Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 130
  1. #61
    IncGamers Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,690

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    no worries...the thread is not going anywhere.
    You sure about that?

  2. #62
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,937

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    I'm not sure where the codewords are in that, but I don't see racism in wanting to allow illegals to have a way to eventually become citizens.
    They do "have a way". I was pleasantly surprised when the daughter of Andrew Lloyd Webber came out fairly vehemently about the latest sham-nesty initiative (she's a frequent guest on RedEye). I've heard VERY few foreigners (both media and personal acquaintance) who are attempting to go through channels having anything positive to say about it, and instead a number of variants about this being the Democrat Party wanting lots of little brown voters' dependency.

    That has nothing to do with reforming immigration, but everything to do with both the term "comprehensive" and the implicit Democrat plan for the newly arrived to immediately become wards of the State.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    So? Who cares? i can like a band's music and not like their politics. Hell half the time I can't follow the lyrics anyway.
    Perhaps valid, perhaps not. "people get weird about them." is putting it mildly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    those two sentences counterdict each other.
    They don't. Premeditation is factual, and can be shown in actions taken. It's not an attempt to divine intent.

    "contradict". Use FireFox.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    The tea party looked like it might be the answer, but then it was co-opted by the same nut bars i would like to have avoided.
    That's an entirely false perception, and no doubt due to the limitations of your bubble. The "Moral Majority" types aren't much of a stain on the TEA Party's dress, certainly not to the degree that the PaulBots, Birchers, and LaRouchies have been.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    I believe i said the exact opposite of that. scroll up my friend. The only racist policy I cited was Affirmative Action.
    Your previous claim had been that both parties are at best equal, then I demonstrated that's completely false, and then you went into some other tangent. It may not be that you're completely Democrat-minded on this, but that hardly supports "exact opposite".
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    lol. really? I'm partisan because a handful of social issues?
    Everyone is partisan.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevinator View Post
    "totalitarianism" isn't a party thing in my opinion. I think both parties seem okay with chipping away at our rights, but it's very hard to pick out which candidate is going to really stand up for anything in campaign season.
    The second part of your statement was rational, so I've cut it out. Instead, I'll concentrate on your "wrong-itude" here. The GOP <does> have Progressives in it, to be sure, but if you bother to look at the entire, you'll be forced to recognize that the GOP is nominally the party of small Gov't. You can't have a totalitarian small Gov't; it's oxymoronic.

    ************************************************** *********************************
    Quote Originally Posted by BobCox2 View Post
    Hey white boys! I don't remember the Native Americans inviting you be citizens.
    Who you callin' white?

    I know La Raza likes to fabricate claims about the legitimacy of the Gadsden Purchase and other ludicrous lies in support of their openly racist agenda. That hardly makes them legitimate, and in addition to which the concept that we can and should renegotiate international treaties that have reached their conclusion flies in the face of logic. Except, of course, when you're Progressive.

    ************************************************** **********************************

    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Conceived? You mean, of course, "as they did". How did that work out for us?
    Pretty damned well, at least for about 180 years. Why?
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Without slaves and masters.
    See, here's why you disgust me: A contract freely entered doesn't constitute slavery. I freely sacrificed many of my rights (up to and including Life, Liberty, and my Pursuit of Happiness) to defend the Constitution. You're calling me nasty names because of that, which may be your right but makes you a total shyteheel in my book.

    It's hardly the first time, as you know.

    Beyond all that, your "slaves and masters" bullshyte is NOT what Anarchy is. Anarchy is a lack of any rules or mechanism of enforcement. If you have a society, you do not have anarchy, because societies make rules - even if those rules are enforced through extrajudicial or other-than-legal means.

    I've seen Anarchy. I'm eager to never see it again.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    And yet you support a number of collectivized "shared burdens" like any socialist central planner. You correctly believe that the market is fully capable of producing healthcare without the nanny-state's intervention. Why do you believe differently for roads, fire departments, and police services?
    Not only do you falsely portray my beliefs for purposes of insult (since I'm demonstrably nasty regarding socialism and central planning), but then you strawman my actual beliefs and claim they are what they're not.

    There's no reason The Gov't, or often even gov't, needs to provide roads, fire departments, and police services. There are examples of all three being of greater profit in the private sector. However, when they do not, corruption equal to or greater than that provided by gov't can result. The solution is to ensure that there is sufficient legal framework to prevent specific types of corruption by the private sector, particularly those of extortion, monopoly, or certain types of price fixing/gouging that rely upon implicit violence (examples provided currently by Union endeavors).

