Libertarians Are The True Political Moderates

Absolutely.

I would also end all the other trappings of the welfare state.

Big Brother is neither my benefactor nor my friend. That you believe him to be so is the very cornerstone of your twisted authoritarian ideology.

Looks like I will have to toss in #1 for good measure.
 
Absolutely.

I would also end all the other trappings of the welfare state.

Big Brother is neither my benefactor nor my friend. That you believe him to be so is the very cornerstone of your twisted authoritarian ideology.

Looks like I will have to toss in #1 for good measure.

So what happens to elderly citizens who face a major illness?
 
"is that libertariansim isn't first and foremost a political ideology. It's a moral/ethic philosophy involving when it is appropriate to use violence/force/coercion."

And it remains a failed moral and ethical system. We the People decide in our legislatures and our courts to give the government certain powers of violence, force, and coercion. Libertarianism cannot control violence without evolving into what it dislikes. Tis what is.

Libertarians misdefine liberty and freedom as "I can do what i want, neener neener".

:lmao:

Your kinds failure to not adhere to civilized discourse with your fellow humans does not mean that civility is a failed system. Otherwise your translation is essentially that you're willing to vote to have a third party steal from your neighbor, as long as the mob is large enough to make it happen. And the government was given "certain powers" of violence, force and coercion. That's a monopoly. They are the only ones authorized to use it with impunity.

Otherwise as usual, you're full of absolute ka-ka.
 
Absolutely.

I would also end all the other trappings of the welfare state.

Big Brother is neither my benefactor nor my friend. That you believe him to be so is the very cornerstone of your twisted authoritarian ideology.

Looks like I will have to toss in #1 for good measure.

So what happens to elderly citizens who face a major illness?

Generally speaking, they die. Let me know when you meet someone who makes it out of here alive.
 
I would love a rule of law, but you don't know what it means, therefore I oppose your interpretation of the phrase.

Don't Act like you know shit about what I want. Unlike you i am not to high to think straight and unlike you i am honest about being a conservative republican. All you libertarians are at the core are goldwater ,Wallace wannabes.

Tapatalk

I think you quoted the wrong guy.

My tapatalk messed up and put his quote as yours

Tapatalk
 
Libertarians want government limited to those functions which only government can do. Most of us would generally agree with police, military, civil and criminal courts, roads, management of limited resources and recognition of property rights. I am not referring to anarchists who want no government here who like calling themselves libertarians, I am referring to the masses of us who want government limited, not eliminated.

Fiscal polices. We want taxes, but we want them low, flat and for the good of the people as a whole and not used for income redistribution. The left are the extremists here not only punishing success and harming employers, but even using tax COLLECTION as a welfare program with refundable tax credits. We are moderates, taxes should be reasonable and to fund the government, not implement social policy. And spending should be within our means.

Social policies. Socons go to church (or other religious institutions) then go to government to implement morality by force. Clearly they are the extremists. Libertarians believe they should have the right to persuade people to live moral lives, they should not have the right to force their morality on them. We are, the moderates.

NeoCons. We want the military used for the defense of the United States. We don't want to be policeman to the world like the right, we also don't blame our troops for the failures of our politicians like the left. And we don't want them in everyone's back yard, like both sides do. We are moderates, protect and defend, don't use force to make other's decisions just like we don't want government making our decisions here.

Republicans and Democrats are just so deep into the question of what government can do to impose their social and fiscal wills on us, they have stopped even asking the question, should government even do that? Do we have the right to make that choice for everyone and use force to impose it on all our citizens? Libertarians are the moderates, that is the first question we ask, that is the right question to answer before proceeding any further.

Very well said and presented, excellent!
But I do disagree with the morality part. I strongly "persuade" family to live what our family believes to be "moral", as just this week I had a long talk with a relative about their bed hopping with a kid in each marriage and little to no funds to care for them, yet believe it is never my right to attempt to persuade anyone else to conform to my set of standards on "morality".
Believe everyone should have a right to do that same as I believe everyone has a right to persuade others to eat plain doughnuts instead of jelly.
However, the moral police be they for good reason or not have no place in society as in most instances they do more harm than good. Some folks believe tattoos are immoral and others do not. Leave that up to the families and churches for their own members.
 
