Saturday, February 12, 2005
Sigh. To no avail. Points to NIck though for his Sealab quote.
Alden: The government is not steeling your money here, it is taking it for he service rendered.
Alden: There could be toll roads (like London implements), or as is now, you're taxed for driving (tax is on gasoline), which pays for the roads.
Alden: The railroads did a heck of a lot more than the government did in terms of transportation. And it's not like there would be no transportation.
Alden: About the infrastructure: there was a lot of it before the government built it all. What about the railroads? Those were all privately owned.
Alden: What good is an ideal if it is completely unatainable? What's this about sacrificing for real consequences? Isn't your ideal then to have the best possible real consequences?
NIck: I prefer a system which aspires to address human well-being than one which aspires to address human greed.
NIck: You seem to value property, and the individual right to property, higher than the lives of others.
NIck: My values are human life and well-being, and that property should be sacrificed in that interest...
NIck: Ideals are what we aspire to, making sacrifices towards them in the interest of real consequences.
NIck: I could go on for a very long time. My point is, your ideals and mine don't work in reality.
NIck: ...sweetest of the transition metals.
NIck: The air quality is rapidly going downhill, and there's a toxic waste dump outside your front door. Your water tastes like mercury.
NIck: You have a similar problem when purchasing pharmaceuticals...
NIck: Your next meal could literally kill you, because there is no oversight of food processing or storage...
NIck: The resulting poverty means taxes are still high, because controlling crime is more difficult.
NIck: Consumer goods are extremely expensive, because there is little transportation infrastructure...
NIck: You have a hard time getting anywhere to work, because there are no roads...
NIck: Unless you were privately educated, you're illiterate...
NIck: Please review your life and remove every non-police, non-military, non-disaster relief governmental service you've ever used.
NIck: Imagine the real consequences of your libertarian system.
NIck: What you've screwed up completely here is attempting to apply either of our philosophical systems to the real world.
"Out vile jelly!" - Duke of Cornwall, King Lear
Alden: The government is not steeling your money here, it is taking it for he service rendered.
Alden: There could be toll roads (like London implements), or as is now, you're taxed for driving (tax is on gasoline), which pays for the roads.
Alden: The railroads did a heck of a lot more than the government did in terms of transportation. And it's not like there would be no transportation.
Alden: About the infrastructure: there was a lot of it before the government built it all. What about the railroads? Those were all privately owned.
Alden: What good is an ideal if it is completely unatainable? What's this about sacrificing for real consequences? Isn't your ideal then to have the best possible real consequences?
NIck: I prefer a system which aspires to address human well-being than one which aspires to address human greed.
NIck: You seem to value property, and the individual right to property, higher than the lives of others.
NIck: My values are human life and well-being, and that property should be sacrificed in that interest...
NIck: Ideals are what we aspire to, making sacrifices towards them in the interest of real consequences.
NIck: I could go on for a very long time. My point is, your ideals and mine don't work in reality.
NIck: ...sweetest of the transition metals.
NIck: The air quality is rapidly going downhill, and there's a toxic waste dump outside your front door. Your water tastes like mercury.
NIck: You have a similar problem when purchasing pharmaceuticals...
NIck: Your next meal could literally kill you, because there is no oversight of food processing or storage...
NIck: The resulting poverty means taxes are still high, because controlling crime is more difficult.
NIck: Consumer goods are extremely expensive, because there is little transportation infrastructure...
NIck: You have a hard time getting anywhere to work, because there are no roads...
NIck: Unless you were privately educated, you're illiterate...
NIck: Please review your life and remove every non-police, non-military, non-disaster relief governmental service you've ever used.
NIck: Imagine the real consequences of your libertarian system.
NIck: What you've screwed up completely here is attempting to apply either of our philosophical systems to the real world.
"Out vile jelly!"
Friday, February 11, 2005
Chris! You bumped everyone off! Take that Ben, and Julia.
Chris: If you still don't understand that blatantly obvious nullification of your arguments then I think you should immediately spend next semester's tuition money on a bum's hospital fees.
Chris: Who freaked out and gave you the right to spend what you earn? Your life belongs to the incompetent, right?
Chris: If you think letting somebody die is the same as killing them then you're a goddamn murderer because you didn't give your livelyhood and happiness and your life to save every bum in the world.
Chris: If BB didn't do that...at what point exactly did you initiate the use of force? Did you punch the man in the DNA before he was born?
Chris: Here, BB initiated force by taking parts of your life and giving them to somebody who didn't earn them.
Chris: At what point did this person who couldn't even guarantee his own happiness obtain the right to yours?
Chris: Where did you right to property go? Where did your right to the pursuit of happiness go? Without your property and your happiness...where did your life go?
Chris: At what point is it okay for you to enjoy what you've earned for yourself in the way that you want to enjoy it?
Chris: ?(forgot this)
Chris: What gave BB the "right" to take YOUR earned happiness and fork it over to somebody who is unwilling to make an effort or unable to live up to BB's standards of a "proper" life.
Chris: Now you may say that this is a small price to pay to SAVE(not spare) a life, but who decides at what point this stops?...and what if your hobby was smoking cigars?
