It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Refuting The Lies Of Looters

page: 7
23
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Legion2112
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



Okay, I'll be more specific this time since you obviously couldn't be bothered to pay attention the first time...

Look up the Sherman Anti-Trust Act; then, research Standard Oil of Ohio.



Standard Oil was not a monopoly.

Monopolies can only form because of government intervention in the markets.

Without government, monopolies are impossible.

Economist Thomas J. DiLorenzo smashes the monopoly myth.





[edit on 3-6-2010 by mnemeth1]




posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


So mnemeth...are you going to reply to me...since my post IS the topic of this thread???

Or are you going to ignore me like you ignored me in your last thread?



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


I was hoping for a debate, but since your blinders won't even allow you to acknowledge that Standard Oil was in fact a monopoly, perhaps the most glaring example of such in the last 200 years, no debate can be had. Enjoy your delusions... I'm out. Peace.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Your comments aren't any different than the ones I refuted in my OP.

Violence against the innocent is wrong, hence taxes are wrong.

Government is an evil institution and those who support it condone violence against people that have harmed no one.

Government is responsible for all of our current problems:

-Inflation
-Outrageous medical costs
-Horrible school systems
-Horrible roads and commons
-Destroyed retirement accounts
-Insolvent social security operated as a Ponzi scheme
the list goes on.

Government is an evil institution that acts against the public with force.

It is a criminal organization of looters.

Believing that "good" government can solve these problems is as ridiculous as believing in the tooth fairy. History is clear. Government is evil.



[edit on 3-6-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Legion2112
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


I was hoping for a debate, but since your blinders won't even allow you to acknowledge that Standard Oil was in fact a monopoly, perhaps the most glaring example of such in the last 200 years, no debate can be had. Enjoy your delusions... I'm out. Peace.



Standard Oil was not a monopoly.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



Your comments aren't any different than the ones I refuted in my OP.


You refuted nothing...as I said in my reply...my statements are about how things are...you are trying to argue how you THINK things should be.

It doesn't change the fact that you participate in the system that you are saying is criminal...unless in fact you don't use any of those services I listed.

Do you? Simple yes/no question...do you use any of the services I listed???


Violence against the innocent is wrong, hence taxes are wrong.


There is no violence in paying taxes...only if you BREAK THE LAW and not pay them...even if you don't pay them...there is still no "violence". You don't get a beat down because you don't pay taxes. Your argument is pretty silly...and paranoid.


Government is an evil institution and those who support it condone violence against people that have harmed no one.


So answer the question...do you use any of those government services or things built by the government? Obviously you do because you are on the internet that was developed with tax dollars.

So you are a hypocrite supporting the exact same thing you are bashing others for supporting.



Government is responsible for all of our current problems:

-Inflation


Inflation is a part of any economic system...the government doesn't "create" it.


-Outrageous medical costs


Medical costs are outrageous because the PRIVATE INSURANCE COMPANIES are gaming the system. So much for your theory that private companies can take care of everything.


-Horrible school systems


School system isn't all that bad...it isn't perfect...but far from horrible. You get what you put into it...plain and simple.


-Horrible roads and commons


The road system in the USA is no less than awesome. I can drive coast to coast...border to border...and anywhere inbetween. This argument is just ignorant.


-Destroyed retirement accounts

-Insolvent social security operated as a Ponzi scheme
the list goes on.

I have the feeling someone lost money in the stock market by investing poorly and is blaming the government? Or maybe someone was depending on Social Security and has found out you also need to make other plans?

You don't have to participate in SS...there are jobs where you don't have to contribute to SS. I won't spoil the fun for you in finding them...but they do exist...I worked at one. Although you wouldn't like it.




Government is an evil institution that acts against the public with force.

It is a criminal organization of looters.

Believing that "good" government can solve these problems is as ridiculous as believing in the tooth fairy. History is clear. Government is evil.



So why do you support it if you are so hardcore against it???

You know for a fact you use most of the services I listed...you are just as guilty as anyone else. And worse...you are a hypocrite for not practicing what you preach.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Legion2112
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


I was hoping for a debate, but since your blinders won't even allow you to acknowledge that Standard Oil was in fact a monopoly, perhaps the most glaring example of such in the last 200 years, no debate can be had. Enjoy your delusions... I'm out. Peace.




You know...I think you are right.

No use in trying to talk to someone who ignores reality.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

You know...I think you are right.

No use in trying to talk to someone who ignores reality.


I'm the one providing links to economists.

Ignoring reality is ignoring economic facts.

Like the fact our government is run by a bunch of criminal thieves and has destroyed this nations currency along with its jobs, industrial base, medical services, and schools.

[edit on 3-6-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Standard Oil was not a monopoly.


A company doesn't have to be a monopoly to be evil. It doesn't even have to be very big to infringe upon the rights of others.

You propose no government. I would like to share my experience with lawlessness.

12 years ago I left the US and moved to Guatemala. When I got here I noticed that people would pay and pile into the back of pick-up trucks to get to their villages. I started to find the info on how I could get into the act.

