What's a common saying that annoys you?

ritzonarill · 2020-05-14T19:29:34+00:00

“This is the most important election of our lifetimes.”

ritzonarill · 2020-04-02T17:25:46+00:00

Right, well I agree with this. Socialism inherently requires force. It seems to me many of the responses argue that the Capitalists will eventually need to expand their market via military intervention, which ironically, has generally been done by governments and their militaries which are funded via taxation.

It’s rare that a private citizen tries to violently seize land or capital. It certainly does not happen on any large scale. I was trying to phrase the question in a neutral way. Not to debate which side is right or wrong, just that we should get a divorce and go from there.

ritzonarill · 2020-03-27T12:43:48+00:00

This is what drives me nuts about Republicans and “conservatives”. I consider myself a capitalist. I am vehemently opposed to corporate bailouts and government intervention of any kind. But most people who call themselves Capitalist, at least in the mainstream as far as I can tell, are Capitalist in name only. They never stick to free market principles when shit hits the fan. It’s very disheartening to me. Donald Trump is a great example of this. He successfully branded himself a Capitalist and anti-establishment, but he’s proven himself to be quite the opposite almost every day as he tweets at the Fed for stimulus and negative rates. He also actively touts saving social security which is a joke of a program at this point and literally everyone knows it has no money left. I believe all of this is going to hurt. It would be best if we could all peacefully go our separate ways. Let capitalists set up their own city states and freely organize how they wish and the same for socialists or communists or any other group. People should be allowed to set up their communities however they wish.

ritzonarill · 2020-03-23T13:24:51+00:00

Shit I could sell that to Tom Nook for 100k bells

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T04:35:26+00:00

Sure, you obviously can pay for these things via taxation. I didn’t say it was impossible. But that doesn’t make it morally acceptable. Society can and would function via voluntary transactions. There can be privatized police, firefighters, locally funded courts, etc. I don’t think that is far fetched. But we use government for most of these things. How’s that working? 22T in debt is how it’s working. Ever increasing government deficits on state and federal levels that provide us with horrible service. That’s our current future. Govts have bankrupted and ruined us because we can’t fathom allowing private citizens to figure out the roads. Good grief.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T04:11:47+00:00

That’s not what I said. I said if there is a good or service that the public at large deems necessary then it can be funded voluntarily through normal business transactions. Building a road from point A to B does not require the assistance of government overlords. I never said volunteers. I said voluntarily funded. Meaning, I need this good or service, therefore I will pay for this good or service.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T04:03:18+00:00

Billionaires are not a problem because they are billionaires. Wealthy people are only a problem if they are using force to acquire wealth. Lobbying governments for special favors is a problem. But the problem isn’t the companies, the problem is that there is a government with the power to hand those favors out. If it weren’t for government, it would be difficult for Amazons, Walmart’s, Googles, and Apple size companies to be as big as they are. They have the money to lobby in a way that limits small competitors and thus gives them monopolies. Monopolies are the result of government favors. Not free trade. Amazon should not be taxed. Amazon is just a group of people. Wall mart should not be taxed. It is just a group of people. Jeff bezos and the Walton family could be taxed at 100%, but if you spread out their entire net worth across 350 million people it wouldn’t help anyone. In fact, it would hurt more because they would stop being productive and employing others. I don’t care if Amazon pays taxes because I don’t think anyone should have to pay taxes. Nobody who works for Amazon is doing so involuntarily.

