Ben Carson says he would “intensify” the war on drugs

[natro.hydro]

the first American slave holder was a black man.

Got a citation for that?? Never heard that before lol.

 

[Padawanbater2]

You never clarified that the property was ill gotten. Such assumption has no place in civilized debate. You merely asked if there should be limitations on property, nothing more.

I've also cited the basis of my standings.

It's presumed in the question - unless you believe money accrued through such means is legitimate

Elon Musk v. David Koch, Bill Gates v. Jamie Dimon, etc.

One is not like the other..

Which is particularly ironic when conservatives complain that liberals "just hate rich people!"

 

[abandonconflict]

That's odd, because Locke, Jefferson, or Franklin

I don't care what a bunch of dead white dudes said though. Appeal to authority is a fallacy.

the US government first granted... right to own

I snipped a few words out in order to show you that you didn't contradict my point with the second statement.

Let me know if you want some more logic lessons.

 

[Lord Kanti]

It's presumed in the question - unless you believe money accrued through such means is legitimate

Elon Musk v. David Koch, Bill Gates v. Jamie Dimon, etc.

One is not like the other..

Which is particularly ironic when conservatives complain that liberals "just hate rich people!"

It's not implied in the question.

 

[Lord Kanti]

I don't care what a bunch of dead white dudes said though. Appeal to authority is a fallacy.

I snipped a few words out in order to show you that you didn't contradict my point with the second statement.

Let me know if you want some more logic lessons.

My citation directly relates to inalienable rights and the foundation of the United States of America. If you don't care about liberty, the reason the USA exists, or why, then kindly find yourself a country to reside in that utilizes tyranny as its foundation, as that seems to better suit your view point.

 

[abandonconflict]

My citation directly relates to inalienable rights and the foundation of the United States of America. If you don't care about liberty, the reason the USA exists, or why, then kindly find yourself a country to reside in that utilizes tyranny as its foundation, as that seems to better suit your view point.

Nope, I'm going to stay in Murica and talk about how much I hate what you call liberty. Like genocide. You say Murica exists because liberty, but that's not so. Murica exists because slaves created so much wealth and white people murdered millions of indigenous people. If you don't like what I have to say, you're welcome to go live in North Korea, where I'm not allowed to say it and you're not allowed to read it.

Also, it is not your "inalienable right" to own a piece of the earth. That right comes from the gov't.

 

[Lord Kanti]

Got a citation for that?? Never heard that before lol.

Anthony Johnson sued when it was time for his indentured servant to be released. He won his case and legalized American slavery was born.

 

[abandonconflict]

And that's how neckbeard libertarians blame American slavery on black people.

 

[Lord Kanti]

Nope, I'm going to stay in Murica and talk about how much I hate what you call liberty. Like genocide. You say Murica exists because liberty, but that's not so. Murica exists because slaves created so much wealth and white people murdered millions of indigenous people. If you don't like what I have to say, you're welcome to go live in North Korea, where I'm not allowed to say it and you're not allowed to read it.

Also, it is not your "inalienable right" to own a piece of the earth. That right comes from the gov't.

According to the Declaration of Independence it is. Due to British impediment of the unalienable rights of Americans, the colonists declared their secession utilizing the basis of such rights as stated in the writings of John Locke.

 

[Padawanbater2]

It's not implied in the question.

It was presumed in the question unless you believe accruing wealth through exploitation, abuse, coercion or intimidation is a legitimate way to make a living

"I made a G today" - But you made it in a sleazy way"

Accruing income off the backs of others is not an "inalienable right"

 

[Lord Kanti]

It was presumed in the question unless you believe accruing wealth through exploitation, abuse, coercion or intimidation is a legitimate way to make a living

"I made a G today" - But you made it in a sleazy way"

Accruing income off the backs of others is not an "inalienable right"

You would have to prove that everyone who has made over 10 million dollars made it unethically and that it was a universally accepts fact; but you cannot.

 

[Padawanbater2]

You would have to prove that everyone who has made over 10 million dollars made it unethically and that it was a universally accepts fact; but you cannot.

Why would I have to prove "that everyone who has made over 10 million dollars made it unethically and that it's universally accepted as fact" to prove you don't have the unalienable right to accrue wealth by exploitation, abuse, coercion or intimidation?

Why don't you just prove to me that you do right now by quoting the section of the Constitution you believe gives you that right?

 

[Lord Kanti]

Why would I have to prove "that everyone who has made over 10 million dollars made it unethically and that it's universally accepted as fact" to prove you don't have the unalienable right to accrue wealth by exploitation, abuse, coercion or intimidation?

Why don't you just prove to me that you do right now by quoting the section of the Constitution you believe gives you that right?

Inalienable rights are covered in the Declaration of Independence which borrowed from the writings of John Locke. I'm referring to Property, and only property. How ever you pervert my statements is on you, as I never claimed that exploitation is an unalienable right.

 

[abandonconflict]

According to the Declaration of Independence it is. Due to British impediment of the unalienable rights of Americans, the colonists declared their secession utilizing the basis of such rights as stated in the writings of John Locke.

So in other words, the right to own a piece of the earth comes from the gov't.

 

[Lord Kanti]

So in other words, the right to own a piece of the earth comes from the gov't.

Locke states that the right to property is inalienable.

 

[abandonconflict]

Locke states that the right to property is inalienable.

You should claim some unoccupied land, and then just say it is yours because Locke said so. I'm sure the gov't won't mind.

 

[Lord Kanti]

You should claim some unoccupied land, and then just say it is yours because Locke said so. I'm sure the gov't won't mind.

That's not impossible to do in some western states.

 

[abandonconflict]

That's not impossible to do in some western states.

Yup, then you'll completely own it and you can hand your exclusive deed down to your kids, you won't have to pay any taxes and nobody will ever dispute it.

 

[Lord Kanti]

Yup, then you'll completely own it and you can hand your exclusive deed down to your kids, you won't have to pay any taxes and nobody will ever dispute it.

There is a good chance there will be taxes. Everything is taxed.

 

[abandonconflict]

There is a good chance there will be taxes. Everything is taxed.

How can they tax you if they don't give you a title?