Capitalism vs Communism dosnt matter

[Rentalia]

There are countries who are less government dependent, when it comes to electricity and water supply. Do you really think we would have to drink water out of a rain barrel, if it was not for the government?

Well you should read what happened when government privatized water in Bolivia

i know that facts(like Global Warming) are anathema for libertarians because fact destroy every dogmatic assumption that libertarians "a-priori logic" makes but well you should try

[Treznor]

Point out ONE of those that are required for you to survive, and then get back to me. Until then, they are conveniences.

Let's see, clean water, safe food, safe transportation, safety in the workplace, safe shelter and personal safety. I count six. Anyone else?

How many of these can I provide for myself? I count six. Anyone else?

Prove it. Become a hermit where you build your own roads, grow your own food, protect your dwelling from natural elements and any passing raiders, all the while ensuring that your work environment doesn't pose significant hazard to your healthy or safety. Then we'll talk.

[Big Jim P]

Point out ONE of those that are required for you to survive, and get back to me. Until then, they are conveniences.

Fine, I dare YOU to live without any of these things, including the clean water, for a month

Surely you can manage without simple conceniences

I can and have, and please note: I am capable of making water drinkable. I can do a great many other things as well. It is called self-sufficiency, and those of you raised on the government/social tit would do well to learn it.

Uh huh. And without the infrastructure created by the government to ensure quality of products, just how many people do you think are going to learn how to become self-sufficient? How many of them are going to be aware that they need to ensure their water is safe to drink? You're arguing self-sufficiency after you've benefited from a society that has had to drill into its citizens heads why regulation is necessary in the first place, since it's cheaper to deliver goods and services without safety regulations.

I am arguing nothing beyond the fact that I can survive without the convenience provided by society/government. I can find and boil water. I can hunt and gather food. I can build a shelter when needed. everything beyond that in unnecessary to survival.

[Self--Esteem]

There are countries who are less government dependent, when it comes to electricity and water supply. Do you really think we would have to drink water out of a rain barrel, if it was not for the government?

Well you should read what happened when government privatized water in Bolivia

i know that facts(like Global Warming) are anathema for libertarians because fact destroy every dogmatic assumption that libertarians "a-priori logic" makes but well you should try

I love how you just said "facts like Global Warming". Straight move to discredit yourself.

[Big Jim P]

Point out ONE of those that are required for you to survive, and then get back to me. Until then, they are conveniences.

Let's see, clean water, safe food, safe transportation, safety in the workplace, safe shelter and personal safety. I count six. Anyone else?

How many of these can I provide for myself? I count six. Anyone else?

Prove it. Become a hermit where you build your own roads, grow your own food, protect your dwelling from natural elements and any passing raiders, all the while ensuring that your work environment doesn't pose significant hazard to your healthy or safety. Then we'll talk.

see my post above.

[Rentalia]

I love how you just said "facts like Global Warming". Straight move to discredit yourself.

No i have read and studied the SCIENTIFIC reports...and i side with 99,9% of Climate researchers

you are on the side of the plutocrat fundie and Sarah Palin who seriously believe there is a "global warming conspiracy hoax" because they can't admit that the externalization generated by capitalism/free market are the worst case of market failure

gratz

[Treznor]

Point out ONE of those that are required for you to survive, and get back to me. Until then, they are conveniences.

Fine, I dare YOU to live without any of these things, including the clean water, for a month

Surely you can manage without simple conceniences

I can and have, and please note: I am capable of making water drinkable. I can do a great many other things as well. It is called self-sufficiency, and those of you raised on the government/social tit would do well to learn it.

Uh huh. And without the infrastructure created by the government to ensure quality of products, just how many people do you think are going to learn how to become self-sufficient? How many of them are going to be aware that they need to ensure their water is safe to drink? You're arguing self-sufficiency after you've benefited from a society that has had to drill into its citizens heads why regulation is necessary in the first place, since it's cheaper to deliver goods and services without safety regulations.

I am arguing nothing beyond the fact that I can survive without the convenience provided by society/government. I can find and boil water. I can hunt and gather food. I can build a shelter when needed. everything beyond that in unnecessary to survival.

And what you completely ignore is the fact that you're only aware of these things because you live in a society where regulatory oversight was imposed because people were getting sick and dying because these things were not being delivered with the appropriate safeguards. You're bitching about government regulation after the fact, ignoring that it was imposed because these were real problems that people demanded solutions for. The private market wasn't interested in delivering solutions, so people turned to the government to enforce them.

[Yethtu]

Point out ONE of those that are required for you to survive, and get back to me. Until then, they are conveniences.