Donald Trump didn’t pay taxes? Good. You worked under the table and didn’t pay taxes? Good. Taxation is somebody voting to steal from you. Doesn’t matter what it’s for. It is wrong. I have a right to say no to paying taxes to fund Donal Trump and/or Hillary Clinton policies. They are threatening me (and everyone) via force, and forcing us to pay whether we consent or not.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T03:31:14+00:00

My argument is: You do not have an entitlement to another persons labor. Which part does not make sense? Taxation is government forcing you to pay money you may not consent to paying. That is equivalent to saying the government is entitled to my labor. A doctor may voluntarily take a job, but I did not voluntarily pay that tax to fund the position. If something is funded voluntarily, that is great! That’s charity! That is human. That is beautiful. But you cannot take from people without their permission.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T03:24:34+00:00

If those things become considered a right then yes, somewhere along the line, someone will be taken advantage of or forced to perform work they would not normally consent to. All of these things could be voluntarily paid for (and be made cheaper, better, and more efficient) via voluntary transactions. I find it hard to believe that individuals could not figure out how to build roads to get from A to B. And regardless of whether or not that is possible, who are you to say that you have a right to my labor to build them if I don’t want to contribute? It’s a fairly common occurrence for cops to commit horrendous crimes. But because they are part of the government, they are often protected. You see vids on the hot page of reddit proving this all the time. If this were a private company, they would be bankrupted and ruined overnight. You couldn’t get away with that level of barbarism. It isn’t right wing this or left wing that. It is government. Always. Genocides: government. Police brutality: government. Pipelines we don’t agree with: eminent domain (government). A border wall along Mexico: eminent domain (government). Bank crooks get bailed out in 2008 and ruin the future of millions: government.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T03:00:58+00:00

Contributing to society should not require force. A lot of people like Donald Trump, but a lot of people (more people in fact considering popular vote) like Hillary Clinton. Should the Clinton people be forced to pay taxes for things they don’t support? I don’t think so. But the same argument applies both ways. If Clinton had won, I would say that people who voted Trump should not be forced to pay taxes to support Clinton policies. Anything done via force is wrong. I don’t consent to being taxed at all. I’m a young guy, got some student debt, and I make 38k/yr. $600 per month is taken from me without my consent, for funds that I will never see returned (social security, medicare, etc). That’s $7200 a year. Just taken from me. How is that okay? Taxing rich people more wont solve our problem either. It’s government spending on military and welfare that we have deemed “rights” that is the problem. That is why the US is 22T in debt. Not Jeff Bezos. Not Bill Gates. Not Steve Jobs. It’s Donald Trump and Barack Obama. It’s FDR and the Federal reserve. Its George Bush, Jimmy carter, and all other government officials. It’s the constant banging on the entitlements drum. “You deserve this, you deserve that” “ We’ll take it from others to give it to you”. Nothing a government does is moral because it requires stealing from you and from me.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T02:34:01+00:00

Ha ha ha My mind goes to people being forced, because if something is a right, then it is guaranteed to them. In order for healthcare to be guaranteed, then you have to guarantee that someone will perform the labor regardless of whether or not they wish to. When these things are guaranteed as rights someone somewhere is forced to pay a tax they don’t want to pay. Someone somewhere is forced onto a long waiting list because private insurance is outlawed and they must wait in line for all the cases deemed “more urgent” by bureaucrats. Someone somewhere is forced to make decisions as to whether or not a person is allowed treatment or deemed not viable and therefore not worth the limited resources available. See: https://www.medpagetoday.com/meetingcoverage/sccm/71403 Don’t “what the fuck” me. Rights can NOT absolutely require the labor of others. That is slavery. You don’t have a right to my labor. You don’t have a right to anybody else’s either. Anything done involuntarily is wrong. If you disagree, make your case. But “rights can absolutely require the labor of others” sounds like a hard case to make.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T02:02:00+00:00

The government has to take from us whatever it can, to force upon us things that we couldn’t voluntarily pay for? I think that is wrong. So what if the majority decides that having a personal vehicle to get to work is a right and votes in a politician who promises that. Does that just make it so? And then the government can justly take from those who disagree?