Ended up getting a used pick up from the US, cheap and filling out the paperwork and paying for the permit to function as a public transport.

Now the rural areas in my country are pretty much lawless. So I make my way into the village that I had permit to make my runs.

After only a few minutes there a gentleman aproaches me. He asks if I am just the driver of the truck or if I am the owner. I tell him that I am the owner.

He then tells me that I can't work that route. I tell him that I have the permit and that I am waiting for my sticker. Thinking that he may be an inspector of sorts I pull out my paperwork. He chuckles and waves them away. He then looks me straight in the eyes and tells. "Son, if you value your life you'll forget about working on this route."

He belonged to one of the families that has that economic activity sown up in the area.

Not a monopoly, not too big too fail but with enough money to have me disappear and not have anyone say a peep. You are naive in thinking that this type of strong arming on a small scale will not happen.

[edit on 3-6-2010 by daskakik]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Standard Oil was not a monopoly.


A company doesn't have to be a monopoly to be evil. It doesn't even have to be very big to infringe upon the rights of others.

You propose no government. I would like to share my experience with lawlessness.

12 years ago I left the US and moved to Guatemala. When I got here I noticed that people would pay and pile into the back of pick-up trucks to get to their villages. I started to find the info on how I could get into the act.

Ended up getting a used pick up from the US, cheap and filling out the paperwork and paying for the permit to function as a public transport.

Now the rural areas in my country are pretty much lawless. So I make my way into the village that I had permit to make my runs.

After only a few minutes there a gentleman aproaches me. He asks if I am just the driver of the truck or if I am the owner. I tell him that I am the owner.

He then tells me that I can't work that route. I tell him that I have the permit and that I am waiting for my sticker. Thinking that he may be an inspector of sorts I pull out my paperwork. He chuckles and waves them away. He then looks me straight in the eyes and tells. "Son, if you value your life you'll forget about working on this route."

He belonged to one of the families that has that economic activity sown up in the area.

Not a monopoly, not too big too fail but with enough money to have me disappear and not have anyone say a peep. You are naive in thinking that this type of strong arming on a small scale will not happen.

[edit on 3-6-2010 by daskakik]


Comparing a developed nation to a third world undeveloped nation is ridiculous.

One needs to understand property rights as well.

In a situation without government, the roads would be privately owned and maintained. Security services would be readily available. Additionally, you would easily be able to arm yourself against an attack.

This could be dealt with in a large number of different ways in a voluntary society.

The problem you are commenting on stems from a LACK of property rights and a lack of security services to enforce those property rights.

Anarchy does not mean a gang of strong men running around without repercussions. It means the security and "laws" of conduct are governed without a State monopoly on the use of force. The situation described is what occurs when there is no functioning security services and property rights enforcement.



[edit on 3-6-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


You are still dodging my question.

Do you use any of those services I listed???

It is a REALLY REALLY simple question.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Privately owned roads/police/fire departments could set the stage for a lot of abuses down the line, especially if it isn't regulated by a governmental body.

Drivers License a violation of freedoms? It helps keep things in line. Bad enough so many people die due to DUI and terrible drivers that have somehow passed the tests, last thing we need is someone who has never driven, but views driving as "cool" jumping behind the wheel and taking off down a dusty road.

I also defend libraries whole heartedly; What about people who don't have internet? What about children? I still prefer paper to reading on a monitor, and I don't see that changing down the road.

Private institutions set up a huge potential for abuse beyond what we already have. They could fee us, fine us, deny us service for pissing someone off.

I'm not defending the current way as a perfect system, but I would rather pay a few taxes and breathe a little bit easier than worry about whatever private group is in charge in such and such area.

So I'll agree to disagree.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Comparing a developed nation to a third world undeveloped nation is ridiculous.

One needs to understand property rights as well.

In a situation without government, the roads would be privately owned and maintained. Security services would be readily available. Additionally, you would easily be able to arm yourself against an attack.

This could be dealt with in a large number of different ways in a voluntary society.

The problem you are commenting on stems from a LACK of property rights and a lack of security services to enforce those property rights.


First world or third lawlessness will always lead to the same thing. Thugs.

How does understanding property rights keep these thugs from being thugs?

You are naive. This was the security force and they made sure I (the stranger) did not take money from them (the townspeople).

I could have pulled out my gun and shot the guy dead on the spot. I would still not have been working the route and I would be looking over my shoulder on the look out for his family members looking for revenge.

This is the real world not your little academic utopia.

Of course there are a number of ways to deal with that.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by SweetRevenge
 


History shows us that abuses come from government, not private corporations.

Private corporations have no power.

Only government has the power to do evil.

Microsoft can not come into your home and force you at gun point to buy its products.

Google can not pull your car over and issue you a citation for speeding.

It is only when a corporation contracts with government that evil becomes possible. The corporation uses government as a shield to protect itself from market forces by getting government to regulate its competition or getting handouts in the form of government contracts.