Fine, I dare YOU to live without any of these things, including the clean water, for a month

Surely you can manage without simple conceniences

I can and have, and please note: I am capable of making water drinkable. I can do a great many other things as well. It is called self-sufficiency, and those of you raised on the government/social tit would do well to learn it.

Uh huh. And without the infrastructure created by the government to ensure quality of products, just how many people do you think are going to learn how to become self-sufficient? How many of them are going to be aware that they need to ensure their water is safe to drink? You're arguing self-sufficiency after you've benefited from a society that has had to drill into its citizens heads why regulation is necessary in the first place, since it's cheaper to deliver goods and services without safety regulations.

I am arguing nothing beyond the fact that I can survive without the convenience provided by society/government. I can find and boil water. I can hunt and gather food. I can build a shelter when needed. everything beyond that in unnecessary to survival.

Then throw of the shackles of soceity and do it. Just remember, don't take anything that was made by somebody in a "government" soceity, or you lose

[Big Jim P]

Point out ONE of those that are required for you to survive, and get back to me. Until then, they are conveniences.

Fine, I dare YOU to live without any of these things, including the clean water, for a month

Surely you can manage without simple conceniences

I can and have, and please note: I am capable of making water drinkable. I can do a great many other things as well. It is called self-sufficiency, and those of you raised on the government/social tit would do well to learn it.

Uh huh. And without the infrastructure created by the government to ensure quality of products, just how many people do you think are going to learn how to become self-sufficient? How many of them are going to be aware that they need to ensure their water is safe to drink? You're arguing self-sufficiency after you've benefited from a society that has had to drill into its citizens heads why regulation is necessary in the first place, since it's cheaper to deliver goods and services without safety regulations.

I am arguing nothing beyond the fact that I can survive without the convenience provided by society/government. I can find and boil water. I can hunt and gather food. I can build a shelter when needed. everything beyond that in unnecessary to survival.

And what you completely ignore is the fact that you're only aware of these things because you live in a society where regulatory oversight was imposed because people were getting sick and dying because these things were not being delivered with the appropriate safeguards. You're bitching about government regulation after the fact, ignoring that it was imposed because these were real problems that people demanded solutions for. The private market wasn't interested in delivering solutions, so people turned to the government to enforce them.

You are ignoring what I have said: I do not need the conveniences provided by the government, society (or corporations, another form of government). Nor do you.

If it all collapsed, both capitalistic and communistic society, could you survive? Have you learned what is safe to eat, how to make a fire, how to boil water? It saddens me that humans have become so dependent on their devices, that they can no longer live without them.

[Self--Esteem]

I love how you just said "facts like Global Warming". Straight move to discredit yourself.

lol

you are ignorant and happy about it gratz

No. You warmers are extreme and dangerous. Thanks to this megalomaniac, anti-democratic nationalist who calls himself Al Gore, people lost their jobs or had to sell their cars. The prices in many European countries went up to 1,60 euro/l by the time his lunacies hit Europe. That's $2US by today's rate and was nearly $3US back then.

Such behaviour is un-excusable and the US government would have done good to fire him.

[Self--Esteem]

I love how you just said "facts like Global Warming". Straight move to discredit yourself.

No i have read and studied the SCIENTIFIC reports...and i side with 99,9% of Climate researchers

you are on the side of the plutocrat fundie and Sarah Palin who seriously believe there is a "global warming conspiracy hoax" because they can't admit that the externalization generated by capitalism/free market are the worst case of market failure

gratz

99,9% of what? There isn't even such a consent between the researchers. And I fail to see how it is not a hoax when those measurement facilities closest to the North-Pole get shut down by the Canadian government.

[Rentalia]

No. You warmers are extreme and dangerous. Thanks to this megalomaniac, anti-democratic nationalist who calls himself Al Gore, people lost their jobs or had to sell their cars. The prices in many European countries went up to 1,60 euro/l by the time his lunacies hit Europe. That's $2US by today's rate and was nearly $3US back then.

Such behaviour is un-excusable and the US government would have done good to fire him.

AHAHAHA

nice nick "self-esteem"

you really need it because when you will discover your real value you WILL want to shoot yourself in the face fucking idiot

@Big Jim P: you are a fucking 14-year-old affected by some form of mild-autism,you would die by famine after 3 days in a jungle

(i will get a ban but i don't care.....the average IQ here at NSG is below the line of tolerability)

99,9% of what? There isn't even such a consent between the researchers..

AHAHAHA source? FOX NEWS?

