Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
you are correct, but human nature dictates differently when your starving to death...no, there is never a justification to steal...never, but, when going hungry, people would, and I honestly cannot tell you what I'd do, they say hunger makes you do things you wouldn't ordinarily do?
Your hunger level does not change the definition of what is immoral and unjust.
Your hunger level does not change the definition of what is immoral and unjust.
correct, it doesn't, and I didn't say it does, what I said was, you were correct, however, when people are starving, it's a whole different ball game...people do things they wouldn't ordinarily do.
No, I'm trying to justify state coercion to libertarians, and point out the silliness of anarcho-capitalism.
Spoiler alert: you need police, courts, and prisons to secure property rights.
No. In a small community, where everyone knows each other, and perhaps even going to the same church, no one would steal from each other. In fact, in a small tight-knit community, those who have, would be sharing with those without.
The downside to a diverse and large community, is that these social bonds would be lacking. When a community is too diverse and lacking in common bonds and true friendships/alliances, that's when people don't automatically help each other out and looting occurs in times of need.
No. In a small community, where everyone knows each other, and perhaps even going to the same church, no one would steal from each other. In fact, in a small tight-knit community, those who have, would be sharing with those without.
The downside to a diverse and large community, is that these social bonds would be lacking. When a community is too diverse and lacking in common bonds and true friendships/alliances, that's when people don't automatically help each other out and looting occurs in times of need.
No. In a small community, where everyone knows each other, and perhaps even going to the same church, no one would steal from each other. In fact, in a small tight-knit community, those who have, would be sharing with those without.
The downside to a diverse and large community, is that these social bonds would be lacking. When a community is too diverse and lacking in common bonds and true friendships/alliances, that's when people don't automatically help each other out and looting occurs in times of need.
There are too many people on the planet for all to live in villages where we only interact with people we are personally familiar with. Our economies of scale would collapse and with them our productivity and ability to support such a large population. The situation you are describing is a hunter-gatherer society, which hasn't existed for 10,000 years.
Are you saying if you are in need breaking the law is an option
For many income inequality is sufficient reason
The law is what makes use different from animals
Are you saying if you are in need breaking the law is an option
For many income inequality is sufficient reason
The law is what makes use different from animals
Breaking the law is always an option. There is no magic law fairy that enforces laws on our behalf. You can do something you know is wrong if you are desperate, so scruples are not enough to guarantee we follow the law. We need enforcement and punishment.
I of course have my own answer to the question, and I will banter with others arguing my own belief. Using questions as a form of response is the Socratic method.
So this thread is mostly rhetoric rather than curiousity. I am interested in the positions others give, and my own opinion is not set in stone, but regarding the libertarians' "usual suspects" of responses I'm fairly certain my opinion won't change.
The libertarian, or "anarcho capitalist" posters here are not very good representatives of the ideology. They are more provocative than substantive, and use the ideology more as a way of getting a rise out of people than actually trying to persuade them of its merit.
There are too many people on the planet for all to live in villages where we only interact with people we are personally familiar with. Our economies of scale would collapse and with them our productivity and ability to support such a large population. The situation you are describing is a hunter-gatherer society, which hasn't existed for 10,000 years.
No. It is possible to maintain villages within large communities. We need to stop trying to create diverse societies. Instead, let people live where they feel comfortable. And stop criticizing states like VT, NH and ME for being so white.
All I can say is that if I had a field of food, then my neighbors would not starve. It would be a non-issue
I mentioned this before, but what the country needs is a more cooperative and less selfish attitude.
Now when we were younger cats, and the old lady had our first kitten, we were struggling. We lived in a small house, in a new but lower middle class neighborhood. We continued to focus on our goals of education, getting our graduate degrees before anything else. Eventually, we both found high paying jobs, and were making $$$ while our neighbors were struggling.
Many hours I spent helping neighbors set goals, arrange finances and set their lives in order. Many times I picked up groceries for the disabled veteran who lived down the street, the poorest man on the block. Many other times I took the other one to the VA For his appointments because he could not drive and had forgotten to call ride-share to get him.
What happens then is that everyone started joining in taking care of each other. One guy bought and fixed a ride on mower and mowed my yard for free while I was in the hospital.
We planted a lime tree, and had enough limes to share with the whole neighborhood, more than we could possibly use ourselves. I won't say that we alone changed anything, but we certainly encouraged people by example to help each other out.
SO yeah, if I had a field of food, and you were my neighbor, as long as I had food to share, you would not be starving anyway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