All "evil" done by corporations comes from government.

If government was not around, an "evil" corporation would soon find itself out of business.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Legion2112
 


Independent oversight might be better off being non government, not for profit, that is hired for an independent arbitration of a dispute. The books of the arbitrator being open his associations would be known.

With government as go between there exists a single authority that can be bought off by the highest bidder and then retire from government oversight to a cushy private sector job. That is what happens when government is in a position to dictate what is right or fair.

In our modern technological age we have the means to discover details of each situation that might arrive from various private information sources. The government does not need to hire as many spooks for this very reason. Private intelligence services work in the free market. Private enterprise can solve its own problems but it takes the right education to understand the opportunities and limitations of such free associations.

People need to be educated in the freedom and liberty school from day one. The collectivist have taken over the public education system and they teach the young to obey their superiors, salute the flag, buy what is in, and drink what is popular. Be good consumers, pay your taxes and work hard and keep your nose clean and you can get a nice job and a pension with a secure government career.

Statist are often the children of government workers or military lifers. Or they are in government or military themselves. One in 4 people are now on a government payroll in the USA. You can not spit and not hit a statist in this country.

Selling freedom and liberty in the USA is harder now than it has ever been. People have been conditioned to accept this iron fist in a velvet glove since they were born. Teaching them what is, what can be, or should be requires a massive reeducation and the willingness of that party to see the truth. It is a hard job and is very thankless.

This and all central governments ultimately collapse under their own weight by fat, bloat, decay, and a poor memory of history or a selective memory at least. What happens after the inevitable collapse we need to begin to influence and that is one of the advantages offered by the internet.

The OP gave some good references to this liberty and freedom philosophy. Go through them and have an open mind and perhaps it can provide you the paradigm shift needed to understand the OP's point of view.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
First world or third lawlessness will always lead to the same thing. Thugs.

How does understanding property rights keep these thugs from being thugs?

You are naive. This was the security force and they made sure I (the stranger) did not take money from them (the townspeople).

I could have pulled out my gun and shot the guy dead on the spot. I would still not have been working the route and I would be looking over my shoulder on the look out for his family members looking for revenge.

This is the real world not your little academic utopia.

Of course there are a number of ways to deal with that.


That's not true.

Just look at the drug war.

The lawlessness and thuggery comes from government's ban on drugs.

If government didn't ban drugs, drug pushers could do business without violence. They would operate just like any other vendor. They would peacefully resolve their differences in a court room.

Security services and courts are very necessary - However a government monopoly on these services is ridiculous. They must be private and competitive.

What you are describing is a situation that has no security services and no courts.





[edit on 3-6-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Do I really have to keep asking? Because I will...I'm dedicated like that.

Do you use any of those services I listed???

It would be easier on all of us if you just answered the question.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1

If government didn't ban drugs, drug pushers could do business without violence. They would operate just like any other vendor. They would peacefully resolve their differences in a court room.



In a court room? Seriously? Who would run this court in this country with no government? Who could uphold and enforce the court's ruling?

This thread continues to get more bizarre...

Also - "Private corporations have no power."

You must be joking. Corporations have more rights and freedoms than the average citizen.



[edit on 3-6-2010 by negativenihil]



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
What you are describing is a situation that has no security services and no courts.


That is were you are wrong. I could have very well taken them to court. There are laws and I could have filed charges but of course they would have denied that any of that had ever happened and it is their word against mine. I would have ended up looking over my shoulder everytime I was out on the streets.

That is the point. Government or not people who have economic power can always get over on those that don't. They don't need a government to intimidate or to pay someone to do dirty deeds.



posted on Jun, 3 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by negativenihil
In a court room? Seriously? Who would run this court in this country with no government? Who could uphold and enforce the court's ruling?


Private arbitration courts, private security firms, and private insurance companies.

While this may sound like crazy talk, if one looks at how courts and laws are created today within government, I assure you this would be a far preferable situation to what we have now.

In such a situation there can necessarily be no "victimless" crime. All crime would revolve around property rights and contract law. You don't need to have State legislatures creating laws to deal with these issues.

Violent crime would be dealt with just as it was in America during the westward expansion (which was incredibly safe by the way, there were almost no incidences of violence even though there was no government). The courts comprised of neutral arbitrators would deal out punishments that fit the crime. There would be no set mandate of sentences or crimes that they must follow. Each case would be dealt with individually since each case and court would be unique.

All other crimes would be dealt with under contract laws and property rights. Since the terms of the contract define what is right and what is wrong, there is no law necessary to deal with contract arbitration. Again, each case is unique because each contract and court is unique.

Its just too much for me to describe here, you need to listen to the lecture on it by Hoppe if you want to understand it.

I posted this earlier, but everyone seems to dismiss or ignore it claiming such a system would be impossible without understanding what it entails.

The key in all of this is voluntary actions and no State monopoly on the use of force.

www.youtube.com...


You must be joking. Corporations have more rights and freedoms than the average citizen.


Who gives them more rights and freedoms?



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join