Debate with a Trumper (any Trumper)

[HAF2]

If somebody does mind paying for something and simply prefers to be responsible for themselves and make their own choices, are you favor of forcing them to abide by your wishes ?

I think that "somebody" should go live on an isolated island if they don't want to be a part of society.

Then no one has to abide by any wishes they don't want.

 

[SneekyNinja]

Oh now let's not get dramatic here.

Is there a level of taxation where you think it is unjust ? Which percent of taking from another person something which belongs to them (against there will), makes an action theft ? 53% ? 73% ? How much ?

Loaded question...

Ackbar suggests it could be a trap.

 

[DiogenesTheWiser]

Oh thanks for clarifying, for a minute there I thought since you had alluded to your awesome debate skills you were ready to have them tested. I'll be moving along now.

You use similar tactics as alluded to in the OP. Complex questions muddle issues, and that was certainly your goal in presenting the complex question you posted. You prefer not to debate about Trumpers' weak debate skills and instead want to derail the thread in hopes of stating your own support for a woefully deficient healthcare system.

Trumpers refuse to support their claims with verifiable info. And I think I captured that in the OP. Do you have a comment on this? or do you prefer to weaken debate and understanding on anything by throwing out philosophical, complex questions that do nothing to help anyone understand the nature of debate when engaging Trumpers?

Other things Trumpers do is call people "libtards" and "sheeple." -- Again, these tactics do nothing to advance one's position on any issue, be it healthcare or national defense, but Trumpers swear by it. Is that because their god does the same thing?

So why do Trumpers have such weak argumentation skills?

 

[DiogenesTheWiser]

Do give your land back to the people that claimed it first.
How did you file your taxes this year ? Did your sons eat lunch at the public schools they attended. Did you have to drive them on the roads that we all paid for ? Have you ever visited a library with your boys when they were younger ?

probably not. He's up there on Ruby Ridge with the other ZOGists.

 

[UncleBuck]

Oh now let's not get dramatic here.

Is there a level of taxation where you think it is unjust ? Which percent of taking from another person something which belongs to them (against there will), makes an action theft ? 53% ? 73% ? How much ?

you forgot to address the part about you thinking it's OK for old men to have sex with 11 year olds.

 

[Jimdamick]

I would prefer that my tax dollars do not support our huge military-industrial complex, but I don't have much say so in that. I'm buying high-tech gadgets produced by General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin that's forced upon me by our wonderful leaders in Washington, D.C.

How is a single payer system different from that kind of taxation?

Similarly, I don't like the way the state takes my money to pay for the Louisiana Highway Patrol--those jackbooted thugs--but again, i don't have much say so in what my tax dollars are buying.

Good point.
I don't like subsidising foreign nations that abuse their citizens, like Egypt.
I don't like subsidising foreign nations like Israel, that abuse the Palestinians, just like I did not like the support of Iraq when they were at war with Iran, or supporting Iran when it was at war with Iraq. Figure that one out, but it made sense to Reagan apparently, just like GW invading Iraq
Basically, I hate all the wasted billions and billions and billions of dollars this nation spends overseas, supporting the cocksucker of the day, that inevitably leads us into more shit. (Afghanistan anyone?)
Keep the fucking money at home, and if we did, the world would be a better place instead of propping up regimes that hate us anyway, except for the cash, and then we would actually afford a single payer health care system in this fucked up country.
Just think about that.

 

[ttystikk]

I would prefer that my tax dollars do not support our huge military-industrial complex, but I don't have much say so in that. I'm buying high-tech gadgets produced by General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin that's forced upon me by our wonderful leaders in Washington, D.C.

How is a single payer system different from that kind of taxation?

Similarly, I don't like the way the state takes my money to pay for the Louisiana Highway Patrol--those jackbooted thugs--but again, i don't have much say so in what my tax dollars are buying.

Believe it or not, you do;

Itemize your taxes and spend your tax money on tax deductible causes. Qualifying charitable donations are tax deductible.

If everyone did this, they'd still build missiles and fighter planes, though. They'll just charge your kids for them.

 

[ttystikk]

Good point.
I don't like subsidising foreign nations that abuse their citizens, like Egypt.
I don't like subsidising foreign nations like Israel, that abuse the Palestinians, just like I did not like the support of Iraq when they were at war with Iran, or supporting Iran when it was at war with Iraq. Figure that one out, but it made sense to Reagan apparently, just like GW invading Iraq
Basically, I hate all the wasted billions and billions and billions of dollars this nation spends overseas, supporting the cocksucker of the day, that inevitably leads us into more shit. (Afghanistan anyone?)
Keep the fucking money at home, and if we did, the world would be a better place instead of propping up regimes that hate us anyway, except for the cash, and then we would actually afford a single payer health care system in this fucked up country.
Just think about that.

Trust me, I think about this every day.

 

[Rob Roy]

You use similar tactics as alluded to in the OP. Complex questions muddle issues, and that was certainly your goal in presenting the complex question you posted. You prefer not to debate about Trumpers' weak debate skills and instead want to derail the thread in hopes of stating your own support for a woefully deficient healthcare system.

