Well donation was the wrong word, but yes, they have to pay an additional fee for Fire Department services.
But they dont get a tax reduction.
Public Schools
- Thread starter londonfog
- Start date
But they dont get a tax reduction.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Thanks for clarifying. The problem I see, is we often fall into the trap of using words that have been word smithed out of their original meaning by "our leaders".
Wouldn't it be better if instead of one grocery store or one car dealership or one fire protection service provider, there were many options for the customer to chose from ? I think competition among service providers, is a good thing.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
You also think pedophilia is consensual and that taxation is a warcrime.
Inb4 this post is compared to rape.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Wrong again. You should stop lying and misrepresenting what I say. If you don't understand it, that's one thing, to intentionally misrepresent it is another thing though. I don't think it is or isn't automatically, the circumstances of the situation and the individuals involved determine that. Of course you and the floor shitter guy attempt to turn what I just said into an endorsement of it...which is either deceitful or .intellectually shallow on your part.
Forcible taxation? How is it NOT an act of one party using a warlike tactic (aggression) to meet its goals? Please explain that...if you can.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
I was outraged when I first saw that then I talked to my brother-in-law who is a fireman Lt. He said that the way the department is set up they operate under that 75 dollar fee. If they had put the fire out, first of all, if one of the men gets hurt, or worse dies, they would not be covered by the fireman's insurance and the family would not be eligible for death benefits because it would operating outside of their jurisdiction unsanctioned. He also pointed out that if they saved a house for the guy who wouldn't pay (he'd been asked for months to send in his 75 dollars) then what incentive would there be to pay for the service? Nobody pays for the service and the firemen don't get paid, the trucks don't get maintenance and nobody can pay the electric bill.
The next door neighbor who had paid his 75 dollar fire fee had their house protected from the fire spreading to them.
I get that it's a shitty thing to do, but this is what that city agreed to and the guy refused to pay the fee until the fire started. Under the system they have, did they do the right thing?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Under the present circumstances it's a difficult question to answer. It needs to be put in the proper context.
I would first examine the scenario to describe what REALLY happened to identify the root cause of the situation.
If the people only had one choice of a fire department or service due to a forcibly held monopoly, any "agreement" they made with that agency was made under duress. Consensual agreements should be kept, forcibly made agreements I have a harder time with.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
I'll just let UncleBuck pull up the post where you described pedophilia as consensual.
Inb4 my Veteran's disability check gets compared with rape.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Yes, do that. I said HE consented to the bad man. I've also said or implied in reply to one of his jabs he sticks gerbils up his ass, that doesn't mean..oh wait, never mind on that one.
Also, if you or any other person consents to something, does that mean in every instance others consent to it or don't consent to it ? No, it doesn't.
I think you are trying to fuck with me, to avoid having a real discussion. Defeating Uncle Buck in a real argument is easy to do, you might be more of a challenge, but eventually you run for insults and false accusations too.
So what constitutes a voluntary act? Are you saying that an act you and I find reprehensible can never be voluntary if all of the parties to the act agree to it? Is the nature of the act what confers consent or does consent confer consent?
If you can't answer my last questions, I'm going to have to assume your motive isn't worth my time.
Last edited:
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
You described pedophilia as consensual. That is consistent with your views.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Now you're combining things to try to make me seem like a pervert, because you can't handle me in a straight up debate.
If something is consensual, it means the participants have consented. It doesn't mean that others, like me or you or anyone else approve of or disapprove of what they may have consented to does it?
For instance your taking money from people that have not consented to giving it to you...is a form of theft. I disapprove of that. If all of the money that you received was voluntarily given, it would be consensual.
So, what is property and who can own it? Scared?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
No, you literally (as in not figuratively) described pedophilia as consensual. I'm not trying to make you seem like anything, I just stated a fact.
Inb4 my Veteran's disability check gets compared to rape.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Out of context again, but nice try. Now you're floundering. It was portrayed as consensual when Uncle B. agreed to it with the bad man in my jab back at him. He and I have long history of that, started by him, I might add. It can also be "not consensual" too, except that doesn't fit your narrative, so you've abandoned that part of the discussion. Consent confers consent, not circumstance alone. So the question is really about who can consent and under which circumstances isn't it?
So, what is property and who can own it? You've always run from that discussion. In fact I bet you will now too. Scared ?
You also never answered my reply to why property tax is a form of theft. Why not?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Thanks for proving me correct yet again. You're dumb.
Inb4 pedophilia is described as consensual.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Your licking Uncle Bucks butt, doesn't become consensual or not consensual based on how reprehensible I or others might find it.
If you and he both consent to it, it is consensual. If he doesn't want you to lick his butt, and you insist on it, using the same type of tactic you derive your income from, FORCE, it would be "not consensual." It works the same in other instances too.
I think you are afraid of a real debate. If I'm "dumb" you can't even beat a dummy in a real debate.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
No, I'm comparing the method of funding government schools as being similar to rape and slavery in that all rely on forcibly taking away choice.
Are you saying that they all DON'T rely on imposed actions under threat of force?
You use a utilitarian argument, but never address the similarity of the means used to achieve the end you desire.
If you want to debate the point I raised, cool, but frankly I'm getting a little tired of your silliness that you run to when your arguments fail or you can't answer relevant questions.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
lol.
maybe if i compared more stuff to rape and slavery you wouldn't call it so silly.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
No, maybe if you were more consistent and didn't talk out of both sides of your mouth. I don't think systemic force is necessary to bring about a peaceful society, in fact logic insists it is impossible.
What is necessary is for people to respect others and their justly acquired property. Forcing people to interact or keeping those that want to interact from doing so, is the act of a controlling entity or person....in other words....you.
You are a fraud, a troll, and a floor shitter and a lousy debater to boot. You might grow some decent weed and sometimes can come up with a funny line due to its absurdity, but in any kind of a real discussion your slightly above average penis joined by your slightly above average intellect leaves you grasping for your crayons. Now here's the mop...get to it Poopy Pants.
Last edited:
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Except pedophilia, which he describes as consensual.