingers.

What super polarized points have I tried to make? The biggest ones I can think of are:

1) The establishment media is biased against Sanders (I have posted several articles backing this up and, aside from the occasional post from Alpine, they are generally met with crickets)

2) There is a racist element to some Trump supporters (this is correct from everything I have seen and has yet to be disproven )

3) Even if Sanders is not ultimately successful, his campaign may be viewed as a watershed for future campaigns of a similar nature.

Those are the three main points I have made all along in these threads, or at least the ones that have caused the biggest arguments. Rather than respond to the issues themselves, though, I think it is simply easier/more fun to write me off as a shrill, narrow minded college liberal and have a laugh.

#65
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:37 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

It's the fact that we disagree on things and you find it good sport to quickly resort to ad-hominem attacks or characterizing me as some archetypical naive college liberal.

My views are probably a lot more balanced than anyone here even realizes. I feel like I said this before, but just because I am a Sanders supporter doesn't mean I think he can do no wrong or that none of any of the other candidates have anything to offer.

 

Yet you green light yourself to go off on anyone who may take a shot a legitimizing Donald Trump in any way.  Talk about ad hominem.  I may not support him, nor Sanders, for several reasons but I can live with the fact people don't and won't always align with me.  

 

It's not your views people seem to take issue with.  It's the fact you've acted like a martyr ever since I gave the opinion that Sanders supporters are rather naive in thinking there is an actual political revolution in progress by his hands.  


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#66
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:38 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

I want to come back to this, because I think it's kind of important. Finland has had some past successes in the socialist-lite model, blending capitalism with expansive social programs. However, lately they've been struggling, and it looks like they're trying to fix things by moving in a much more true-socialist direction.

I think this is what some Americans fear: once you start heading down the socialist slope (even if it's Democratic/capitalist socialism at first), it could make it easier to slip into full-blown socialism in the future. Which I think we all agree has never worked out well and leads to tyranny.

Just to make sure it's abundantly clear - this doesn't mean I'm saying a vote for Bernie is a vote for tyranny.

What do you think we should do, then? Who is our best (realistic) choice between Trump, Sanders and Clinton? I am all ears.

The slippery slope thing is a classic logical fallacy, fwiw. We didn't slip into a socialist dictatorship in the wake of the New Deal or Great Society programs.

#67
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:43 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

What super polarized points have I tried to make? The biggest ones I can think of are:

1) The establishment media is biased against Sanders (I have posted several articles backing this up and, aside from the occasional post from Alpine, they are generally met with crickets)

2) There is a racist element to some Trump supporters (this is correct from everything I have seen and has yet to be disproven )

3) Even if Sanders is not ultimately successful, his campaign may be viewed as a watershed for future campaigns of a similar nature.

Those are the three main points I have made all along in these threads, or at least the ones that have caused the biggest arguments. Rather than respond to the issues themselves, though, I think it is simply easier/more fun to write me off as a shrill, narrow minded college liberal and have a laugh.

 

And I've allowed you to make those points.  You haven't been snuffed out.  People disagree, I may disagree, yet here I am being portrayed as the kingpin of some anti-Jesse conspiracy.  It reeks of classic victimology.  It gets old.  

 

Maybe just get better at making your points before you immediately jump to such a virtuous babe in the woods establishment victim position.  


  • Front Ranger likes this

All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#68
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:44 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

Yet you green light yourself to go off on anyone who may take a shot a legitimizing Donald Trump in any way. Talk about ad hominem. I may not support him, nor Sanders, for several reasons but I can live with the fact people don't and won't always align with me.

It's not your views people seem to take issue with. It's the fact you've acted like a martyr ever since I gave me opinion that Sanders supporters are rather naive in thinking there is an actual political revolution in progress by his hands.

Trump is such a different animal than Sanders. I know you like to act like they are completely the same and that anyone who thinks otherwise is just blindly partisan toward one or the other, but the differences are rather stark. Anyone who has been following the 2016 campaign even halfway should be able to see the differences pretty easily.

For starters, Sanders has a 40+ year record on fighting for generally the same issues throghout his entire career. Trump on the other hand, has literally said the opposite of almost everything he "stands for", at some point. Factcheck.com found 76% of his statements, of the ones they looked at, to be out and out lies. That is pretty staggering.