Trumpers refuse to support their claims with verifiable info. And I think I captured that in the OP. Do you have a comment on this? or do you prefer to weaken debate and understanding on anything by throwing out philosophical, complex questions that do nothing to help anyone understand the nature of debate when engaging Trumpers?

Other things Trumpers do is call people "libtards" and "sheeple." -- Again, these tactics do nothing to advance one's position on any issue, be it healthcare or national defense, but Trumpers swear by it. Is that because their god does the same thing?

So why do Trumpers have such weak argumentation skills?

You caught me. You are correct, I would prefer not to debate anybody about which pile of turd Political party smells the least or debates the worst.

Trumpers have such weak argumentation skills, because they are essentially the same as Clintonites. They both think you shouldn't run your own life and they rarely question whether or not there should be a plantation, instead, like Clintonites they get mired on the wrong argument ; who should run the plantation.

In other words, they both default to an assumption that is erroneous. That assumption is that government is a good thing and that it can be justified when examined objectively. It can't.

 

[Rob Roy]

I think that "somebody" should go live on an isolated island if they don't want to be a part of society.

Then no one has to abide by any wishes they don't want.

So, are you saying if a person wishes to be left alone or wishes to have a say in who they will interact with, you are willing to attack them, in order to get your way. even if they aren't attacking you ?


Your last line wasn't well thought out and can easily be refuted. If you answer my question above, it will become obvious why.

 

[HAF2]

Your last line wasn't well thought out and can easily be refuted. If you answer my question above, it will become obvious why.

 

[srh88]

So, are you saying if a person wishes to be left alone or wishes to have a say in who they will interact with, you are willing to attack them, in order to get your way. even if they aren't attacking you ?


Your last line wasn't well thought out and can easily be refuted. If you answer my question above, it will become obvious why.

That somebody shouldn't open a business to the public. Or bought a house KNOWING you'd be paying taxes.
That's like going up to someone and punching them and getting hit back not expecting it so you bitch and moan and think it's ok for children to consent

 

[Blunted 4 lyfe]

So, are you saying if a person wishes to be left alone or wishes to have a say in who they will interact with, you are willing to attack them, in order to get your way. even if they aren't attacking you ?


Your last line wasn't well thought out and can easily be refuted. If you answer my question above, it will become obvious why.

NAMBLA wants you back pedo

 

[schuylaar]

You caught me. You are correct, I would prefer not to debate anybody about which pile of turd Political party smells the least or debates the worst.

Trumpers have such weak argumentation skills, because they are essentially the same as Clintonites. They both think you shouldn't run your own life and they rarely question whether or not there should be a plantation, instead, like Clintonites they get mired on the wrong argument ; who should run the plantation.

In other words, they both default to an assumption that is erroneous. That assumption is that government is a good thing and that it can be justified when examined objectively. It can't.

Finally, a real post!

 

[schuylaar]

That somebody shouldn't open a business to the public. Or bought a house KNOWING you'd be paying taxes.
That's like going up to someone and punching them and getting hit back not expecting it so you bitch and moan and think it's ok for children to consent

Well, we don't really know if @Rob Roy stories of shunning taxation are true. For all we know he's just some regular non-anarchy dude with a house, wife and three kids..your neighbor sparking one up while surfing the web.

 

[schuylaar]

So, are you saying if a person wishes to be left alone or wishes to have a say in who they will interact with, you are willing to attack them, in order to get your way. even if they aren't attacking you ?


Your last line wasn't well thought out and can easily be refuted. If you answer my question above, it will become obvious why.

I'll answer it! But first, you have to clarify

Attack them? In what way?

 

[DiogenesTheWiser]

I honestly don't get the no government types. Have they ever heard of the Hobbesian state of nature? Where life is nasty, brutish, and short? Haven't they seen the post-apocalyptic fantasies in which government collapses for some reason or another? Haven't they read the history of the old Southwest and the history of the West? No government is not a tenable prospect.

 

[schuylaar]

I honestly don't get the no government types. Have they ever heard of the Hobbesian state of nature? Where life is nasty, brutish, and short? Haven't they seen the post-apocalyptic fantasies in which government collapses for some reason or another? Haven't they read the history of the old Southwest and the history of the West? No government is not a tenable prospect.

In 1860, your average life expectancy was 40 years.

 

[Rob Roy]

That somebody shouldn't open a business to the public. Or bought a house KNOWING you'd be paying taxes.
That's like going up to someone and punching them and getting hit back not expecting it so you bitch and moan and think it's ok for children to consent

When you say "open a business to the public" you seem to be missing the point. Any person who wants to retain ownership choices of who they will do business with or not, obviously isn't "open to the public" (as in everyone), certainly not by their choice anyway. How could they be?

So, before I can address your absurd assertion, you should check your premise.

 

[Rob Roy]

In 1860, your average life expectancy was 40 years.

I honestly don't get the no government types. Have they ever heard of the Hobbesian state of nature? Where life is nasty, brutish, and short? Haven't they seen the post-apocalyptic fantasies in which government collapses for some reason or another? Haven't they read the history of the old Southwest and the history of the West? No government is not a tenable prospect.

Can a person delegate a right they do not possess?