Absolutely.

I would also end all the other trappings of the welfare state.

Big Brother is neither my benefactor nor my friend. That you believe him to be so is the very cornerstone of your twisted authoritarian ideology.

Looks like I will have to toss in #1 for good measure.

So what happens to elderly citizens who face a major illness?

Generally speaking, they die. Let me know when you meet someone who makes it out of here alive.

Funny, you right wing scum like to talk about 'death panels'.

Yea, grandma and grandpa have no more use. Maybe gas chambers would be more humane than long agonizing suffering.
 
Absolutely.

I would also end all the other trappings of the welfare state.

Big Brother is neither my benefactor nor my friend. That you believe him to be so is the very cornerstone of your twisted authoritarian ideology.

Looks like I will have to toss in #1 for good measure.

I think you should just stick with the site's title...

H3PsDzK.png
 
Always a joke when folks want to RESTRUCTURE a failed, wasteful and full of fraud train wreck government like Medicare we hear the absurd claim of "You want to end it".

Medicare is BLANK CHECK health care and it MUST END as such or it will bankrupt the nation.
Restructure it and now. Not doing so continued irresponsible government and any citizen that wants it continued as it is now is uninformed, naive, gullible, selfish, greedy and does not care about the future generations of Americans.
 
So what happens to elderly citizens who face a major illness?

Generally speaking, they die. Let me know when you meet someone who makes it out of here alive.

Funny, you right wing scum like to talk about 'death panels'.

Yea, grandma and grandpa have no more use. Maybe gas chambers would be more humane than long agonizing suffering.

What's really funny is you bloody morons that think as long as the gubmint provides something, no one will die.
The point, stupid, is that no matter what happens to an old person who gets a major illness, or not, will die. Does that mean we should steal from others to make sure they receive something? no. Does that mean that people will not help the elderly? No. You have a one track mind and it is forever stuck on stupid.

Again, let me know when you find an example of someone living forever.
 
Generally speaking, they die. Let me know when you meet someone who makes it out of here alive.

Funny, you right wing scum like to talk about 'death panels'.

Yea, grandma and grandpa have no more use. Maybe gas chambers would be more humane than long agonizing suffering.

What's really funny is you bloody morons that think as long as the gubmint provides something, no one will die.
The point, stupid, is that no matter what happens to an old person who gets a major illness, or not, will die. Does that mean we should steal from others to make sure they receive something? no. Does that mean that people will not help the elderly? No. You have a one track mind and it is forever stuck on stupid.

Again, let me know when you find an example of someone living forever.

They live longer if they receive assistance. The difference is usually quality of life. They can literally live in shit if nobody helps them. Some don't have kids to support them or kids who don't give a fuck. But then is it society's best interest to help them live longer?
 
Absolutely.

I would also end all the other trappings of the welfare state.

Big Brother is neither my benefactor nor my friend. That you believe him to be so is the very cornerstone of your twisted authoritarian ideology.

Looks like I will have to toss in #1 for good measure.

So what happens to elderly citizens who face a major illness?
The same thing that happens to younger people when they get a major illness.

As TakeAStepBack already obviously pointed out, nobody gets out of this life alive. He also pretty much covered the other bases that I would have.

But, as has also already been pointed out, you are a blind authoritarian progressive ideologue, who is completely disinterested in considering any other methods of doing things, outside of forcing your neighbors to pay for your peurile notions as to what constitutes compassion. It is you who is the extremist.

Again, covered in numbers 9 & 1. :lol:
 
"is that libertariansim isn't first and foremost a political ideology. It's a moral/ethic philosophy involving when it is appropriate to use violence/force/coercion."

And it remains a failed moral and ethical system. We the People decide in our legislatures and our courts to give the government certain powers of violence, force, and coercion. Libertarianism cannot control violence without evolving into what it dislikes. Tis what is.