#69
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:44 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

What do you think we should do, then? Who is our best (realistic) choice between Trump, Sanders and Clinton? I am all ears.

The slippery slope thing is a classic logical fallacy, fwiw. We didn't slip into a socialist dictatorship in the wake of the New Deal or Great Society programs.

 

WWII would help.  


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#70
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:46 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

WWII would help.


Check your history. The Great Society program was an expansion of many of the programs put in place during the New Deal, and it happened in the 1960s under LBJ. There was no world war directly following that.

#71
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:47 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

What super polarized points have I tried to make? The biggest ones I can think of are:

1) The establishment media is biased against Sanders (I have posted several articles backing this up and, aside from the occasional post from Alpine, they are generally met with crickets)

2) There is a racist element to some Trump supporters (this is correct from everything I have seen and has yet to be disproven )

3) Even if Sanders is not ultimately successful, his campaign may be viewed as a watershed for future campaigns of a similar nature.

Those are the three main points I have made all along in these threads, or at least the ones that have caused the biggest arguments. Rather than respond to the issues themselves, though, I think it is simply easier/more fun to write me off as a shrill, narrow minded college liberal and have a laugh.

 

1) I responded to this by pointing out that the media has always been biased, and their own political inclinations have a lot to do with that. It's not a conspiracy and it's not just Sanders (the Republicans have it worse).

 

2) Agreed. But you can't let the fringe elements define a candidacy. Personally, I think Trump should have spoke stronger against his racist supporters when initially given the chance.

 

3) Sure. And like I said repeatedly, if it came down to Sanders vs. Trump, I'd probably vote for Sanders (if I voted at all). However, I don't think Sander's ideals would translate very well and I'm not sure given our current government/economic situation they'd be viable at all.


  • Deweydog likes this

Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#72
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:53 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

Trump is such a different animal than Sanders. I know you like to act like they are completely the same and that anyone who thinks otherwise is just blindly partisan toward one or the other, but the differences are rather stark. Anyone who has been following the 2016 campaign even halfway should be able to see the differences pretty easily.

For starters, Sanders has a 40+ year record on fighting for generally the same issues throghout his entire career. Trump on the other hand, has literally said the opposite of almost everything he "stands for", at some point. Factcheck.com found 76% of his statements, of the ones they looked at, to be out and out lies. That is pretty staggering.

 

And the irony continues.

 

I have never said they are completely the same.  Show me one place where I have said that.  They are quite similar in several areas, more than you are probably willing to admit, but yes there are stark differences.  Purely from a campaign standpoint the similarities are pretty big.  

 

This isn't a Trump vs. Sanders argument, I support neither candidate.  This is about your inability to smell your own excrement. 


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#73
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:53 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

The slippery slope thing is a classic logical fallacy, fwiw. We didn't slip into a socialist dictatorship in the wake of the New Deal or Great Society programs.

 

Slippery slopes don't always happen, but they can. They can go in the fascist direction (just ask Nazi Germany), or in the socialist direction (Communist Russia, China, etc). Finland certainly appears to be looking to more socialism to answer their socialist-lite problems.

 

Either way, I think the root issue comes down to asking the government to do too much, to have too much power, too much resources. I'm in favor of smaller government, more fiscal responsibility, re-working the tax code, and re-working social programs for our current societal demographics (not just expanding them, getting rid of some as well).


  • IbrChris likes this

Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#74
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 12:55 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

1) I responded to this by pointing out that the media has always been biased, and their own political inclinations have a lot to do with that. It's not a conspiracy and it's not just Sanders (the Republicans have it worse).

2) Agreed. But you can't let the fringe elements define a candidacy. Personally, I think Trump should have spoke stronger against his racist supporters when initially given the chance.

3) Sure. And like I said repeatedly, if it came down to Sanders vs. Trump, I'd probably vote for Sanders (if I voted at all). However, I don't think Sander's ideals would translate very well and I'm not sure given our current government/economic situation they'd be viable at all.


