Banned

Banned from a website, for coming up with logical arguments that the "blogger", who happens to be a coward, couldn't dispute. One of the arguments I have already posted under reply to pro tax state-ist. I guess I should post his response to me which led me to put him in his place.

"The “ideal market” does not exist, it’s a ficitonal utopia created by libertarians as an unreachable goal. Much like the “kingdom of god”."

The ideal market does not exist because of the plague of intervention. The only blockade in reaching a free market is intervention, so your argument is incorrect.

Calling someone a moron is not an argument. If you believe you are being opressed and stolen from then you have options. You have chosen to stay and “fight”. By choosing to stay you are willingly allowing the government to control you. You have consented. Consented under protest but consented none the less."

Calling someone a moron, when the person is a moron, is an argument. Yes you have options to leave your home, a place which is controlled by an illegal force exerting power over your home. What is your option by the way? Oh, yeah to go to other governments. How awesome. That way they can steal from me, and claim I agreed to their laws and signed their constitutions. You are very weak in your arguments. You are clearly a person who believes in contradiction, which I get from your statement “Consented under protest but consented none the less.” Idiotic.

"That reminds m, I have all these links debubnking the “taxes are theft” argument lying around. I’ll have to post them. Thanks for the reminder."

He never posted his "links", and he never responded to my argument.

"To argue that any intervention of any kind must neccesarily leade to “bad things tm” is to argue against the vast bulk of economics and a bit of history to boot."

I would like to know what intervention you are talking about. Maybe you are speaking of the eight hour work day, which led to labor rights activists to calm down a bit. Perhaps, you are referring to patents which increase the price of a good significantly. Perhaps you are speaking of child labor laws, which only re-affirmed a childs right to not work, actually prohibiting children from working, whether they would like to or not. Perhaps you are referring to the monopoly on currency, which creates a wide gap in the standard of living

"I pay my stock broker more than I am paid for the same amount of time/effort. I pay my doctor more, my dentist, my mechanic. It’s nonsense to say we wouldn’t pay more for the expertise and resources of government than we ourselves are paid."

Notice how all of these individuals make a living off of you because you voluntarily pay them. You don’t voluntarily pay a president $400,000 a year. See the difference? One is a real business practice while the other is fake, and can only exist with coercion. I know of another organization that stole from people, the Mafia, it was for protection.

"Government can be manipulated to serve the few and all government do over the course of time. That’s why we need to drastically rearrange society every few centuries.

To say that government can be misused is not an argument against government. It’s an argument against bad government."

Actually it's an argument against government. There will always be those who will misuse government, always, and to think that there is such thing as good government is retarded. There might be "better" government, but any organization that claims power over ones life in exchange for protection is not "good". There might be "better" mafia but there will never be good mafia. So there will always be these people who misuse government. To me the best solution to that is to remove the tool they use to do evil.

"Argument ad hitlerum.

Thrawn is not arguing for direct democracy and nothing thrawn says rules out putting into place limits on power like rights or constitutions.

Even in your anarcho-capitalist utopia there would be tides of cultural oppression. There is no perfect system free from evil (which I hear you don’t believe in, oh the jokes to be made). So saying “it’s not perfect” is not an argument."

Can you deny the facts? The extermination was for the common good, according to Hitler. Rights and constitutions are not enough to protect the individual. You two don’t understand this. The only legitimate use of government is temporary to set up roads, infrastructure, etc, aka voluntary collectivism, and some would argue this isn't necessary.
You can marginalize these ideas, but they have never been tested, at least not that I am aware of. Government has and it has failed miserably. Time for a new hypothesis.

I am not an anarcho-capitalist. You still clearly don’t understand the term “free Market”. Once again, system of trade unregulated.