Libertarians misdefine liberty and freedom as "I can do what i want, neener neener".

:lmao:

Your kinds failure to not adhere to civilized discourse with your fellow humans does not mean that civility is a failed system. Otherwise your translation is essentially that you're willing to vote to have a third party steal from your neighbor, as long as the mob is large enough to make it happen. And the government was given "certain powers" of violence, force and coercion. That's a monopoly. They are the only ones authorized to use it with impunity.

Otherwise as usual, you're full of absolute ka-ka.

He's stupid too, but you knew that already.

There have been decades prior to now where the gov't had little influence over the lives of people because it was still restrained by the COTUS. The more relaxed the restraints on the sort of criminally insane political whores that bed wetters like Fakeyboy, the worse things have become. Spending out of control, drug gangs raising hell, perverts of every sort crawling out from underneath rocks, generation after generation being dumbed down in worsening schools.

Not that there weren't problems before, but solutions were localized and effective. Name just ONE THING this bloated behemoth of a federal hog has efficiently solved. I dare you bed wetters to try.


 
Libertarians want government limited to those functions which only government can do. Most of us would generally agree with police, military, civil and criminal courts, roads, management of limited resources and recognition of property rights. I am not referring to anarchists who want no government here who like calling themselves libertarians, I am referring to the masses of us who want government limited, not eliminated.

Fiscal polices. We want taxes, but we want them low, flat and for the good of the people as a whole and not used for income redistribution. The left are the extremists here not only punishing success and harming employers, but even using tax COLLECTION as a welfare program with refundable tax credits. We are moderates, taxes should be reasonable and to fund the government, not implement social policy. And spending should be within our means.

Social policies. Socons go to church (or other religious institutions) then go to government to implement morality by force. Clearly they are the extremists. Libertarians believe they should have the right to persuade people to live moral lives, they should not have the right to force their morality on them. We are, the moderates.

NeoCons. We want the military used for the defense of the United States. We don't want to be policeman to the world like the right, we also don't blame our troops for the failures of our politicians like the left. And we don't want them in everyone's back yard, like both sides do. We are moderates, protect and defend, don't use force to make other's decisions just like we don't want government making our decisions here.

Republicans and Democrats are just so deep into the question of what government can do to impose their social and fiscal wills on us, they have stopped even asking the question, should government even do that? Do we have the right to make that choice for everyone and use force to impose it on all our citizens? Libertarians are the moderates, that is the first question we ask, that is the right question to answer before proceeding any further.

Very well said and presented, excellent!
But I do disagree with the morality part. I strongly "persuade" family to live what our family believes to be "moral", as just this week I had a long talk with a relative about their bed hopping with a kid in each marriage and little to no funds to care for them, yet believe it is never my right to attempt to persuade anyone else to conform to my set of standards on "morality".
Believe everyone should have a right to do that same as I believe everyone has a right to persuade others to eat plain doughnuts instead of jelly.
However, the moral police be they for good reason or not have no place in society as in most instances they do more harm than good. Some folks believe tattoos are immoral and others do not. Leave that up to the families and churches for their own members.

I appreciate that, gadawg, but I'm a little confused. You said you disagreed with me on the morality part and we are both against government imposing morality laws. So how are you disagreeing with me?
 
Generally speaking, they die. Let me know when you meet someone who makes it out of here alive.

Funny, you right wing scum like to talk about 'death panels'.

Yea, grandma and grandpa have no more use. Maybe gas chambers would be more humane than long agonizing suffering.

What's really funny is you bloody morons that think as long as the gubmint provides something, no one will die.
The point, stupid, is that no matter what happens to an old person who gets a major illness, or not, will die. Does that mean we should steal from others to make sure they receive something? no. Does that mean that people will not help the elderly? No. You have a one track mind and it is forever stuck on stupid.

Again, let me know when you find an example of someone living forever.

