Search results

See, shifting from the general to the specific and the specific to the general is an argumentative gimmick. You will not find any post of mine that contains insults from me.

What is libertarianism then? I've asked you to describe it and all we get is "nope, it's not that". So what is it, your move.

Dude, this is your thread. It's about libertarianism. Jesus, you might consider just discussing things rather than insulting everyone who doesn't automatically agree with.. You, but we can't even agree with you because you haven't said anything yet. I have put out my ideas btw.

The difference on potency is minor. Perhaps a percent or two, you can as easily just take a quarter gram and adjust for the loss. People are far too sensitive about drying and picking time. Relax, it will be fine even if you wait till the caps are upward curved and you put them in a hot oven...

Nusum and the left are making the same old mistake. They think the right will be congruent. They believe that the court is really pivoting on a singular decision on sb 8 (or any other decision) they still believe that an ideological court will remain true to its prior decisions. But the...

Dude, I want to play. So let's. Please define your idea of libertarianism. Further, let's work with a country of ten million people. How "large" shoukd the governing body of that country be? You can use numbers of members, percentage of gnp, per capita percentage, I don't know, make your...

This is the logical fallacy known as "no true scottsman".

That IS libertarianism, that IS small government. Or you can show me where it is not. I'll wait.

Here it is again. "What we have doesn't work, therefore my unexplained system will". Faulty logic.

We can look at motivation. If a person claims that government is "too large" or that government can never actually help anyone then why would a person who believes that ever run for office knowing that his very act serves only to enlarge that government? This means that everyone who runs for...

This is flawed reasoning. "The system we have is flawed therefore only "my" system will work". But your system consists only of a nebulous reduction in an aspect of that other system. This is no different than my claiming that "bigger government" is the answer, without establishing a metric.

Some might. Or we could make helping "the little guy" profitable. But there will always be more profit in not doing so. Capitalism Is extremely proficient at solving problems and an utter failure at determining what problems should be solved.

I intend to sell a product that has arsenic in its formulation. If I buy or control information outlets that may report on death and injury, if I purchase medical reports on my product, if I manage news outlets regarding arsenic deaths, all legal and proper, then I can continue to sell my...

The surest way to avoid solving a problem is to blame a situation over which one has no control. "If only people would be better parents, our country would be better off".

You have thus far, failed to define "smaller government" as though "smaller" could be a definitive goal. I can't claim I want to weigh "less" and do anything but hope. Were I to see the scale register a pound reduction, does that satisfy my quest? Nope.

?

What would you like to know?

The biggest problem with libertarianism is that it is inherently reactionary and can never be preemptive. It depends upon. The inherent and proper understanding of the masses while it preaches intellectual classism. The flaw resides in a presumption that correct information cannot be...

In an ordinary world I would agree. But in a political atmosphere where we can be assured that any republican finds it unhealthy to think or speak against the grain of trumpism and more likely to be downright anti democracy I find it safest to vote for the D. Regardless of the particulars.

That is the point. Antibody dependent enhancement doesn't much alter transmisability. It just sickens more profoundly