I never said it was a media conspiracy, dude. That's the kind of crap I'm taking about. Complete mischaracterization of my ideas. I think it all started when I made a fairly well supported, balanced post on a past thread outlining my views on the media's bias against Sanders (which has been further backed up with subsequent articles) and Dewey wrote it off with a thoroughly ****-ish tinfoil hat comment. If I am going to be accused of wearing a tinfoil hat for making a fairly reasonable claim which I have actually time and time again proven to be true, I am not even sure why I waste my time posting here.

#75
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 01:00 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

And the irony continues.

I have never said they are completely the same. Show me one place where I have said that. They are quite similar in several areas, more than you are probably willing to admit, but yes there are stark differences. Purely from a campaign standpoint the similarities are pretty big.

This isn't a Trump vs. Sanders argument, I support neither candidate. This is about your inability to smell your own excrement.

Let me know when you start smelling yours. I have admitted to being wrong or overreacting many times on these threads. I've even gone so far as to apologize to people on occasion or attempt to bury the hatchet. Showing an ounce of humilty. You have never done any such thing, ever. If you are caught being wrong you will just say something snarky or make fun of someone and move on. I don't think I've ever seen you apologize to anybody for anything, even if they have deserved one from you. Basically nothing showing even a hint of human kindness, tenderness or self-awareness. You are scared shitless when it comes to showing your neck/humanity at all here, for some reason.

#76
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 01:07 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

Let me know when you start smelling yours. I have admitted to being wrong or overreacting many times on these threads. I've even gone so far as to apologize to people on occasion or attempt to bury the hatchet. You have never done any such thing, ever. If you are caught being wrong you will just say something snarky or make fun of someone and move on. I don't think I've ever seen you apologize to anybody for anything, even if they have deserved one from you. Basically nothing showing even a hint of human kindness, tenderness or self-awareness. You are scared shitless when it comes to showing your neck/humanity at all here, for some reason.

 

Well... case in point once again.  You're giving me way too much credit here for my supposed powers of persuasion.  I'm wrong all the time.  Would you like me to articulate some instances??? This is an opinion thread.  None of us has all the answers to fixing an ailing political system/electorate.  I've apologized for things when I see merit in doing so and when it seems appropriate, but I don't apologize for my opinions.  That's not what makes America great (again).  Neither should you.  And I am plenty self-aware, probably more than you'll ever be if you don't shake this knee-jerk tendency to slip into a battered-wife shell as you've done so many times over the years.  You're 30 aren't you?  Time to shake it off, Taylor.  


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#77
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 01:07 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

Slippery slopes don't always happen, but they can. They can go in the fascist direction (just ask Nazi Germany), or in the socialist direction (Communist Russia, China, etc). Finland certainly appears to be looking to more socialism to answer their socialist-lite problems.

Either way, I think the root issue comes down to asking the government to do too much, to have too much power, too much resources. I'm in favor of smaller government, more fiscal responsibility, re-working the tax code, and re-working social programs for our current societal demographics (not just expanding them, getting rid of some as well).


Fair enough.

For what it's worth, I don't think either Trump or Clinton would be your candidates when it came to that kind of approach, either.

#78
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 01:10 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

Check your history. The Great Society program was an expansion of many of the programs put in place during the New Deal, and it happened in the 1960s under LBJ. There was no world war directly following that.

 

I was speaking in generalities.  It's pretty widely understood the US didn't fully recover from the GD until the capitalist boom provided by WWII.  Where's Hitler when you need him...


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#79
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 01:10 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

Well... case in point once again. You're giving me way too much credit here for my supposed powers of persuasion. I'm wrong all the time. Would you like me to articulate some instances??? This is an opinion thread. None of us has all the answers to fix an ailing political system/electorate. I've apologized for things when I see merit in doing so and when it seems appropriate, but I don't apologize for my opinions. That's not what makes America great (again). Neither should you. And I am plenty self-aware, probably more than you'll ever be if you don't shake this knee-jerk tendency to slip into a battered-wife shell as you've done so many times over the years. You're 30 aren't you? Time to shake it off, Taylor.

There you go again.

You can try to dodge it all you want but I think it would be clear to most people that you pick on my views here, especially, and don't really give anyone much respect. You like watching the world burn. If this were a constructive political discussion where we were all being respectful of each other's opinions, not attempting to mischaracterize them, and attempting to find common ground you would find it boring, and probably would attempt to incite something juicy so you could be amused again.