It is not about living forever. It is about quality of life for our senior citizens. It is about being able to live our their remaining years SECURE from a devastatingly expensive illness that could very easily wipe out ever dollar they earned working 50 years.

Everyone dies eventually. That is OBVIOUS you fucking pea brain. But the elderly are well past their peak earning potential and at a point in their life when a major illness could eat up every penny they earned.

No one is stealing from others. Are you THAT stupid?

Social Security and Medicare are social INSURANCE programs that citizens PAY INTO their whole working life.
 
Absolutely.

I would also end all the other trappings of the welfare state.

Big Brother is neither my benefactor nor my friend. That you believe him to be so is the very cornerstone of your twisted authoritarian ideology.

Looks like I will have to toss in #1 for good measure.

So what happens to elderly citizens who face a major illness?
The same thing that happens to younger people when they get a major illness.

As TakeAStepBack already obviously pointed out, nobody gets out of this life alive. He also pretty much covered the other bases that I would have.

But, as has also already been pointed out, you are a blind authoritarian progressive ideologue, who is completely disinterested in considering any other methods of doing things, outside of forcing your neighbors to pay for your peurile notions as to what constitutes compassion. It is you who is the extremist.

Again, covered in numbers 9 & 1. :lol:

One that confounds good and evil is an enemy to good.
Edmund Burke

That would be YOU.

There is nothing evil about Social Security and Medicare. Anyone who would end those programs would make an authoritarian look like Gandhi. They are social INSURANCE programs that have been EXTREMELY successful, a MUCH better value than ANY private insurance program and have not added a penny to our debt.

Your "ideology" is all too familiar to civilized people. We have suffered through it before when ideologues profess social Darwinism. It is the very essence of the "ideology" of Stalin and Hitler.

The Social Weapon: Darwinism

The twentieth century was one of the darkest and most deadly in all of human history. Vast amounts of blood were spilled and people subjected to the most terrible fear and oppression. Such dictators as Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot inflicted genocide on millions. Hitler had those whom he regarded as “useless” exterminated in the gas chambers. Hundreds of thousands of people in many Western countries—from Great Britain to Germany, from the USA to Sweden—were compulsorily sterilized or left to die just for being sick, crippled or old. All over the world, people were oppressed and exploited because of ruthless competition. Racism became the ideology of certain states, and some races were not even regarded as human at all. Because of the conflicts and hot and cold wars between East and West, the peoples of communist and capitalist countries, and even brothers, became one another's enemies.
darwinisim

The main point not generally realized, however, is the nature of the ideological foundation that propelled the 20th century towards such disruption, chaos, war and conflict, and gave rise to such hatred and enmity. The groundwork of this ideological foundation was laid by the British economist Thomas Malthus. This twisted concept, widely accepted by people far removed from religious moral values, was further strengthened by another Briton, the sociologist Herbert Spencer, and disseminated by the theory of evolution put forward by yet another Englishman, Charles Darwin.
selfishness

As dictated by the ideology they advocate, these three figures entirely ignored such religious moral virtues as cooperation, altruism, protecting the poor and weak, and regarding all human beings as equal. In contrast, they proposed the falsehood that life is a battlefield, that the oppression and even extermination of the poor and those races whom they regarded as “inferior” was justified; that as a result of that pitiless struggle, the “fittest” would survive and the rest would be eliminated—and that all this would lead to human “progress.”


"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson to the Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland" (March 31, 1809)

"The legitimate object of Government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done but cannot do at all, or cannot so well do, for themselves in their separate and individual capacities. But in all that people can individually do as well for themselves, Government ought not to interfere."
President Abraham Lincoln

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history."
President Dwight D. Eisenhower

While not all conservatives are authoritarians; all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.
Robert Altmeyer - The Authoritarians
 
[

There is nothing evil about Social Security and Medicare. Anyone who would end those programs would make an authoritarian look like Gandhi. s

excuse me fucktard

But FORCING people to join a ponzi scheme is UNamerican,, UNconstitutional , tyrannical.