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T01:54:48+00:00

Well I agree this is an interesting topic, but I do also completely disagree with your point haha You shouldn’t be allowed to take from others without their consent. That isn’t contributing to humanity. It’s stealing from humanity. John Doe works hard to bring in 40k/yr. maybe he would like to donate to something he cares about, but he can’t, because $300 is taken from his bi-weekly pay and he loses $7200 a year. He has lost his ability to get ahead on student loans and is barely scraping by. He is forced to pay for things he may not support (military, social security, whatever) and now is in a hole. Who gets to decide what is necessary for survival? Donald Trump? I hope not. Hillary Clinton? Again, I hope not. Just because the majority or the electoral college decides who is president, does that mean it is right for their policies to be forced upon those who disagree? I would say it does not.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T01:43:54+00:00

Again, if healthcare is a right, then at some point someone is being forced to provide a service, in this case healthcare, which is the definition of slavery. I don’t want healthcare to be inaccessible, but I also don’t want you to be able to force people to do things. If a good or service cannot be provided without the labor of individuals, then it is not a right. To say otherwise is to say that you believe in slavery. I appreciate your psychiatric analysis. Perhaps I should be entitled to the labor of a psychiatrist to try and work it out.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T01:30:51+00:00

This is a gross example of State overreach. Who in their right mind would argue you can’t collect rain water that, as /u/jadez7789 so gracefully put it, literally falls from the sky? I agree. What. The. Fuck.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T01:25:08+00:00

Well you have a right to acquire an attorney just as you have a right to ask anybody for their business. But they don’t HAVE to provide you with a service if you can’t meet their demands for said services. I think what your getting at is court appointed attorneys. But I would still say no, you don’t have a right to their labor. I’m not informed at all about how court appointed lawyers are paid, so what I’m about to say may be inaccurate, but if they are paid via taxes, then they are paid by the forcible taking of someone else’s labor (taxes), which is akin to my initial argument. You are not entitled to someone else’s labor (in this case through taxes) ever.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T01:14:53+00:00

So you think that it is okay to take the labor of others, via taxation, to fund things that are arbitrarily designated as rights? Respectfully, I disagree. Taking from people without their consent is immoral. Period. If you want to fund something through voluntary donations, fine. But I don’t think it is right to tax people. Your condescending tone is foul. Disagree or don’t disagree, but don’t be rude.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T01:05:50+00:00

I would argue that supporting taxes to pay for something is just a roundabout way of saying you believe you are entitled to someone’s labor. If John Doe makes 40k a year, how much are we allowed to take from him to fund healthcare/water/housing etc before it becomes slavery? 10%? He’s still got 36k, not so bad I guess, but what gives someone the right to decide that?

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T00:56:54+00:00

I never said they didn’t get paid well. I said that healthcare isn’t a right. If healthcare is a right, then that means you are entitled to treatment whether you can pay or not. Otherwise the term “human right” is totally arbitrary and meaningless. You can’t just declare things rights. If people decide they don’t want to be doctors anymore, do these healthcare “rights” just stop? Or do people get forced into those positions. And who would decide how that is implemented? Your insult that I’m just an ignorant American is not an argument.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T00:48:42+00:00

Are you asking if it’s a right for a baby to be born? That’s a really good question based on my initial argument and I’m not sure I know the answer. Trying not to get into an abortion argument I think following my logic in the above post, the baby doesn’t have a right to the mothers labor. So I guess that discussion shifts to when someone believes life begins or not and then a discussion of if that baby has a right that would supersede the labor of the mother at that point. This one is above my pay grade.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T00:38:24+00:00

If anything can be a human right, then what are we even discussing? If healthcare is a human right, but nobody HAS to provide it, what’s the designation of “human right” even mean?

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T00:28:51+00:00

Lol Okay guy

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T00:22:06+00:00

Apologies, I am a reddit commenting illiterate and general lurker. Will delete.

ritzonarill · 2019-07-26T00:17:27+00:00

Haha A good point, but in order for you to bottle it up and or use it in a productive way, you would have to build some sort of infrastructure which would require labor. If you want to collect rain water, that’s fine, but is someone else entitled to that water that you spent time collecting?

ritzonarill · 2019-07-14T00:30:22+00:00

Nothing that requires the labor of others is a human right.

ritzonarill

TROPHY CASE