#80
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 01:14 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

There you go again.

 

There's just no pleasing you.  You dragged this thread into the mud by invoking me, not the other way around.  


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#81
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 01:23 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

There you go again.

You can try to dodge it all you want but I think it would be clear to most people that you pick on my views here, especially, and don't really give anyone much respect. You like watching the world burn. If this were a constructive political discussion where we were all being respectful of each other's opinions, not attempting to mischaracterize them, and attempting to find common ground you would find it boring, and probably would attempt to incite something juicy so you could be amused again.

 

Show me where that is the case.  You don't know me.  You don't know what I do for the world around me.  You simply make convenient diagnoses of people when they don't align with you politically, climatologically, whatever.  It's incredibly consistent and the reason there are so many people here who could simply do without your input on a lot of things.  

 

I am a smart a**.  No doubt about that, and common ground in a political discussion is hard to come by.  But you're the one who polarizes things to such a degree, not me.  It has long been my assertion our country's complete inability to compromise is a huge factor in why we are where we are today.  Yet you are someone who wants to paint one candidate as a revolutionary while another is simply a bigot.  It's not productive.  


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#82
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 01:38 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

I never said it was a media conspiracy, dude. That's the kind of crap I'm taking about. Complete mischaracterization of my ideas. I think it all started when I made a fairly well supported, balanced post on a past thread outlining my views on the media's bias against Sanders (which has been further backed up with subsequent articles) and Dewey wrote it off with a thoroughly ****-ish tinfoil hat comment. If I am going to be accused of wearing a tinfoil hat for making a fairly reasonable claim which I have actually time and time again proven to be true, I am not even sure why I waste my time posting here.

 

It started with you saying the media was running a smear campaign against Sanders. I pointed out that yes, the media in general is biased and aligns themselves most closely with Hillary, at the expense of candidates like Sanders and just about any Republican.

 

Please try not to overreact. Me pointing out that it's not a conspiracy doesn't mean I'm saying you're sporting tin foil.


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#83
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 01:40 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Fair enough.

For what it's worth, I don't think either Trump or Clinton would be your candidates when it came to that kind of approach, either.

 

Sadly, I agree. That's why I've lamented the choices we have all along.  -_-


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#84
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 01:58 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

Show me where that is the case. You don't know me. You don't know what I do for the world around me. You simply make convenient diagnoses of people when they don't align with you politically, climatologically, whatever. It's incredibly consistent and the reason there are so many people here who could simply do without your input on a lot of things.

I am a smart a**. No doubt about that, and common ground in a political discussion is hard to come by. But you're the one who polarizes things to such a degree, not me. It has long been my assertion our country's complete inability to compromise is a huge factor in why we are where we are today. Yet you are someone who wants to paint one candidate as a revolutionary while another is simply a bigot. It's not productive.

This is quickly devolving. I will say though that compromise shouldn't be about failing to call a spade a spade. Compromise is great when it represents the meeting in the middle of two or more reasonable viewpoints. It doesn't mean applying some sort of "We all act like politicians are different, when in fact everyone sucks equally" mentality. Sometimes, like it or not, there are people who are better suited to lead this country than others. Choosing one over the other doesn't so much represent an inability to compromise as it does seeing something that comes fairly close to objective fact for what it is. Trump is a joke and frankly, he would be dangerous in the Oval Office. If there were a more reasonable voice on the conservative side this time around (a conservative of old and not simply a puppet for moneyed interests) compromise would be wonderful. But there are times when compromise is not a reasonable option, and when we are facing electing a man like Donald Trump to arguably one of the most powerful positions in the world it is not a time to attempt to find some sort of middle ground between he and others. Especially when we have someone who is slightly left of center using a world political barometer (Sanders) someone who is solidly right of center using the same barometer (Hillary) and someone who is only a few steps to the left of Mussolini (Trump). Attempting to find the mean would still put you solidly right of center.

#85
Jesse

Posted 20 March 2016 - 02:07 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')
Matt, I will say that I appreciate your commentary more often than not, and that my criticisms are of you at your worst. I wish you would give me just a little ground though as far as admitting it wouldn't hurt you to be just a little less dismissive of the opinions of others, though. I know I have flaws too, not trying to say I don't. There are many things here that I need to work or or am continuing to work on. I think it would be good for you to admit that there are some changes you could make as well to help this forum be a more positive place on the whole, though.