    Furthermore, your lunatic misinterpretation of Anarchy and insult regarding even the smaller concept of gov't ignores all examples beyond that of the U.S. First, many other nations don't have our defensive, environmental, or resource luxuries. Second, despite the gun-grabbers' mantra, we remain a remarkably peaceful, lawful, and moral nation due primarily to our religious heritage, AKA the Christian Nation. Those mores are from our society, not from our laws.

    Speaking of, I found this rather interesting, as well as being far more correct than you are.
    Quote Originally Posted by AceofSpades
    Do you know what you are currently permitted to do? Do you know what you will face a criminal penalty for doing?

  3. #63

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    Pretty damned well, at least for about 180 years. Why?
    So your goal is just to have a huge revolution every couple of centuries to reset the parasite and let it get it's footing again?

    See, here's why you disgust me: A contract freely entered doesn't constitute slavery.
    What contract are we discussing? Surely you're not going to say we have a "social contract", like llad would. That would disappoint me.

    Anarchy is a lack of any rules or mechanism of enforcement.
    Literally not possible, since all property must be owned by someone. The cost of enforcing property rights in an anarchic society then becomes a matter of voluntary trade of services on the market. It doesn't mean that property no longer exists.

    The solution is to ensure that there is sufficient legal framework to prevent specific types of corruption by the private sector, particularly those of extortion, monopoly, or certain types of price fixing/gouging that rely upon implicit violence (examples provided currently by Union endeavors).
    So your solution to extortion, monopoly, price-fixing, and implicit violence is to set up a violent, extortionist, price-fixing monopoly by decree, and then go one step further and enshrine it as necessary and proper to the preservation of liberty? The mafia may be all of those things as well, but no one ever forgets it or makes kids pledge allegiance to it.

    moral nation due primarily to our religious heritage, AKA the Christian Nation. Those mores are from our society, not from our laws.
    I can't argue that, really, but doesn't that work in my favor instead of yours? If laws cannot protect you when morals are lost, is not the answer to talk about morals rather than laws?

    EDIT:

    Here it is, my moment of zen:



    Who could have foreseen??

  4. #64
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,937

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    So your goal is just to have a huge revolution every couple of centuries to reset the parasite and let it get it's footing again?
    I wish I'd bought it when I saw it, but there was a book about Jefferson's idea of "constant revolution" - every 20-30 years ago a good house-cleaning. It's what our 2-party system was designed to do, since a multi-party system has the tendency to create alliances.

    I guess none of the Founders ever thought we'd become so immoral that both parties would have a Progressive constituency.

    Furthermore, The Republic would and should curtail the abuses we have now. I think it was simple laziness on the part of our elected officials that allowed changes to the Senate and the Federal overreach that we now see.

    Plus, there's something baseline that I doubt you have even recognized. IF we don't restrict certain voting rights to landowners, then the transient population is able to enforce their will upon them, up to and including confiscation/property rights. How would that be improved in any system bordering on anarchy?
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    What contract are we discussing?
    I took an oath - a contract - to protect your right to be an asshat. You exercise that right very freely, but IMO you can take a flying leap at a rolling doughnut if you think I have any respect for you & your views when you (and Ash) basically show up to throw a turd or two at me.

    I'm not demanding respect from anyone. You, however, cement your image by being far less than respectful to those who have sacrificed for you of their own accord. The Democrat Party found out the hard way back in the 1960's that by spitting upon those who defend them, AKA the sheepdogs, pretty much all decent people wrote them off as filthy scum.

    I suspect I understand the concept you mistakenly label "Anarchy", which I compared to the end of Atlas Shrugged - A work of FICTION. A group of freely associating individuals sharing public goods and burdens of their own free will. Without having respect for others, such a system is impossible to achieve. Comparative basis can be found within the survivalist community, who are planning explicitly for the danger of the Anarchy you espouse: every individual cannot be an island, because even Rambo can't pull security round the clock, gather crops, and care for home & offspring.