HEARD WELL FUCKING IDIOT:GLOBAL WARMING IS A FACT LIKE GRAVITY OR DARWINISM. THERE IS A SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS.
fucking moron

[Treznor]

And what you completely ignore is the fact that you're only aware of these things because you live in a society where regulatory oversight was imposed because people were getting sick and dying because these things were not being delivered with the appropriate safeguards. You're bitching about government regulation after the fact, ignoring that it was imposed because these were real problems that people demanded solutions for. The private market wasn't interested in delivering solutions, so people turned to the government to enforce them.

You are ignoring what I have said: I do not need the conveniences provided by the government, society (or corporations, another form of government). Nor do you.

If it all collapsed, both capitalistic and communistic society, could you survive? Have you learned what is safe to eat, how to make a fire, how to boil water? It saddens me that humans have become so dependent on their devices, that they can no longer live without them.

If it all collapsed, this generation might remember the need to boil water, but the next? The one after? How long before we're right back where we started? You're arguing that we should be self-sufficient because you've had the luxury of living in a society where it's possible to study those issues and learn why they're necessary.

If the government abandons all regulatory oversight and surrenders all services to private organizations, how long before those businesses start cutting costs by abandoning health and safety measures? The Tennessee coal mine collapsed because the company fought hard against the safety regulations that would have prevented the deaths of 24 miners. The oil platform in the Gulf was owned by a company that was, again, fighting the regulations that would have kept it safe.

Self-sufficiency is a irrelevant. It's a concern when we don't have the support of our communities to manage day-to-day functions like clean water and safe roads, but we have those communities and the infrastructure that was provided to us by our governments. The issue is how do we best manage that infrastructure? There's an argument that everything is best managed by free enterprise, that governments only create waste and corruption. I call bullshit. The most corruption we see is when there's no oversight to keep organizations honest, whether we're talking about the government or a private company.

[Self--Esteem]

the average IQ here at NSG is below the line of tolerability)

Swearing like this isn't exactly a measurement for intelligence, either.

[Treznor]

[quote="Rentalia";p="2011904"][/quote]
Psst! Don't flame!

[North Suran]

No. You warmers are extreme and dangerous. Thanks to this megalomaniac, anti-democratic nationalist who calls himself Al Gore, people lost their jobs or had to sell their cars. The prices in many European countries went up to 1,60 euro/l by the time his lunacies hit Europe. That's $2US by today's rate and was nearly $3US back then.

Such behaviour is un-excusable and the US government would have done good to fire him.

So you accuse Al Gore of being "anti-democratic" and "nationalist", before calling for the US Government to fire him for speaking his views. Right.

The reason why oil prices are high isn't due to Al Gore. It is because of OPEC, an international organisation which actively colludes to keep the world price of oil high. OPEC shows what happens when no regulatory bodies exist; monopolies of powerful firms screwing over the average man in favour of maximum profits.

[Treznor]

No. You warmers are extreme and dangerous. Thanks to this megalomaniac, anti-democratic nationalist who calls himself Al Gore, people lost their jobs or had to sell their cars. The prices in many European countries went up to 1,60 euro/l by the time his lunacies hit Europe. That's $2US by today's rate and was nearly $3US back then.

Such behaviour is un-excusable and the US government would have done good to fire him.

So you accuse Al Gore of being "anti-democratic" and "nationalist", before calling for the US Government to fire him for speaking his views. Right.

The reason why oil prices are high isn't due to Al Gore. It is because of OPEC, an international organisation which actively colludes to keep the world price of oil high. OPEC shows what happens when no regulatory bodies exist; monopolies of powerful firms screwing over the average man in favour of maximum profits.

Technically, OPEC is an oligarchy which is not a monopoly but a small group of companies acting together in monopolistic fashion.

Yet another consequence of free market principles.

[North Suran]

No. You warmers are extreme and dangerous. Thanks to this megalomaniac, anti-democratic nationalist who calls himself Al Gore, people lost their jobs or had to sell their cars. The prices in many European countries went up to 1,60 euro/l by the time his lunacies hit Europe. That's $2US by today's rate and was nearly $3US back then.

Such behaviour is un-excusable and the US government would have done good to fire him.

So you accuse Al Gore of being "anti-democratic" and "nationalist", before calling for the US Government to fire him for speaking his views. Right.

The reason why oil prices are high isn't due to Al Gore. It is because of OPEC, an international organisation which actively colludes to keep the world price of oil high. OPEC shows what happens when no regulatory bodies exist; monopolies of powerful firms screwing over the average man in favour of maximum profits.

Technically, OPEC is an oligarchy which is not a monopoly but a small group of companies acting together in monopolistic fashion.

Yet another consequence of free market principles.

I think you mean "oligopoly", not "oligarchy". Oligopoly is just a monopoly involving more than one private firm.