#86
Front Ranger

Posted 20 March 2016 - 02:14 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

I'm not sure characterizing Trump as just left of Mussolini is accurate.

 

What's interesting is how many people who were on Celebrity Apprentice now support him. Of all races and political leanings. The man clearly has some sort of charisma. 

 

But so did Hitler!!


Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#87
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 02:31 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

This is quickly devolving. I will say though that compromise shouldn't be about failing to call a spade a spade. Compromise is great when it represents the meeting in the middle of two or more reasonable viewpoints. It doesn't mean applying some sort of "We all act like politicians are different, when in fact everyone sucks equally" mentality. Sometimes, like it or not, there are people who are better suited to lead this country than others. Choosing one over the other doesn't so much represent an inability to compromise as it does seeing something that comes fairly close to objective fact for what it is. Trump is a joke and frankly, he would be dangerous in the Oval Office. If there were a more reasonable voice on the conservative side this time around (a conservative of old and not simply a puppet for moneyed interests) compromise would be wonderful. But there are times when compromise is not a reasonable option, and when we are facing electing a man like Donald Trump to arguably one of the most powerful positions in the world it is not a time to attempt to find some sort of middle ground between he and others. Especially when we have someone who is slightly left of center using a world political barometer (Sanders) someone who is solidly right of center using the same barometer (Hillary) and someone who is only a few steps to the left of Mussolini (Trump). Attempting to find the mean would still put you solidly right of center.

 

This devolved the minute you tried to paint me as being some kind of Pied Piper in a one-man anti-Jesse campaign.  

 

Calling a spade a spade is an incredibly subjective analysis.  I strongly believe that at face value (obviously even if elected I think a great deal of Sanders platform would be shelved or watered down to barely noticeable, as with Trump) Sanders' policies would be detrimental to an already lazy and apathetic younger generation.  Doesn't mean the guy doesn't mean well, or isn't a hell of a nice guy.  You talk about reasonable voices, but other than the fact he aligns with you, those of us in the middle and especially those in the middle which lean right fiscally, don't see Sanders as at all reasonable.  And you're right, Trump is a poor option, but I don't put him more than a click or two less poor than Sanders.  I, along with clearly a great deal of the electorate, don't put a whole lot of stock in career politicians.  Neither will get my vote, although that scenario at this point is pretty far-fetched.  


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#88
Deweydog

Posted 20 March 2016 - 02:35 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA

Matt, I will say that I appreciate your commentary more often than not, and that my criticisms are of you at your worst. I wish you would give me just a little ground though as far as admitting it wouldn't hurt you to be just a little less dismissive of the opinions of others, though. I know I have flaws too, not trying to say I don't. There are many things here that I need to work or or am continuing to work on. I think it would be good for you to admit that there are some changes you could make as well to help this forum be a more positive place on the whole, though.

 

If it's something specific, I'm all for it.  There are clearly instances where things have devolved around here and I was complicit.  That said, if I disagree with something I'm not going to suppress my opinion simply because you may overreact.  


All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#89
SilverFallsAndrew

Posted 21 March 2016 - 03:15 PM

SilverFallsAndrew

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10446 posts
  • LocationSilverton, OR

I'm not sure characterizing Trump as just left of Mussolini is accurate.

 

What's interesting is how many people who were on Celebrity Apprentice now support him. Of all races and political leanings. The man clearly has some sort of charisma. 

 

But so did Hitler!!

 

That is a good point. 


Snowfall

2016-17: 47.2"

2015-16: 11.75"

2014-15: 3.5"
2013-14: 11.75"
2012-13: 16.75"
2011-12: 98.5"

 

 

 


#90
Jesse

Posted 22 March 2016 - 06:30 AM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')
Maybe Gary Johnson isn't so bad after all.

http://dailycaller.c...used-marijuana/
  • Front Ranger likes this

#91
IbrChris

Posted 22 March 2016 - 09:21 AM

IbrChris

    Moderating Meteorologist

  • Meteorologist
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1903 posts
  • LocationTigard, OR and Portland, OR (work)

Trump's nomination could cost Republicans the reddest state in the nation.

