Still not enough, say America’s voters. Sigh.
They are servants. Just not of the public. He gets a full pension because he did his job for his…
THE LAST DITCH
61 responses to “America’s debt is greater than all the money in the world.”
-
Yawn
I think we’ve established on the other thread that your definition of what can constitute rightful property depends entirely upon a lack of imagination regarding people’s desires.LikeLike
-
No, I don’t agree – just because something is funded by government doesn’t mean that it has to be centrally run – the UK has a bit of an odd system in that respect. I don’t see why the government should be so incompetent at providing funding to make the achievement of its aims impossible.
If you are saying that people must save money to save themselves – doesn’t that mean that those without money will not be able to save themselves? What do you propose for people without money, in your non-government world?LikeLike
-
I tend to agree, but that is NOT the system we are discussing, for better-or-worse welfare has been institutionalized and bureaucratized by the least capable money managers (government).
LikeLike
-
IE
“Universal rules are of course the ones freely choosing people choose…People with more than x or the ability to generate more than x (or even the hope that they might one day get more than x) will never rationally choose that everyone should be furnished with x by force. To give everyone x you must take from people with more than x against their will. What do “natural” principles have to do with anything?”
There was me thinking that your objection was based on some highfalutin laser logic, when in fact, it was based on a pretty stupid assumption. Namely, that while the poor will be able to imagine that they will someday be rich, the rich will never imagine that someday they might be poor – and never imagine that someday someone they care about might be poor.
Furthermore, this doesn’t even address the actual question as to whether your two chosen systems, communism and “natural property” rights also require force to be established. In fact, even from your own (silly) ideas, they clearly would – since while it is logical for the rich to oppose redistribution, it would be entirely logical for the poor to favour it – however will we solve this disagreement?
You then went into some bizarre aside about having me live in your dog house. I think that you are forgetting that I am the one saying that all social systems require a degree of force, as I have said many times now – all social systems require force to the degree that some people disagree and others insist… which is why we should try and build the system with which the least number of people disagree with the least passion.
I happen to think that a system which results in people’s families dieing unnecessarily, or starvation, or homelessness, is likely to provoke more passionate disagreement than one in which there is taxation. It is the nature of what we are being forced to do which is important, not the fact that there is force.LikeLike
-
“…while it is logical for the rich to oppose redistribution, it would be entirely logical for the poor to favour it – however will we solve this disagreement?…”
Firstly, you might as well say that burglary is “entirely logical” – does morality not enter into your thinking at all? Secondly, the “poor” (to the extent that Britain has any) should be capable of learning from history that redistribution impoverishes all, that the force required to prevent inequality returning will result in mass murder and famine and that undermining property rights is the surest way to kill economic growth.LikeLike
-
No, we have merely established that you have no morality when you see something you desire, but lack the talent or industry to earn.
LikeLike
-
?
Which rhetorical trick is this? Unfounded assertion?LikeLike
-
Yeah, think you’re having a different argument there Tom – TomSmith is claiming that there is some kind of method by which natural property can be established without reference to individual opinion – I assumed this was because of some natural moral system… but apparently he claims that any logical human would support his programme. I disagree.
So yes, morality and pragmatism are important, but what I’m trying to do here is disagree with his libertarianism is the only logical conclusion argument.LikeLike
-
Mark, Nothing is really “funded by the governemnt” like they have this magic money tree or horn of plenty.
It is funded by all who are not exclusively living off state benefit and that is a much smaller number then the figures suggest. Even some of that “benfit” finds it’s way back into the government’s pocket.
The UK government pension scheme is not “funded by the government” as was mentioned.
It is funded by people currently working and innocently believing they are paying towards their pension.
The government takes that money and uses it to pay current pensioners. It is flawed. It needs at least a stable or better increasing birthrate forever for it to work. Remember, without more investors the Ponzie scheme falls over.
The government could run a pension scheme based on sound and honest pinciples, like a building society. When it set the system up it chose not to do that, maybe (being nice here) because the people doing it were economically illiterate.
“If I am saying peopele must save for themselves”?
What do you think they are doing already?
Where does the money come from? Do fairies leave it under the pillows of treasury officials at midnight each night? Because the way you talk and argue you seem believe somewhere deep down like that is exactly what happens.
“Save for themselves” – Except they have to give it to the government to look after, they don’t get to choose, and the government are not looking after their contributions properly.
Non Governemnt world? I can’t see it will ever be possble to have that, much more limited government might, but the government has it’s hands all over stuff it should never go near in the way it does and it is expanding all the time like some cancer.
I think this conversation has no natural stop you will just come back with something else looks like self deception or perpetual motion to me so maybe we should just agree to disagree…LikeLike
-
Moggsy, the government have a magic money tree.
The government have a magic money tree.
They don’t have a horn of plenty, but money can be created by the government – just changing the numbers on a computer screen.
Where does the money come from? Do fairies leave it under the pillows of treasury officials at midnight each night? Because the way you talk and argue you seem believe somewhere deep down like that is exactly what happens.
And no, I don’t “agree to disagree” because where money comes from is a matter of fact rather thn opinion.
So where does money come from?LikeLike
-
Sorry that should read…
“Where does the money come from? Do fairies leave it under the pillows of treasury officials at midnight each night? Because the way you talk and argue you seem believe somewhere deep down like that is exactly what happens.”
Where do you think the money comes from?
I think it comes from either the government, or government cronies in the banking sector (which the government controls through interest rates).
And no, I don’t “agree to disagree” because where money comes from is a matter of fact rather thn opinion.
So where does money come from?LikeLike
Your blogger
Tom is a retired international lawyer. He was a partner in a City of London law firm and spent almost twenty years abroad serving clients from all over the world.
Returning to London on retirement in 2011, he was dismayed to discover how much liberty had been lost in the UK while he was away.
He’s a classical liberal (libertarian, if you must) who, like his illustrious namesake, considers that
“…government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.”
Socials
Subscribe
Receive content by email
Latest comments
One can only hope his neighbours, fellow lodge members (?) etc give him the cold shoulder.
The problem is that they already know about the blog and some read it. Why is that an issue? If…
Conversationally, I already operate on NATO “no first strike” principles. I am not going to start a political discussion with…
Why don’t you stick with what you are doing on the blogs but simply withdraw from discussion on politics with…
The Last Ditch by Tom Paine 
Leave a reply to Mark Cancel reply