Is there a libertarian approach to poverty that *doesn't* come down to "just stop being poor"?

[Pedro de San Patricio]

Because they put ideology before loyalty and didn't understand that they were being used. They were too blinded by the propaganda of a classless utopia to see that it was really an oppressive hellhole.

 

[RKMBrown]

No one's starving in this country.

You clearly never missed many meals in your life. I know poor people. I regularly associate with poor people. Almost all of them have jobs. I used to be one myself. Yes. They really are, including the ones with jobs.

The poor for the most part are OBESE.

You can only spend the money in your pocket once. Poor folks don't have much money by definition. They still need to eat food to avoid starvation. Healthy food tends to cost more money than unhealthy food. Unhealthy food typically makes you obese. It's not hard reasoning to follow.

This constant drum claiming that people are starving is total bullshit.

Again, you clearly have never went more than a day or two without eating, and clearly trust your own experience more highly than that of people who have.

As for breaking your leg. Go to a clinic to have it set. Our hospitals charge ten times what they should because of this idiotic idea that people should not have to pay their hospital bills. So the hospitals have to pass the bills of the illegals that don't pay.. to Americans that do.

The barely affordable emergency room bill was only the most immediate blow. You're not considering lost wages.

Nonsense. Healthy food is cheap. Lost wages? Find them.

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

Nonsense. Healthy food is cheap.

Have you ever even bought your own groceries?

Lost wages? Find them.

That's easy to say when you're in good health. It's not easy to do when you're laid up and can't even walk.

 

[RKMBrown]

Nonsense. Healthy food is cheap.

Have you ever even bought your own groceries?

Lost wages? Find them.

That's easy to say when you're in good health. It's not easy to do when you're laid up and can't even walk.

Yes I have. I buy rice, beans, and sugar by the 50lb sack for pennies in the dollar. I get meat out of my back yard. We grown our own fruit and veggies. We have free range chickens they provide the eggs. They have sit down jobs now. Look it up.

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

Yes I have. I buy rice, beans, and sugar by the 50lb sack for pennies in the dollar. I get meat out of my back yard. We grown our own fruit and veggies. We have free range chickens they provide the eggs. They have sit down jobs now. Look it up.

I see. It's worth keeping in mind that not everyone has the time, knowledge, land, and resources to own their own farm.

 

[RKMBrown]

Yes I have. I buy rice, beans, and sugar by the 50lb sack for pennies in the dollar. I get meat out of my back yard. We grown our own fruit and veggies. We have free range chickens they provide the eggs. They have sit down jobs now. Look it up.

I see. It's worth keeping in mind that not everyone has the time, knowledge, land, and resources to own their own farm.

Farm? How much food do you eat?

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

Yes I have. I buy rice, beans, and sugar by the 50lb sack for pennies in the dollar. I get meat out of my back yard. We grown our own fruit and veggies. We have free range chickens they provide the eggs. They have sit down jobs now. Look it up.

I see. It's worth keeping in mind that not everyone has the time, knowledge, land, and resources to own their own farm.

Farm? How much food do you eat?

Depends. Like a meal or two a day now. How is that relevant to pointing out that not everyone can raise all of their own food like that?

 

[RKMBrown]

Yes I have. I buy rice, beans, and sugar by the 50lb sack for pennies in the dollar. I get meat out of my back yard. We grown our own fruit and veggies. We have free range chickens they provide the eggs. They have sit down jobs now. Look it up.

I see. It's worth keeping in mind that not everyone has the time, knowledge, land, and resources to own their own farm.

Farm? How much food do you eat?

Depends. Like a meal or two a day now. How is that relevant to pointing out that not everyone can raise all of their own food like that?

You claimed they need a "Farm" in order to have food to eat. A garden is not a "Farm."

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

Yes I have. I buy rice, beans, and sugar by the 50lb sack for pennies in the dollar. I get meat out of my back yard. We grown our own fruit and veggies. We have free range chickens they provide the eggs. They have sit down jobs now. Look it up.

I see. It's worth keeping in mind that not everyone has the time, knowledge, land, and resources to own their own farm.

Farm? How much food do you eat?

Depends. Like a meal or two a day now. How is that relevant to pointing out that not everyone can raise all of their own food like that?

You claimed they need a "Farm" in order to have food to eat. A garden is not a "Farm."

You said that you raise your own fruit, vegetables, and meat. This implied something larger than a garden to me. I said that not everyone can do that.

 

[RKMBrown]

Yes I have. I buy rice, beans, and sugar by the 50lb sack for pennies in the dollar. I get meat out of my back yard. We grown our own fruit and veggies. We have free range chickens they provide the eggs. They have sit down jobs now. Look it up.

