So there is some objective standard of human happiness?
Oh by the way, since the state has a monopoly on infrastructure, I don't think pointing out that it undersupplies those goods helps your case at all. Quite the opposite; it's makes a great case for a stateless society. Schools, roads, hospitals, etc. are far too important to be left to government.
sjc wrote:
Quote:
Evidence? Oh that's right, you have a monopoly on the truth, therefore you don't need to provide evidence.
I have been providing evidence all along, you just choose to ignore it because it contradicts your religious beliefs.
What you provide are op/eds, dubious statistics and arbitrary measures (like the "Genuine Progress Indicator") from people/organizations with a clear partisan agenda, and links to subjects that are completely irrelevant to the case at hand. Case in point: the three links you posted above.
sjc wrote:
Quote:
Surprisingly, there is actually some small part of truth in this; see the quote by Ron Paul on my sig as to why. Of course, that's not capitalism though.
Sounds exactly like modern capitalism to me....
Then you obviously are mistaken about what capitalism is, and I would suggest that you acquaint yourself with it before making an even bigger fool out of yourself.
sjc Thinker
Joined: Nov 12, 2006
Posts: 423
Posted:
Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:35 am
offsprng46 wrote:
So there is some objective standard of human happiness?
I'm talking about quality of life, not happiness, and that is an agreed upon standard. One the USA had agreed upon.
Quote:
Oh by the way, since the state has a monopoly on infrastructure, I don't think pointing out that it undersupplies those goods helps your case at all. Quite the opposite; it's makes a great case for a stateless society. Schools, roads, hospitals, etc. are far too important to be left to government.
Not here in Canada. If anything the private sector has shown that it can't be trusted at all when it comes to supplying services. It puts a price on compassion. And that is immoral.
Quote:
What you provide are op/eds, dubious statistics and arbitrary measures (like the "Genuine Progress Indicator") from people/organizations with a clear partisan agenda, and links to subjects that are completely irrelevant to the case at hand. Case in point: the three links you posted above.
Nope. What they do is contradict your religious beliefs.
Quote:
Then you obviously are mistaken about what capitalism is, and I would suggest that you acquaint yourself with it before making an even bigger fool out of yourself.
I know what it has evolved into. You, on the other hand, believe in a system that doesn't exist in the real world. It was so flawed that it couldn't survive long enough to even qualify as a bad example. So, in fact you are the fool here.
So there is some objective standard of human happiness?
I'm talking about quality of life, not happiness,
The two are synonymous in this context.
sjc wrote:
and that is an agreed upon standard. One the USA had agreed upon.
Blatant lie. And even if some government bureaucrats did agree on an arbitrary statistic as an objective measure of the standard of living, it doesn't make it true.
sjc wrote:
Quote:
Oh by the way, since the state has a monopoly on infrastructure, I don't think pointing out that it undersupplies those goods helps your case at all. Quite the opposite; it's makes a great case for a stateless society. Schools, roads, hospitals, etc. are far too important to be left to government.
Not here in Canada. If anything the private sector has shown that it can't be trusted at all when it comes to supplying services.
I see, so the private sector is somehow to blame for the poor performance of a sector the state has monopolized. God damn you're an idiot.
sjc wrote:
It puts a price on compassion.
Compassion like making a kid with cancer wait a month for treatment? That kind of compassion?
sjc wrote:
And that is immoral.
I refuse to accept any claim of morality/immorality coming from you until you can come up with some coherent, logical, objective moral philosophy.
sjc wrote:
Quote:
What you provide are op/eds, dubious statistics and arbitrary measures (like the "Genuine Progress Indicator") from people/organizations with a clear partisan agenda, and links to subjects that are completely irrelevant to the case at hand. Case in point: the three links you posted above.
Nope. What they do is contradict your religious beliefs.
Prove that an increase in the "genuine progress indicator" necessarily means that human happiness has increased. Prove it right the fuck now. Oh wait - you can't, as it's impossible. And everyone knows that you're the one with the religious beliefs here, the religion of statism.
sjc wrote:
Quote:
Then you obviously are mistaken about what capitalism is, and I would suggest that you acquaint yourself with it before making an even bigger fool out of yourself.
I know what it has evolved into. You, on the other hand, believe in a system that doesn't exist in the real world. It was so flawed that it couldn't survive long enough to even qualify as a bad example. So, in fact you are the fool here.
Actually, it's socialism that cannot survive in the real world. A market economy is the only viable type of economy. For more on the failure of socialism, see the collapse of the Soviet Empire. And capitalism is the lack of interference in buying, selling, trading, and producing. Once again, I'm not going to let you arbitrarily redefine words in order to set up a strawman.
Further, your argument that since an anarcho-capitalist society doesn't currently exist it could never exist is wholly specious. Every type of societal structure and economic system ever conceived at one point had not been put into practice, even your beloved socialism.
sjc Thinker
Joined: Nov 12, 2006
Posts: 423
Posted:
Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:21 am
Quote:
the two are synonymous in this context.
No, they aren't. Quality of life is a matter of needs, happiness is primarily a matter of wants.
Quote:
Blatant lie. And even if some government bureaucrats did agree on an arbitrary statistic as an objective measure of the standard of living, it doesn't make it true.
So, that is how you justify not honoring your agreements and the like. You choose to forget that the USA is a founding member of the UN. It wasn't forced to sign it. Plus, you're got it wrong yet again. I'm not talking about standard of living. I talking about quality of life. You can have a high standard of living, when compared to others, but still have a lower quality of life. There is the example of the industrial worker of the late 19th and early 20th centuries who had a much better standard of living as compared to what they had before, but they were at the mercy of their employers. In that they could be fired without cause, had the constant worry of being maimed or killed thus leaving their families without a means to support themselves. And they couldn't quit either.
And it wasn't arbitrary. But than again you think that life is nothing more than a business opportunity to be exploited, just like everything else. And yes, you are immoral for believing such things. You're not much of a human being.
Quote:
Compassion like making a kid with cancer wait a month for treatment? That kind of compassion?
You're still using that lame excuse. As I had said, you're assuming that he isn't getting any care at all, and that it is always that long a wait. It says up too. Some provinces there isn't all that much of a wait and some there is a wait. Under your system a person who has a much less serious condition can get ahead in line just because they have more money. In our system a person with a truly serious condition gets moved ahead of the line and they don't have to pay for it. BTW, America has a higher rate of cancers than Canada does.
And there is the fact that you have the same sort of waits for the same things, you just leave the majority behind in favor of the rich. A growing number of Americans don't even have the option to wait in line at all since they're too poor to afford paying for your compassion. In other words you put a monetary value on compassion and that is truly immoral. And there is also another fact you like to ignore. We're fixing the problem, yours is only getting worse. Far worse. So in reality, something you should learn about, our system is far more compassionate and humane than you're greed based system is which will let people die just because they don't have enough money. Where things like Viagra and facelifts are more important than finding cures for real diseases.
You fundies and your deluded beliefs. All just to defend your hatred and ignorance. What a fuktard.
Gerard Grand Poster
Joined: Nov 19, 2003
Posts: 1740
Location: Groningen, the Netherlands
Posted:
Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:40 am
Is this a discussion about science?
I don't think it is.
View next topic View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
* You can syndicate our news and blog using the file