In a theoretical general election matchup, among Utah voters polled in a recent Deseret News/KSL poll:

Hillary 38% vs Trump 36%
Sanders 48% vs Trump 37%

 

Margin of error 4.38%

 

Trump barely scrounged 500 people at his rally in SLC, meanwhile Sanders had several thousand.

 

http://www.deseretne...over-Trump.html


  • Jesse likes this

The Pacific Northwest: Where storms go to die.


#92
IbrChris

Posted 22 March 2016 - 09:25 AM

IbrChris

    Moderating Meteorologist

  • Meteorologist
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1903 posts
  • LocationTigard, OR and Portland, OR (work)

Maybe Gary Johnson isn't so bad after all.

http://dailycaller.c...used-marijuana/

 

Entrepreneur and former Republican governor of New Mexico. I'd vote for him over any of the main party candidates.


  • iFred likes this

The Pacific Northwest: Where storms go to die.


#93
IbrChris

Posted 22 March 2016 - 09:35 AM

IbrChris

    Moderating Meteorologist

  • Meteorologist
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1903 posts
  • LocationTigard, OR and Portland, OR (work)

The upside to Sanders: You know what you're gonna get.

 

Sure he honeymooned in Soviet Russia and had the red flag in his office as mayor, admired the Sandinistas and Fidel Castro's regime in Cuba but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he is, as he claims to be, a democratic socialist. Although his references to Scandinavia are flawed as those are social democracies, not democratic socialist countries (as they will freely admit to themselves).

So Bernie isn't necessarily a closet Marxist, though it's possible he's being cleverly disingenuous.

 

At any rate it's virtually certain the House will remain in Republican control until at least 2018, able to act as a check on some of Sanders' interesting economic proposals. I'm ok with that and I'm ok with a Sanders win in November if that's how the cookie crumbles. I say this as a libertarian whose economic viewpoints are largely opposite those of Bernie.


  • iFred and Jesse like this

The Pacific Northwest: Where storms go to die.


#94
IbrChris

Posted 22 March 2016 - 09:58 AM

IbrChris

    Moderating Meteorologist

  • Meteorologist
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1903 posts
  • LocationTigard, OR and Portland, OR (work)

Fades so far into obscurity that he forms and later gets swallowed by a black hole. 

 

Reality bites!

 

Austin Petersen has no pretensions of actually winning, his goal is providing libertarians and some libertarian-leaning conservatives with an alternative to Gary Johnson rather than Johnson sitting on his couch and being auto-nominee of the Libertarian Party. I like that he is being critical of some of Johnson's positions as well as spreading the message of liberty.

 

I actually hope Petersen eventually runs for the Republican nomination in two or three election cycles from now.

 

#TaxationIsTheft


The Pacific Northwest: Where storms go to die.


#95
Front Ranger

Posted 22 March 2016 - 12:15 PM

Front Ranger

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10620 posts
  • LocationWestminster, CO

Maybe Gary Johnson isn't so bad after all.

http://dailycaller.c...used-marijuana/

 

He's an independent thinker, always has been. The mainstream is finally catching up to the benefits of marijuana legalization.


  • Jesse likes this

Cool anomalies soothe the soul.


#96
bainbridgekid

Posted 22 March 2016 - 10:23 PM

bainbridgekid

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2426 posts
  • LocationMountlake Terrace, WA (510 feet)

Austin Petersen has no pretensions of actually winning, his goal is providing libertarians and some libertarian-leaning conservatives with an alternative to Gary Johnson rather than Johnson sitting on his couch and being auto-nominee of the Libertarian Party. I like that he is being critical of some of Johnson's positions as well as spreading the message of liberty.

 

I actually hope Petersen eventually runs for the Republican nomination in two or three election cycles from now.

 

#TaxationIsTheft

I have never understood this sentiment.

 

Where do you expect the money for roads, police, fire fighters, schools, the military, National Parks, and the literally MILLIONS of other things our taxes pay for that we completely take for granted everyday to come from?

 

Government could obviously be much more efficient, but when you really think about, it's actually pretty impressive all the things they get done. We just take it all for granted right away.