    I suppose you think a stone-age existence is somehow an ideal state? The "Noble Savage" ideology come home to roost?
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Literally not possible, since all property must be owned by someone. The cost of enforcing property rights in an anarchic society then becomes a matter of voluntary trade of services on the market. It doesn't mean that property no longer exists.
    Worthless twaddle on the level of Atheist fapping. In Anarchy, I'm going to put a bullet in your head, rape your kids, and take your stuff. Nobody's there to stop me. To have a market, which is a system, you must have a setting that allows such a system. These can be self-organizing, but they're still the opposite of Anarchy.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    So your solution to extortion, monopoly, price-fixing, and implicit violence is to set up a violent, extortionist, price-fixing monopoly by decree, and then go one step further and enshrine it as necessary and proper to the preservation of liberty?
    More worthless fapping by you. There is nothing extortionist or price-fixing about free-market capitalism, though the requirement of threat of "violence" remains for those not trading freely.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    I can't argue that, really, but doesn't that work in my favor instead of yours? If laws cannot protect you when morals are lost, is not the answer to talk about morals rather than laws?
    It <DOES> work in my favor; you weren't paying attention to an earlier discussion with Steve (not that I'd blame you). If you have a moral populace, their self-regulation is greater (AKA SHAME to Steve) and the need for violence lesser - except regarding those who refuse to comply. Such a society remains a system, and not Anarchy; in the "Wild Wild West" (which wasn't), certain mores remained like theft & cheating being worthy of death penalty, women & children being off-limits, churches being non-partisan, and so forth.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Who could have foreseen??
    You missed all her subsequent equivocation. I actually signed up on Disqus last night to comment:
    Quote Originally Posted by Brazile
    "So, I am looking forward to the full implementation of #obamacare so I do not have to fight with my health provider on an ongoing basis."
    The Federal Government is so much more approachable and reasonable.

  5. #65

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    Furthermore, The Republic would and should curtail the abuses we have now. I think it was simple laziness on the part of our elected officials that allowed changes to the Senate and the Federal overreach that we now see.
    While not a magic-bullet cure for despotism, a decentralized, local government is indeed preferable to centralized government, because it grants more autonomy and power to the individual. Anarchy is just the next logical step from there. The most local government you can have is yourself governing your own property.

    How would that be improved in any system bordering on anarchy?
    The first thing a government does is confiscate, either through eminent domain or taxes. Are you opposed to both in any and all forms?

    I took an oath - a contract - to protect your right to be an asshat.
    A 12-year old goat-herder in some theocratic ****hole country that Al Queda pays 10 bucks to take potshots with a rusty AK at the foreign troops occupying their territory is not a threat to my freedoms. Sorry, but I'm not going to bow down before the troops and listen to the star spangled banner with a hand over my heart when a drone blows the kid into meaty chunks with a hellfire missile.

    So when someone tries to score points by spouting the equivalent of "Ye'd all be speakin' dat Iraqi if it wasn't for us!" there's nothing for me to do but roll my eyes. I don't lionize the troops because they aren't "protecting my rights", they are protecting the very system that violates my rights at every turn.

    I suspect I understand the concept you mistakenly label "Anarchy", which I compared to the end of Atlas Shrugged - A work of FICTION.
    Rand was a minarchist; one of her many failings.

    every individual cannot be an island, because even Rambo can't pull security round the clock, gather crops, and care for home & offspring.
    That's a silly canard that the left uses frequently (see: "You didn't build that!") I'm surprised to see you spout it here. Of course no man is an island, but trying to paint it as a choice between either government violence or complete isolationism is a false dichomtomy.

    I suppose you think a stone-age existence is somehow an ideal state?
    Why would I? Capitalism and free exchange raises quality of living for everyone.

    In Anarchy, I'm going to put a bullet in your head, rape your kids, and take your stuff. Nobody's there to stop me.
    Who is there to stop you now? Certainly not the police. They may take some fingerprints and call someone in to mop up the blood after the fact, but they aren't going to be parked outside waiting to stop criminals from hurting me. They have no incentive to, after all. Their paycheck does not depend on keeping citizens happy or safe, and they have more important things to do:



    These can be self-organizing, but they're still the opposite of Anarchy.
    Anarchy = Self organizing.

    There is nothing extortionist or price-fixing about free-market capitalism, though the requirement of threat of "violence" remains for those not trading freely.
    So let's say I grant you a minimal government: how are you going to fund it without taxes (institutionalized theft, backed up with threats of violence)?

