Hilary Clinton vs. Rand Paul 2016 - The Choice is Clear

[Hoosier4Liberty]

There should be no such thing as "public" anything. Taxation is stealing, and is immoral, simple as that. Government seeks to have a monopoly on these sorts of things so that they can INDOCTRINATE you into being a good little obamasheep. Taxation, and Government are two things that run fundamentally contrary to the idea of "liberty" and "property".

Um...how do you propose to stop people from murdering each other? Remember, economic freedom can't exist without a rule of law, which requires some government. This is why anarchist states do just as poorly as socialist kleptocracies on the economic freedom index. Limited government is the sweet spot, not no government.

You ignore the problem in of itself... government is against moral laws. How do you justify the stealing from people's hard earned money, alongside the forced monopolization of things such as "power" into a single entity?

Ideally, I'd support a government funded with a small, flat sales tax and user fees for most services(privatization). However, there's never been a successful, stateless society in the history of the world. Until there is one, I don't think I can buy your theory.

Let's just support what works: less government and more economic freedom.

 

[American4Americ]

Um...how do you propose to stop people from murdering each other? Remember, economic freedom can't exist without a rule of law, which requires some government. This is why anarchist states do just as poorly as socialist kleptocracies on the economic freedom index. Limited government is the sweet spot, not no government.

You ignore the problem in of itself... government is against moral laws. How do you justify the stealing from people's hard earned money, alongside the forced monopolization of things such as "power" into a single entity?

Ideally, I'd support a government funded with a small, flat sales tax and user fees for most services(privatization). However, there's never been a successful, stateless society in the history of the world. Until there is one, I don't think I can buy your theory.

Let's just support what works: less government and more economic freedom.

So you buy into the theory that people can be abused by taxation, which runs contrary to the idea of "rule of law" since it is government sanctioned theft?

 

[American4Americ]

Um...how do you propose to stop people from murdering each other? Remember, economic freedom can't exist without a rule of law, which requires some government. This is why anarchist states do just as poorly as socialist kleptocracies on the economic freedom index. Limited government is the sweet spot, not no government.

You ignore the problem in of itself... government is against moral laws. How do you justify the stealing from people's hard earned money, alongside the forced monopolization of things such as "power" into a single entity?

Ideally, I'd support a government funded with a small, flat sales tax and user fees for most services(privatization). However, there's never been a successful, stateless society in the history of the world. Until there is one, I don't think I can buy your theory.

Let's just support what works: less government and more economic freedom.

A better idea is to completely minimize government, and have MAXIMUM economic freedom!

 

[Avatar4321]

There mere existence of government is not socialism. Socialism is an economic system enforced through government. It is specifically because of that force that makes it immoral and dooms it to failure.