 

#TaxationIsThePriceWePayForCivilizedSociety


  • Jesse likes this

2016-17 snowfall: 12"

 

12/8-9: 3.5"

12/23: 0.25"

12/31: 0.25"

2/3: 0.5"

2/5-6: 4"

2/26: 0.25"

2/27: 1.5"+0.5"+0.25"

2/28: 0.25"

3/7/17: 0.5"

3/8/17: 0.25"

 

 


#97
IbrChris

Posted 23 March 2016 - 05:53 AM

IbrChris

    Moderating Meteorologist

  • Meteorologist
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1903 posts
  • LocationTigard, OR and Portland, OR (work)

I have never understood this sentiment.

 

Where do you expect the money for roads, police, fire fighters, schools, the military, National Parks, and the literally MILLIONS of other things our taxes pay for that we completely take for granted everyday to come from?

 

Government could obviously be much more efficient, but when you really think about, it's actually pretty impressive all the things they get done. We just take it all for granted right away.

 

#TaxationIsThePriceWePayForCivilizedSociety

 

Some reading on the topic:

https://mises.org/li...axation-robbery

http://reason.com/ar...xation-is-theft

 

http://www.libertari...in/polin044.pdf

 

“If taxation without consent is not robbery, then any band of robbers have only to declare themselves a government, and all their robberies are legalized.”
― Lysander Spooner

 

“The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life...The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful. The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber...Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful 'sovereign,' on account of the 'protection' he affords you.”
― Lysander Spooner

 

“If any man's money can be taken by a so-called government, without his own personal consent, all his other rights are taken with it; for with his money the government can, and will, hire soldiers to stand over him, compel him to submit to its arbitrary will, and kill him if he resists.”
― Lysander Spooner

 

"Just as no one is morally required to answer a robber truthfully when he asks if there are any valuables in one's house, so no one can be morally required to answer truthfully similar questions asked by the State, e.g., when filling out income tax returns."
--Murray Rothbard, Ethics of Liberty

 

Yes it could be argued that there's a social contract we agree to and for the support of which we pay taxes. I would reply where did we sign such a contract? You cannot claim that we signed it at birth without recognizance and you cannot claim it's simply due to where one is born, if so one person can be born free and another a slave according to the whims of government. If it isn't voluntary it is compulsory. Not all taxes are equal either...you have direct taxation (income tax, property tax) and you have indirect taxation (sales tax, tariffs)...some taxes are voluntary in the sense that they can be avoided. I pay taxes not because I believe they are morally or ethically sound but because I do not wish to be deprived of other fundamental rights like freedom of movement and association.

 

Ultimately society doesn't care if I believe taxation is theft so long as I pay the taxes, I realize that...but I will not play party to reinforcing the belief that taxes are some sort of "patriotic duty" or obligation due to the "social contract". Sure this is a natural segue into a discussion of the legitimate functions of government, which is a more productive discussion in general. People are as upset by the phrase "taxation is theft" as they are by claims that many government services could be more efficiently provided through privatization, but that doesn't by itself determine the veracity of the statements.


The Pacific Northwest: Where storms go to die.


#98
Deweydog

Posted 23 March 2016 - 08:32 PM

Deweydog

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12441 posts
  • LocationHockinson, WA
Only in Alabama...

Almost as good as only in Florida, but close.

All roads lead to Walgreens.  


#99
bainbridgekid

Posted 23 March 2016 - 09:33 PM

bainbridgekid

    Daily Contributor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2426 posts
  • LocationMountlake Terrace, WA (510 feet)

Some reading on the topic:

https://mises.org/li...axation-robbery

http://reason.com/ar...xation-is-theft

 

http://www.libertari...in/polin044.pdf

 

“If taxation without consent is not robbery, then any band of robbers have only to declare themselves a government, and all their robberies are legalized.”
― Lysander Spooner

 

“The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life...The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful. The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber...Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful 'sovereign,' on account of the 'protection' he affords you.”
― Lysander Spooner

 

“If any man's money can be taken by a so-called government, without his own personal consent, all his other rights are taken with it; for with his money the government can, and will, hire soldiers to stand over him, compel him to submit to its arbitrary will, and kill him if he resists.”
― Lysander Spooner

 