I see. It's worth keeping in mind that not everyone has the time, knowledge, land, and resources to own their own farm.

Farm? How much food do you eat?

Depends. Like a meal or two a day now. How is that relevant to pointing out that not everyone can raise all of their own food like that?

You claimed they need a "Farm" in order to have food to eat. A garden is not a "Farm."

You said that you raise your own fruit, vegetables, and meat. This implied something larger than a garden to me. I said that not everyone can do that.

By choice I prefer to live on acreage. I hunt meat ... it walks, climbs, and flies onto my property. You don't need many acres to have the option of being self-sufficient.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Because they put ideology before loyalty and didn't understand that they were being used. They were too blinded by the propaganda of a classless utopia to see that it was really an oppressive hellhole.

but dear you too are a liberal so why be so critical of those who spied for Hitler and Stalin. You want Naziliberals to impose a pre-industrial society on America and Hitler wanted to impose national socialism on the world. What's the difference??

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

Because they put ideology before loyalty and didn't understand that they were being used. They were too blinded by the propaganda of a classless utopia to see that it was really an oppressive hellhole.

but dear you too are a liberal so why be so critical of those who spied for Hitler and Stalin.

It might have to do with the fact that I'm not a liberal. I just don't really fit on your scale at all because I reject key components of Enlightenment thought. Specifically I reject total individualism and the value of unfettered reason. I see logic as a tool we invented to win arguments. You as a modern Western conservative would technically be closer to a liberal than I am.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It might have to do with the fact that I'm not a liberal..

you are the guy who wanted lib nazis to impose a pre-industrial society. Sounds a lot like HItler and Stalin to me

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Specifically I reject total individualism and the value of unfettered reason.

so with what does the idiot liberal replace reason. A liberal will look at East/West Germany and say lets switch to socialism ??? Liberalism always rejects reason because liberals are too stupid to use it

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

you are the guy who wanted lib nazis to impose a pre-industrial society. Sounds a lot like HItler and Stalin to me

You haven't really been reading my posts for the past twenty pages. This is another reason why I no longer take you to be a serious participant in the discussion.

so with what does the idiot liberal replace reason. A liberal will look at East/West Germany and say lets switch to socialism ??? Liberalism always rejects reason because liberals are too stupid to use it

Unfettered reason. Humans are fundamentally emotional animals. We develop our biases and beliefs and then we use reason to rationalize them. We use logic to attempt to convince each other that our emotionally based viewpoint is the valid one and theirs is not. I don't really respect that as an infallible means to discover the truth because that isn't the point of it. What I'm more concerned about is social cohesion, safety, and security. This gives me a strong collectivist tendency, which is a major thing you're picking up on that makes you think your silly little term is accurate.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

you are the guy who wanted lib nazis to impose a pre-industrial society. Sounds a lot like HItler and Stalin to me

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. We use logic to attempt to convince each other that our emotionally based viewpoint is the valid one

of course that's 100% stupid and liberal since logic and emotion are related to survival. If the human viewpoint was emotionally based we would not have the Iphone and 7 billion folks we would have gone extinct 2 million years ago.

Do you understand?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. This gives me a strong collectivist tendency,.

yes like I said, you're an obvious lib Nazi

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

you are the guy who wanted lib nazis to impose a pre-industrial society. Sounds a lot like HItler and Stalin to me

I refuse to allow people to die so I'm Hitler. Makes sense.

of course that's 100% stupid and liberal since logic and emotion are related to survival. If the human viewpoint was emotionally based we would not have the Iphone and 7 billion folks we would have gone extinct 2 million years ago.

Do you understand?

Do you understand how ironic your reply was? If humans weren't emotional creatures then you wouldn't feel any compulsion to defend the views you feel an emotional attachment to.

yes like I said, you're an obvious lib Nazi

What I meant by that was that family is of overriding importance. The community is of more consequence than any individual member. The human family is one community. We are members of it through our common ancestry. I have certain obligations to you because of this. I don't have to like you. I don't have to respect you. I do have to feed you if you're starving and give you my shirt if you're freezing. The cost to myself is outweighed by the requirement to the community. I will admit to being hypocritical about this, however. I would neither ask nor accept the same. I believe that may be because on some level I consider others to be more needy and dependent than myself in general. It's very likely pride/arrogance related.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If humans weren't emotional creatures then you wouldn't feel any compulsion to defend the views you feel an emotional attachment to.

dear, a child knows humans are emotional and intellectual creatures? and that the two work together.

Do you understand?