Chris: and suddenly you're "spending" quite the chunk of your hard-earned cash and now you cant afford to take your wife out or maybe you cant afford the bigger house you wanted for your kid.
Chris: but wait...BB just noticed that several others have been born with defects and he is "willing" to "spend" a slightly larger portion of your income than you really wanted to devote to your hobby.
Chris: We'll say you're a sympathetic guy who happens to WANT to help out and that you're WILLING to pay a bit of your income to subsidize your philanthropy hobby.
Chris: So, BB decides that HE is "willing", "for the sake of man" to take YOUR MONEY(which you use to LIVE happily) and use it to pay for the D man's health insurance.
Chris: Now, a third party comes into this equation(lets call him Big Brother) and he decides that it is a tragedy that the deformed man might get injured and be unable to pay for medical services.
Chris: and somebody else happens to be born with a birth defect that couldn't have been avoided and that you had nothing to do with. Now,because of this defect, he is unable to earn a proper living.
Chris: So, Nick...say you've WORKED very hard to live happily by TRADING your SERVICES for MONEY(hint hint) which you used to buy the FOOD and other goods that let you LIVE(really really big hints here)..
Alden: I know misguided can have integrity. My point was if you have low integrity, you'd flip-flop based on your income level.
Ben: And Julia, your cynicism is depressing. - 5 points.
Ben: People can be very wrong and still have integrity. Alden - 10 points.
Julia: So, a person with integrity cannot possibly be affected by their own subconsious biases?
Alden: A person with integirity is going to hold his view regardless of his immediate circumstances.
Julia: Throw in a few terminal diseases and you have a very different discussion.
Julia: I wonder how this conversation would go if we were all born poor and unable to aford health care.
Okay, after reading Chris' posts, I forgive him. Good phrasing here, solid example. Props to Chris. Nick, I await your conversion.
"They are alive, she thought, but their soul operates them by remote control. Their soul is in every man who has the capacity to equal this achievement. Should the soul vanish from the earth, the motors would stop, because that is the power which keeps them going -- not the oil under the floor under her feet, the oil that would then become the primeval ooze again -- not the steel cylinders that would become the stains of rust on the walls of the caves of shivering savages --- the power of a living mind -- the power of thought and choice and purpose." - Dagney Taggart, Atlas Shrugged, pp 230-231
Chris: If you still don't understand that blatantly obvious nullification of your arguments then I think you should immediately spend next semester's tuition money on a bum's hospital fees.
Chris: Who freaked out and gave you the right to spend what you earn? Your life belongs to the incompetent, right?
Chris: If you think letting somebody die is the same as killing them then you're a goddamn murderer because you didn't give your livelyhood and happiness and your life to save every bum in the world.
Chris: If BB didn't do that...at what point exactly did you initiate the use of force? Did you punch the man in the DNA before he was born?
Chris: Here, BB initiated force by taking parts of your life and giving them to somebody who didn't earn them.
Chris: At what point did this person who couldn't even guarantee his own happiness obtain the right to yours?
Chris: Where did you right to property go? Where did your right to the pursuit of happiness go? Without your property and your happiness...where did your life go?
Chris: At what point is it okay for you to enjoy what you've earned for yourself in the way that you want to enjoy it?
Chris: ?(forgot this)
Chris: What gave BB the "right" to take YOUR earned happiness and fork it over to somebody who is unwilling to make an effort or unable to live up to BB's standards of a "proper" life.
Chris: Now you may say that this is a small price to pay to SAVE(not spare) a life, but who decides at what point this stops?...and what if your hobby was smoking cigars?
Chris: and suddenly you're "spending" quite the chunk of your hard-earned cash and now you cant afford to take your wife out or maybe you cant afford the bigger house you wanted for your kid.
Chris: but wait...BB just noticed that several others have been born with defects and he is "willing" to "spend" a slightly larger portion of your income than you really wanted to devote to your hobby.
Chris: We'll say you're a sympathetic guy who happens to WANT to help out and that you're WILLING to pay a bit of your income to subsidize your philanthropy hobby.
Chris: So, BB decides that HE is "willing", "for the sake of man" to take YOUR MONEY(which you use to LIVE happily) and use it to pay for the D man's health insurance.
Chris: Now, a third party comes into this equation(lets call him Big Brother) and he decides that it is a tragedy that the deformed man might get injured and be unable to pay for medical services.
Chris: and somebody else happens to be born with a birth defect that couldn't have been avoided and that you had nothing to do with. Now,because of this defect, he is unable to earn a proper living.
Chris: So, Nick...say you've WORKED very hard to live happily by TRADING your SERVICES for MONEY(hint hint) which you used to buy the FOOD and other goods that let you LIVE(really really big hints here)..
Alden: I know misguided can have integrity. My point was if you have low integrity, you'd flip-flop based on your income level.
Ben: And Julia, your cynicism is depressing. - 5 points.
Ben: People can be very wrong and still have integrity. Alden - 10 points.
Julia: So, a person with integrity cannot possibly be affected by their own subconsious biases?