"Just as no one is morally required to answer a robber truthfully when he asks if there are any valuables in one's house, so no one can be morally required to answer truthfully similar questions asked by the State, e.g., when filling out income tax returns."
--Murray Rothbard, Ethics of Liberty

 

Yes it could be argued that there's a social contract we agree to and for the support of which we pay taxes. I would reply where did we sign such a contract? You cannot claim that we signed it at birth without recognizance and you cannot claim it's simply due to where one is born, if so one person can be born free and another a slave according to the whims of government. If it isn't voluntary it is compulsory. Not all taxes are equal either...you have direct taxation (income tax, property tax) and you have indirect taxation (sales tax, tariffs)...some taxes are voluntary in the sense that they can be avoided. I pay taxes not because I believe they are morally or ethically sound but because I do not wish to be deprived of other fundamental rights like freedom of movement and association.

 

Ultimately society doesn't care if I believe taxation is theft so long as I pay the taxes, I realize that...but I will not play party to reinforcing the belief that taxes are some sort of "patriotic duty" or obligation due to the "social contract". Sure this is a natural segue into a discussion of the legitimate functions of government, which is a more productive discussion in general. People are as upset by the phrase "taxation is theft" as they are by claims that many government services could be more efficiently provided through privatization, but that doesn't by itself determine the veracity of the statements.

Interesting quotes, but you didn't answer my question.

 

Who is going to build the roads? Put out fires? Monitor, investigate, and prevent crime? Educate our youth? Do you honestly believe this "freedom" you so highly value would exist without some form of tax funded government? Chaos isn't freedom.

 

There's a difference between making a theoretical philosophical argument and living in reality.


  • Deweydog and Jesse like this

2016-17 snowfall: 12"

 

12/8-9: 3.5"

12/23: 0.25"

12/31: 0.25"

2/3: 0.5"

2/5-6: 4"

2/26: 0.25"

2/27: 1.5"+0.5"+0.25"

2/28: 0.25"

3/7/17: 0.5"

3/8/17: 0.25"

 

 


#100
Jesse

Posted 23 March 2016 - 11:09 PM

Jesse

    Forum Fantastic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17409 posts
  • LocationEast Vancouver, WA (300')

Some reading on the topic:

https://mises.org/li...axation-robbery

http://reason.com/ar...xation-is-theft

http://www.libertari...in/polin044.pdf

“If taxation without consent is not robbery, then any band of robbers have only to declare themselves a government, and all their robberies are legalized.”
― Lysander Spooner

“The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life...The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful. The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber...Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful 'sovereign,' on account of the 'protection' he affords you.”
― Lysander Spooner

“If any man's money can be taken by a so-called government, without his own personal consent, all his other rights are taken with it; for with his money the government can, and will, hire soldiers to stand over him, compel him to submit to its arbitrary will, and kill him if he resists.”
― Lysander Spooner

"Just as no one is morally required to answer a robber truthfully when he asks if there are any valuables in one's house, so no one can be morally required to answer truthfully similar questions asked by the State, e.g., when filling out income tax returns."
--Murray Rothbard, Ethics of Liberty

Yes it could be argued that there's a social contract we agree to and for the support of which we pay taxes. I would reply where did we sign such a contract? You cannot claim that we signed it at birth without recognizance and you cannot claim it's simply due to where one is born, if so one person can be born free and another a slave according to the whims of government. If it isn't voluntary it is compulsory. Not all taxes are equal either...you have direct taxation (income tax, property tax) and you have indirect taxation (sales tax, tariffs)...some taxes are voluntary in the sense that they can be avoided. I pay taxes not because I believe they are morally or ethically sound but because I do not wish to be deprived of other fundamental rights like freedom of movement and association.

Ultimately society doesn't care if I believe taxation is theft so long as I pay the taxes, I realize that...but I will not play party to reinforcing the belief that taxes are some sort of "patriotic duty" or obligation due to the "social contract". Sure this is a natural segue into a discussion of the legitimate functions of government, which is a more productive discussion in general. People are as upset by the phrase "taxation is theft" as they are by claims that many government services could be more efficiently provided through privatization, but that doesn't by itself determine the veracity of the statements.


Just out of curiosity, are there any current or historical examples of a large scale civilization or country functioning for an extended period of time with a system like this in place?

With a reasonable standard of living for an average citizen, I should say.