Nothing prevents your ilk from joining any bankrupt investment scam. See if you can get Madoff out of jail and have a great time.

.
 
Funny, you right wing scum like to talk about 'death panels'.

Yea, grandma and grandpa have no more use. Maybe gas chambers would be more humane than long agonizing suffering.

What's really funny is you bloody morons that think as long as the gubmint provides something, no one will die.
The point, stupid, is that no matter what happens to an old person who gets a major illness, or not, will die. Does that mean we should steal from others to make sure they receive something? no. Does that mean that people will not help the elderly? No. You have a one track mind and it is forever stuck on stupid.

Again, let me know when you find an example of someone living forever.

They live longer if they receive assistance. The difference is usually quality of life. They can literally live in shit if nobody helps them. Some don't have kids to support them or kids who don't give a fuck. But then is it society's best interest to help them live longer?

How about they help themselves and if they do then we step in and also help?
Not my responsibility to raise their "quality of life".
I have MY OWN quality of life to worry about.
It is not in my best interest to help parasites live longer.
 
Libertarians want government limited to those functions which only government can do. Most of us would generally agree with police, military, civil and criminal courts, roads, management of limited resources and recognition of property rights. I am not referring to anarchists who want no government here who like calling themselves libertarians, I am referring to the masses of us who want government limited, not eliminated.

Fiscal polices. We want taxes, but we want them low, flat and for the good of the people as a whole and not used for income redistribution. The left are the extremists here not only punishing success and harming employers, but even using tax COLLECTION as a welfare program with refundable tax credits. We are moderates, taxes should be reasonable and to fund the government, not implement social policy. And spending should be within our means.

Social policies. Socons go to church (or other religious institutions) then go to government to implement morality by force. Clearly they are the extremists. Libertarians believe they should have the right to persuade people to live moral lives, they should not have the right to force their morality on them. We are, the moderates.

NeoCons. We want the military used for the defense of the United States. We don't want to be policeman to the world like the right, we also don't blame our troops for the failures of our politicians like the left. And we don't want them in everyone's back yard, like both sides do. We are moderates, protect and defend, don't use force to make other's decisions just like we don't want government making our decisions here.

Republicans and Democrats are just so deep into the question of what government can do to impose their social and fiscal wills on us, they have stopped even asking the question, should government even do that? Do we have the right to make that choice for everyone and use force to impose it on all our citizens? Libertarians are the moderates, that is the first question we ask, that is the right question to answer before proceeding any further.

Very well said and presented, excellent!
But I do disagree with the morality part. I strongly "persuade" family to live what our family believes to be "moral", as just this week I had a long talk with a relative about their bed hopping with a kid in each marriage and little to no funds to care for them, yet believe it is never my right to attempt to persuade anyone else to conform to my set of standards on "morality".
Believe everyone should have a right to do that same as I believe everyone has a right to persuade others to eat plain doughnuts instead of jelly.
However, the moral police be they for good reason or not have no place in society as in most instances they do more harm than good. Some folks believe tattoos are immoral and others do not. Leave that up to the families and churches for their own members.

I appreciate that, gadawg, but I'm a little confused. You said you disagreed with me on the morality part and we are both against government imposing morality laws. So how are you disagreeing with me?

"persuade"
 
What's really funny is you bloody morons that think as long as the gubmint provides something, no one will die.
The point, stupid, is that no matter what happens to an old person who gets a major illness, or not, will die. Does that mean we should steal from others to make sure they receive something? no. Does that mean that people will not help the elderly? No. You have a one track mind and it is forever stuck on stupid.

Again, let me know when you find an example of someone living forever.

They live longer if they receive assistance. The difference is usually quality of life. They can literally live in shit if nobody helps them. Some don't have kids to support them or kids who don't give a fuck. But then is it society's best interest to help them live longer?

How about they help themselves and if they do then we step in and also help?
Not my responsibility to raise their "quality of life".
I have MY OWN quality of life to worry about.
It is not in my best interest to help parasites live longer.

In other words, fuck them?
 
Back
Top Bottom