  6. #66
    IncGamers Member BobCox2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    UnderYourDoorMat
    BattleTag What Me Worry?
    Posts
    10,825

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Thomas Mallory based argument.

    Does Might make right or does Right make might?



    Anarchy does not last long without agreed on Human rights codes. Thus Capitilism, Religions, and then Military based governments.

  7. #67
    IncGamers Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,690

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Clearly, you guys have two very different views of anarchy. The type of anarchy Saro is talking about has probably never, ever, ever existed. Thus, you can point to all the horror shows and examples of brutality you want--none of those is the system he's proposing. You're bashing a target that's never been. If it helps, you can call his idea "WXYZ" instead of "anarchy."

    WXYZ: an ideal free market capitalistic system of voluntarism with rules but no rulers where, due to enough people finally respecting each other, nothing awful happens.

    Note the italicized and bold parts. Heady. But they're important parts of the definition.

    The reason WXYZ has never happened before is the same reason they never saw MacGyver, basket balls or airplanes in the 1500's. It wasn't implemented or invented yet.

    So at most, you can argue that his idea is a fantasy delusion, and it's completely impossible to ever happen and is fit for the pages of sci fi (because we have no examples to look at). Kind of like how we could call manned flight and space travel impossible because in medieval times, we had no examples to look at.

    Obviously, the wise goal is to have enough people respecting each other first, and then try this WXYZ thing. I'll just point out that people have been progressing, and we tend to treat each other better over time, granting longer life spans, better education, etc. It seems there is at least some chance for humanity to improve to the point where full blown anarchy could work, just not right now. No one wants to shut off all the coal power plants overnight. The current systems many uphold now did not exist and sounded impossible or counterproductive at one time. Then, they were developed. It takes a long time to see in the dark.

  8. #68
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,937

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    While not a magic-bullet cure for despotism, a decentralized, local government is indeed preferable to centralized government, because it grants more autonomy and power to the individual.
    Just so. Decentralization and devolution of power to the lowest common denominator is the best concept of system management that can be achieved. The same thing is true for Capitalism, since money = power.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Anarchy is just the next logical step from there. The most local government you can have is yourself governing your own property.
    Not only is that beyond lunacy, since anarchy is NOT a logical step from decentralization, but it is also not in any way the same as self-governance or property ownership. Self-governance is following "the rules" because they both make sense and are agreed upon. In Anarchy, there are no rules to be followed.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    The first thing a government does is confiscate, either through eminent domain or taxes. Are you opposed to both in any and all forms?
    To neither, but I definitely find some forms stupid or even reprehensible.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    A 12-year old goat-herder in some theocratic ****hole country that Al Queda pays 10 bucks to take potshots with a rusty AK at the foreign troops occupying their territory is not a threat to my freedoms.
    This isn't true, and you're ignorant. The entire point of the so-called "Bush Doctrine" is that in the newly 'flattened' world, that goat herder is indeed a potential existential threat. IF you hadn't heard, those "goat-herders" are treated as wind-up toys by a core of really nasty dudes who would cheer your stupid belief in Anarchy on - because they've grown accustomed to imposing their will within such environments.

    In reality, we're just returning to the really unsafe world that existed about 200 years ago. Nation-states will be warring upon each other, with radicals nibbling around the edges. Seems like your dream existence, except that they will have nuclear warheads and can wipe your pitiful existence off the map (or mine, or Bob's, or Loz').
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Sorry, but I'm not going to bow down before the troops and listen to the star spangled banner with a hand over my heart when a drone blows the kid into meaty chunks with a hellfire missile.
    And I'm the one regarded as offensive around here... :rolleyes: I'm completely sure that all we were doing in Shrub's Magnificent Adventure was destroying 12-year-old goat herders. Moron.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    I don't lionize the troops because they aren't "protecting my rights", they are protecting the very system that violates my rights at every turn.
    Then you are my enemy, because you're so stupid that you think the troops <are> the "system", rather than victims of it, and frequently unwilling ones at that. If you're anti-Constitution, you should pack your bags and go live in another nation. See how wonderful your Anarchy really is. I have. Again, you're a moron.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    That's a silly canard that the left uses frequently (see: "You didn't build that!") I'm surprised to see you spout it here. Of course no man is an island, but trying to paint it as a choice between either government violence or complete isolationism is a false dichomtomy.
    Your making of my assertion into a strawman is neither valid nor truthful. While yours is not the false dichotomy (which you accuse me of proposing), yours IS the laughably stupid belief that one absolute can somehow be legitimate. Neither is government equal to complete violence.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Why would I? Capitalism and free exchange raises quality of living for everyone.
    Because you inherently do not support free exchange, due to your moronic claim of Anarchy. Again, anarchy means I put a bullet in your head, rape your wife & kids, and steal your stuff.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Who is there to stop you now? Certainly not the police.
    "False dichotomy", weren't you saying? While "Protect and Serve" is indeed a farce, that doesn't mean that the police do not fill an obvious and needed enforcement role on occasion. You may believe that frontier justice is somehow superior, but that's even more lunatic and moronic - you may dislike her, but you ought to read Coulter's Demonic (I haven't) to see just how dangerous your belief in the mob really is.

