Views of Libertarians (financial, states, claim, agent)
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.
For the record, I meant aggression defined as offensive force/the initiation of force.
Our fundamental disagreement is on what constitutes defensive vs. offensive force.
This is true.
Let me give you an analogy. Say you’re stranded in the middle of the desert with another person.
There are nine water bottles. You claim eight and say the other has the freedom to use the ninth however he/she wants.
There are two faults with this assumption; the first is that both of you are in an environment where a lack of water equates to a lessening of one’s freedom. The second is that claim ownership is an authoritative claim on what people can and can’t use beyond reason.
Let me give you an analogy. Say you’re stranded in the middle of the desert with another person.
There are nine water bottles. You claim eight and say the other has the freedom to use the ninth however he/she wants.
There are two faults with this assumption; the first is that both of you are in an environment where a lack of water equates to a lessening of one’s freedom. The second is that claim ownership is an authoritative claim on what people can and can’t use beyond reason.
I’d like to get rid of both factors.
Who mixed their labor with previously unused materials to produce the bottles and then fill them? That is the rightful owner.
Though you aren't a statist in the traditional sense you too exhibit this fantasy that nature is kind and ready-made for humans to survive and thrive.
Like all statists you don't understand what constitutes private ownership. Marxism struggles here by making some absurd claim of personal and private property. It's one in the same.
Who mixed their labor with previously unused materials to produce the bottles and then fill them? That is the rightful owner.
Though you aren't a statist in the traditional sense you too exhibit this fantasy that nature is kind and ready-made for humans to survive and thrive.
The person who bought the bottles from the manufacturer, or the person who inherited them from their parents.
If you wanted a capitalism where people only owned what they themselves made, that would be different. But that is not the capitalism you imagine and the end results to the same problems I previously mentioned.
What we have. Or is a lousier system OK as long as a private company own it?
Have you ever tried firing the government? If so, how did it go?
Also, did you know the Ohio turnpike's fees were initially suppose to be temporary? Not sure of your age but my father b-itched about this until the day he died a few years ago.
The person who bought the bottles from the manufacturer, or the person who inherited them from their parents.
If you wanted a capitalism where people only owned what they themselves made, that would be different. But that is not the capitalism you imagine and the end results to the same problems I previously mentioned.
You're off on a tangent again.
How did those bottles get there? Are you seriously in denial on the legitimacy of transfer of ownership?
EDIT: What "problems"? The fact that Jesus Christ, Barney the Dinosaur, and Buddha only put a small percentage of potable water on earth?
How did those bottles get there? Are you seriously in denial on the legitimacy of transfer of ownership?
EDIT: What "problems"? The fact that Jesus Christ, Barney the Dinosaur, and Buddha only put a small percentage of potable water on earth?
Your "problem" is with existence/life itself.
1. My problem isn't with the transfer of ownership, it is with the ability to purchase and inherit more than you have the capacity to contain.
2. Re-read your last post I was replying to, you said their labor was involved in gaining ownership to the bottles, I responded that in capitalism that is not the only way to gain ownership.
You have two problems with this case, either you eliminate private ownership or you eliminate transfer of ownership. You want to keep both which is where the problem arises.
3. The problems I mentioned in my original post.
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.