[Self--Esteem]

No. You warmers are extreme and dangerous. Thanks to this megalomaniac, anti-democratic nationalist who calls himself Al Gore, people lost their jobs or had to sell their cars. The prices in many European countries went up to 1,60 euro/l by the time his lunacies hit Europe. That's $2US by today's rate and was nearly $3US back then.

Such behaviour is un-excusable and the US government would have done good to fire him.

So you accuse Al Gore of being "anti-democratic" and "nationalist", before calling for the US Government to fire him for speaking his views. Right.

The reason why oil prices are high isn't due to Al Gore. It is because of OPEC, an international organisation which actively colludes to keep the world price of oil high. OPEC shows what happens when no regulatory bodies exist; monopolies of powerful firms screwing over the average man in favour of maximum profits.

If it was only for high oil prices. It is not.

Even when the worldwide oil price was at it's low, many countries like Germany suffered from extremely high petrol prices. Therefore, so called green taxes are the problem.

[DaWoad]

Point out ONE of those that are required for you to survive, and get back to me. Until then, they are conveniences.

Fine, I dare YOU to live without any of these things, including the clean water, for a month

Surely you can manage without simple conceniences

I can and have, and please note: I am capable of making water drinkable. I can do a great many other things as well. It is called self-sufficiency, and those of you raised on the government/social tit would do well to learn it.

Uh huh. And without the infrastructure created by the government to ensure quality of products, just how many people do you think are going to learn how to become self-sufficient? How many of them are going to be aware that they need to ensure their water is safe to drink? You're arguing self-sufficiency after you've benefited from a society that has had to drill into its citizens heads why regulation is necessary in the first place, since it's cheaper to deliver goods and services without safety regulations.

I am arguing nothing beyond the fact that I can survive without the convenience provided by society/government. I can find and boil water. I can hunt and gather food. I can build a shelter when needed. everything beyond that in unnecessary to survival.

you cannot defend yourself from roving bands of raiders nor from the diseases for which you have little natural immunity. You probably cannot fashion the weapons required to hunt you own food. You almost certainly would not survive the end of government (nor would I or most others here I suspect).

[Bendira]

I love how you just said "facts like Global Warming". Straight move to discredit yourself.

No i have read and studied the SCIENTIFIC reports...and i side with 99,9% of Climate researchers

you are on the side of the plutocrat fundie and Sarah Palin who seriously believe there is a "global warming conspiracy hoax" because they can't admit that the externalization generated by capitalism/free market are the worst case of market failure

gratz

99.9% of scientists side with climate researchers? Can you back that up?

[Bendira]

All of you who say anarchism would be completely un-orderly dont understand the principle of it. It would be completely orderly. Just the military, court systems and police would be owned by private corporations in constant competition with eachother. You would be even safer than you are now, because now you have a massive corrupt corporation with a monopoly on the defense industry who pisses away your money they stole from you with taxes to fund a highly inefficient military. The private sector wouldnt let any of that money slip through the cracks.

[Treznor]

No. You warmers are extreme and dangerous. Thanks to this megalomaniac, anti-democratic nationalist who calls himself Al Gore, people lost their jobs or had to sell their cars. The prices in many European countries went up to 1,60 euro/l by the time his lunacies hit Europe. That's $2US by today's rate and was nearly $3US back then.

Such behaviour is un-excusable and the US government would have done good to fire him.

So you accuse Al Gore of being "anti-democratic" and "nationalist", before calling for the US Government to fire him for speaking his views. Right.

The reason why oil prices are high isn't due to Al Gore. It is because of OPEC, an international organisation which actively colludes to keep the world price of oil high. OPEC shows what happens when no regulatory bodies exist; monopolies of powerful firms screwing over the average man in favour of maximum profits.

Technically, OPEC is an oligarchy which is not a monopoly but a small group of companies acting together in monopolistic fashion.

Yet another consequence of free market principles.

I think you mean "oligopoly", not "oligarchy". Oligopoly is just a monopoly involving more than one private firm.

D'oh!

You're right. Thank you.

[Treznor]

All of you who say anarchism would be completely un-orderly dont understand the principle of it. It would be completely orderly. Just the military, court systems and police would be owned by private corporations in constant competition with eachother. You would be even safer than you are now, because now you have a massive corrupt corporation with a monopoly on the defense industry who pisses away your money they stole from you with taxes to fund a highly inefficient military. The private sector wouldnt let any of that money slip through the cracks.

We tried that for a little while. It's how feudalism came to pass.

[Bendira]

so your comparing the world today to the way it was in the dark ages? I think theres been a few developments since then... like the englightenment?