Alden: A person with integirity is going to hold his view regardless of his immediate circumstances.
Julia: Throw in a few terminal diseases and you have a very different discussion.
Julia: I wonder how this conversation would go if we were all born poor and unable to aford health care.
Okay, after reading Chris' posts, I forgive him. Good phrasing here, solid example. Props to Chris. Nick, I await your conversion.
"They are alive, she thought, but their soul operates them by remote control. Their soul is in every man who has the capacity to equal this achievement. Should the soul vanish from the earth, the motors would stop, because that is the power which keeps them going -- not the oil under the floor under her feet, the oil that would then become the primeval ooze again -- not the steel cylinders that would become the stains of rust on the walls of the caves of shivering savages --- the power of a living mind -- the power of thought and choice and purpose." - Dagney Taggart, Atlas Shrugged, pp 230-231
Monday, February 07, 2005
Nick: by alive I don't simply mean having vital signs.
Nick: oh, looking back through the log, Alden, I agree, life is more than being a vegtable or a host for tubeworms
Nick: finally, for now, if a right to life is not a guarantee to not have one's life needlessly ended, why shouldn't I be able to kill anyone I am able to and want to?
Nick: there is no ethical difference between killing a man through one's actions and killing a man through inaction when one has the capacity to act.
Nick: anyway, back to the primary subject.
Nick: and how are work and trade "necessarily related"? I see a rather important difference, work depending only on the individual, trade depending on a group of people
Nick: i.e., a death preventable by an action of another person?
Nick: furthermore, if it is a violation of the right to live to be killed, isn't it also a violation to die unnecessarily?
Nick: On the right to life, if noone guarantees your right to live, or at least not to have it ended, it isn't much of right.
Nick: Wait, wait. The basic thing that people do is work and trade? They don't eat, reproduce, grow and learn? And those are not more basic then "trade"?
Chad: Thus to speak of a 'right to life' as meaning 'a guarantee of life' is erroneous, since nothing guarantees you life, no matter how hard you wish it does.
Chad: Remember the meaning of a right: it's a condition that must be obeyed to allow you to further your own life; a right is not a guarantee to something
Chad: Well, the basic "thing" that people do is work and trade, so the two are necessarily related and essentially equivalent
Chad: Politics is the study of the initiation of force: it says when you can make people do what.
Chad: You can't enslave people to those around them simply because they're capable of being enslaved to them.
Chad: As alden said, not causing something not to happen is NOT the same as causing it to happen.
Chad: Property is a prerequisite of human life, because without a foot of land to live on or an apple in your hand to eat, life is impossible.
Ben: There's a joke somewhere in talking about feeding off other people and Nick's repeated use of the capitalized "ALIVE," but I'm too lazy to put it together into something coherent.
Professor Farnsworth: "Astonishing! I must have created a parallel universe!"
Parallel Farnsworth: "Baldercrap! I created your universe! All you created was my fist paralell to your face!"
- Futurama (5, 10) - The Farnsworth Paradox
Nick: oh, looking back through the log, Alden, I agree, life is more than being a vegtable or a host for tubeworms
Nick: finally, for now, if a right to life is not a guarantee to not have one's life needlessly ended, why shouldn't I be able to kill anyone I am able to and want to?
Nick: there is no ethical difference between killing a man through one's actions and killing a man through inaction when one has the capacity to act.
Nick: anyway, back to the primary subject.
Nick: and how are work and trade "necessarily related"? I see a rather important difference, work depending only on the individual, trade depending on a group of people
Nick: i.e., a death preventable by an action of another person?
Nick: furthermore, if it is a violation of the right to live to be killed, isn't it also a violation to die unnecessarily?
Nick: On the right to life, if noone guarantees your right to live, or at least not to have it ended, it isn't much of right.
Nick: Wait, wait. The basic thing that people do is work and trade? They don't eat, reproduce, grow and learn? And those are not more basic then "trade"?
Chad: Thus to speak of a 'right to life' as meaning 'a guarantee of life' is erroneous, since nothing guarantees you life, no matter how hard you wish it does.
Chad: Remember the meaning of a right: it's a condition that must be obeyed to allow you to further your own life; a right is not a guarantee to something
Chad: Well, the basic "thing" that people do is work and trade, so the two are necessarily related and essentially equivalent
Chad: Politics is the study of the initiation of force: it says when you can make people do what.
Chad: You can't enslave people to those around them simply because they're capable of being enslaved to them.
Chad: As alden said, not causing something not to happen is NOT the same as causing it to happen.
Chad: Property is a prerequisite of human life, because without a foot of land to live on or an apple in your hand to eat, life is impossible.
Ben: There's a joke somewhere in talking about feeding off other people and Nick's repeated use of the capitalized "ALIVE," but I'm too lazy to put it together into something coherent.
Professor Farnsworth: "Astonishing! I must have created a parallel universe!"
Parallel Farnsworth: "Baldercrap! I created your universe! All you created was my fist paralell to your face!"
- Futurama (5, 10) - The Farnsworth Paradox
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]