    An individual can be wise, intelligent, and caring, but People are generally the precise opposite.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Anarchy = Self organizing.
    No, Anarchy = Chaos. No organization. Self-organizing is completely different, and occurs within a framework of law, the degree of which is dependent upon the context.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    So let's say I grant you a minimal government: how are you going to fund it without taxes (institutionalized theft, backed up with threats of violence)?
    First off, "use" taxes are not theft - so that would be a no-brainer. Right up your alley, no brain and all that; deals agreed upon between individuals need not be any different than deals agreed upon between the gov't "collective" or 'co-op'. That way, the public goods receive support or reimbursement as needed, and if they're unneeded, they cease (unlike the Tennessee Valley Authority)

    As to violence, there's always a need for violence, particularly in Anarchy. The idea of militia-based defense is silly and unworkable; at a minimum you need a system like those found in Switzerland or Israel (though the entire conscription-based citizenry issue is also questionable).

  9. #69
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,937

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Quote Originally Posted by BobCox2 View Post
    Thomas Mallory based argument.

    Does Might make right or does Right make might?
    One of my favorite books is T.H.White's The Once and Future King.

    As I recall, White, as well as Tolkien and C.S.Lewis, were Infantrymen or at least served in the military during WW1.

    Quote Originally Posted by BobCox2 View Post
    Anarchy does not last long without agreed on Human rights codes. Thus Capitilism, Religions, and then Military based governments.
    Completely false. Anarchy can last forever, as long as those with Might are unstable in their attempt at rule.

    Quote Originally Posted by stillman View Post
    Clearly, you guys have two very different views of anarchy. The type of anarchy Saro is talking about has probably never, ever, ever existed. Thus, you can point to all the horror shows and examples of brutality you want--none of those is the system he's proposing. You're bashing a target that's never been. If it helps, you can call his idea "WXYZ" instead of "anarchy."
    No, he's claiming Anarchy is a good thing, and that "WXYZ" exists in Anarchy. It doesn't. In fact, it likely can't - it's fanciful, infantile belief spurred by things like Rand's stories or "The Gods Must Be Crazy", which romanticize the belief in a world without rules. Humans not only like and need rules, but they are truly horrific creatures when they don't have those rules. The belief that "WXYZ" can be implemented, particularly in The Future, is no different than the belief in True Socialism or True Communism; it requires that people do not act according to their nature.

    God, I can't believe you're making me sound like a Statist.
    Quote Originally Posted by stillman View Post
    Obviously, the wise goal is to have enough people respecting each other first, and then try this WXYZ thing. I'll just point out that people have been progressing, and we tend to treat each other better over time, granting longer life spans, better education, etc.
    I'm sure the millions of violent dead during the 20th Century would agree... [/sarc]
    Quote Originally Posted by stillman View Post
    The current systems many uphold now did not exist and sounded impossible or counterproductive at one time. Then, they were developed. It takes a long time to see in the dark.
    There's distinct advantages in self-actualization, self-determination, and decentralization. Obama won the election, and the GOP is in full retreat. Europe is gnawing off it's testicles in an attempt to not live within it's means. What makes you believe that such a system development is possible or even feasible?

    See, I have the advantage of Christianity. I KNOW that people are evil, and that only morality and civilization, AKA order, prevent Anarchy from turning into Totalitarianism, as one Might emerges to decide what is Right.

  10. #70
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,937

    Re: Board of education claims intellectual ownership of pupils' school work... ehh wh

    Recent footage of a smirking little mother-fecker for added comic relief. Start about 2:11.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •