Libertarian Discussion Thread II - Don't Thread on Me

[Torrocca]

The highest is actually 240 for Einstein if you actually bothered reading your own source, and the highest for Jefferson is 190 if, again, you bothered reading your own source.

Who gives a shit? IQ is a test for French kindergartners, not a basis for ideology.

I don't except to refute GM's silly ideas. :^)

The highest is actually 240 for Einstein if you actually bothered reading your own source, and the highest for Jefferson is 190 if, again, you bothered reading your own source.

Cough http://www.eoht.info/page/American+Presidents+by+IQ

Ehem.

[The South Falls]

Who gives a shit? IQ is a test for French kindergartners, not a basis for ideology.

I don't except to refute GM's silly ideas. :^)

Cough http://www.eoht.info/page/American+Presidents+by+IQ

Ehem.

Both of y'alls arguments are stupid. There we go.

[Great Minarchistan]

I don't except to refute GM's silly ideas. :^)

I wasn't the one who brought up the topic though. You were the one who put Einstein's beliefs in the midst of the conversation because he was smart.

Ehem.

One of the several sources on his desc.

[The South Falls]

This is a dick measuring contest for dicks that are not our own. How bout we move back to topic?

What do y'all think about the synthetic marijuana?

[Rostavykhan]

Who gives a shit? IQ is a test for French kindergartners, not a basis for ideology.

I don't except to refute GM's silly ideas. :^)

"Einsteins IQ is bigger."
"Na-ah, it's Jeffersons, Commie."
"No, look here, it shows Einstein is higher."
"....y-yeah, but who cares? This is dumb anyways!"

It's like the grown-up version of two kids arguing which Ninja Turtle could win in a fight.

[Torrocca]

I don't except to refute GM's silly ideas. :^)



Ehem.

Both of y'alls arguments are stupid. There we go.

Oh no, radical centrism! *dies*

I don't except to refute GM's silly ideas. :^)

I wasn't the one who brought up the topic though. You were the one who put Einstein's beliefs in the midst of the conversation because he was smart.

Simply to make the point that people tend to adopt leftism the smarter they are.

Ehem.

One of the several sources on his desc.

And one that proves you wrong.

BTW, when am I gonna get a response to this?:

Alright, lemme explain it more coherently:

Quite frankly, if your ideology - rather than offer a network of support, community well-being, and happiness in life to everyone from the healthy, the strong, the intelligent, and the skilled, to the sick, the disenfranchised, the disabled, the elderly, etc. - simply offers empty platitudes that basically boil down to tugging on metaphorical bootstraps, and then says to those who are suffering and couldn't tug on bootstraps for a variety of reasons, OR did tug on those metaphorical bootstraps as hard as they could and still couldn't rise up and be afforded a decent life, "you simply didn't do enough to succeed in the land of opportunities," despite not actually having opportunities for success thanks to an entrenched hierarchy, then your ideology is frankly quite shit.

Not that you'll see it that way, because, "muh private property!" or whatever excuse you come up with defending your ideology, but that's simply how it is. If it refuses to help people, then it's not a worthwhile ideology.

I'd love to hear what a staunch champion of Libertarianism has to say in defense of it. :^)

[Great Minarchistan]

I don't except to refute GM's silly ideas. :^)

"Einsteins IQ is bigger."
"Na-ah, it's Jeffersons, Commie."
"No, look here, it shows Einstein is higher."
"....y-yeah, but who cares? This is dumb anyways!"

It's like the grown-up version of two kids arguing which Ninja Turtle could win in a fight.

I was contesting the very nature of his argument (that was of ranking ideologies by the IQ of their highest endorsers). Recheck the chat log.

[Torrocca]

"Einsteins IQ is bigger."
"Na-ah, it's Jeffersons, Commie."
"No, look here, it shows Einstein is higher."
"....y-yeah, but who cares? This is dumb anyways!"

It's like the grown-up version of two kids arguing which Ninja Turtle could win in a fight.

I was contesting the very nature of his argument (that was of ranking ideologies by the IQ of their highest endorsers). Recheck the chat log.

Except I was never ranking ideologies by the IQ of their highest endorsers. I was merely making a wholly correct statement that smarter people tend to be on the left of politics.

[United American Commomwealth]

Quite frankly, if your ideology - rather than offer a network of support, community well-being, and happiness in life to everyone from the healthy, the strong, the intelligent, and the skilled, to the sick, the disenfranchised, the disabled, the elderly, etc. - simply offers empty platitudes that basically boil down to tugging on metaphorical bootstraps, and then says to those who are suffering and couldn't tug on bootstraps for a variety of reasons, OR did tug on those metaphorical bootstraps as hard as they could and still couldn't rise up and be afforded a decent life, "you simply didn't do enough to succeed in the land of opportunities," despite not actually having opportunities for success thanks to an entrenched hierarchy, then your ideology is frankly quite shit.

At least our ideology is based on facts and not feelings :^)

[Torrocca]

Quite frankly, if your ideology - rather than offer a network of support, community well-being, and happiness in life to everyone from the healthy, the strong, the intelligent, and the skilled, to the sick, the disenfranchised, the disabled, the elderly, etc. - simply offers empty platitudes that basically boil down to tugging on metaphorical bootstraps, and then says to those who are suffering and couldn't tug on bootstraps for a variety of reasons, OR did tug on those metaphorical bootstraps as hard as they could and still couldn't rise up and be afforded a decent life, "you simply didn't do enough to succeed in the land of opportunities," despite not actually having opportunities for success thanks to an entrenched hierarchy, then your ideology is frankly quite shit.

At least our ideology is based on facts and not feelings :^)

Not an argument and also not true :^)

[Great Minarchistan]

Simply to make the point that people tend to adopt leftism the smarter they are.

Do you have a political compass test aligned with an IQ test sampling at least a statistically reasonable amount of the population (5000+) to prove your point right? Or is this just a circlejerk akin to the "My ancestor :-)" meme?

And one that proves you wrong.

If one sets his top IQ at 190 just so another one does it at 170 and another one at 195 it doesn't mean that they are conflicting. You take the highest of the sampled values and call it the ceiling of the CI.

[Torrocca]

And one that proves you wrong.

If one sets his top IQ at 190 just so another one does it at 170 and another one at 195 it doesn't mean that they are conflicting. You take the highest of the sampled values and call it the ceiling of the CI.

Except you weren't doing that, but regardless, I don't care for this anymore.

I want a response to this:

Alright, lemme explain it more coherently:

Quite frankly, if your ideology - rather than offer a network of support, community well-being, and happiness in life to everyone from the healthy, the strong, the intelligent, and the skilled, to the sick, the disenfranchised, the disabled, the elderly, etc. - simply offers empty platitudes that basically boil down to tugging on metaphorical bootstraps, and then says to those who are suffering and couldn't tug on bootstraps for a variety of reasons, OR did tug on those metaphorical bootstraps as hard as they could and still couldn't rise up and be afforded a decent life, "you simply didn't do enough to succeed in the land of opportunities," despite not actually having opportunities for success thanks to an entrenched hierarchy, then your ideology is frankly quite shit.

Not that you'll see it that way, because, "muh private property!" or whatever excuse you come up with defending your ideology, but that's simply how it is. If it refuses to help people, then it's not a worthwhile ideology.

[Great Minarchistan]

Alright, lemme explain it more coherently:

Quite frankly, if your ideology - rather than offer a network of support, community well-being, and happiness in life to everyone from the healthy, the strong, the intelligent, and the skilled, to the sick, the disenfranchised, the disabled, the elderly, etc. - simply offers empty platitudes that basically boil down to tugging on metaphorical bootstraps, and then says to those who are suffering and couldn't tug on bootstraps for a variety of reasons, OR did tug on those metaphorical bootstraps as hard as they could and still couldn't rise up and be afforded a decent life, "you simply didn't do enough to succeed in the land of opportunities," despite not actually having opportunities for success thanks to an entrenched hierarchy, then your ideology is frankly quite shit. Not that you'll see it that way, because, "muh private property!" or whatever excuse you come up with defending your ideology, but that's simply how it is. If it refuses to help people, then it's not a worthwhile ideology.

You don't even know my plans on what the government should do/not do to even call me out against equity and social progress.

[Torrocca]

Alright, lemme explain it more coherently:

Quite frankly, if your ideology - rather than offer a network of support, community well-being, and happiness in life to everyone from the healthy, the strong, the intelligent, and the skilled, to the sick, the disenfranchised, the disabled, the elderly, etc. - simply offers empty platitudes that basically boil down to tugging on metaphorical bootstraps, and then says to those who are suffering and couldn't tug on bootstraps for a variety of reasons, OR did tug on those metaphorical bootstraps as hard as they could and still couldn't rise up and be afforded a decent life, "you simply didn't do enough to succeed in the land of opportunities," despite not actually having opportunities for success thanks to an entrenched hierarchy, then your ideology is frankly quite shit. Not that you'll see it that way, because, "muh private property!" or whatever excuse you come up with defending your ideology, but that's simply how it is. If it refuses to help people, then it's not a worthwhile ideology.

You don't even know my plans on what the government should do/not do to even call me out against equity and social progress.

Nah, I do. You've made it abundantly clear with multiple posts of yours that basically insinuate people need to tug on bootstraps for success. In fact, one of them was what this was even responding to earlier.

[Great Minarchistan]

You don't even know my plans on what the government should do/not do to even call me out against equity and social progress.

Nah, I do. You've made it abundantly clear with multiple posts of yours that basically insinuate people need to tug on bootstraps for success. In fact, one of them was what this was even responding to earlier.

Did I detail on my intentions for education, healthcare, infrastructure, social policies, government models, welfare et c. or are you just inferring my positions from some posts of mine that didn't even tangentiate the topics I've mentioned above?

[Northern Davincia]

I don't except to refute GM's silly ideas. :^)

"Einsteins IQ is bigger."
"Na-ah, it's Jeffersons, Commie."
"No, look here, it shows Einstein is higher."
"....y-yeah, but who cares? This is dumb anyways!"

It's like the grown-up version of two kids arguing which Ninja Turtle could win in a fight.

Leonardo, duh.

[Torrocca]

Nah, I do. You've made it abundantly clear with multiple posts of yours that basically insinuate people need to tug on bootstraps for success. In fact, one of them was what this was even responding to earlier.

Did I detail on my intentions for education, healthcare, infrastructure, social policies, government models, welfare et c. or are you just inferring my positions from some posts of mine that didn't even tangentiate the topics I've mentioned above?

Well how's about you do that then, if you disagree with the insinuation that your ideology isn't about helping people?

[The South Falls]

"Einsteins IQ is bigger."
"Na-ah, it's Jeffersons, Commie."
"No, look here, it shows Einstein is higher."
"....y-yeah, but who cares? This is dumb anyways!"

It's like the grown-up version of two kids arguing which Ninja Turtle could win in a fight.

Leonardo, duh.

What the fuck? Donatello had more versatility!

[Great Minarchistan]

Did I detail on my intentions for education, healthcare, infrastructure, social policies, government models, welfare et c. or are you just inferring my positions from some posts of mine that didn't even tangentiate the topics I've mentioned above?

Well how's about you do that then, if you disagree with the insinuation that your ideology isn't about helping people?

If my Filteries is worth anything to the discussion...

[Northern Davincia]

Yes, but really, it doesn't mean anything.

These people are scientists, not economists. Just because I know a lot about dinosaurs doesn't mean my opinion on Newton's laws is instantly validated.

You don't have to be an economist to realize a system that doesn't help people is a shit system :^)

That's like saying you don't need to be a doctor to diagnose or treat illnesses.

Leonardo, duh.

What the fuck? Donatello had more versatility!

I can only do so much for people that are wrong.

[Torrocca]

Well how's about you do that then, if you disagree with the insinuation that your ideology isn't about helping people?

If my Filteries is worth anything to the discussion...

How's about explaining it in English instead of Graphese?

You don't have to be an economist to realize a system that doesn't help people is a shit system :^)

That's like saying you don't need to be a doctor to diagnose or treat illnesses.

Nah, it's more like saying you don't need to be a doctor to realize you're sick.

[Great Minarchistan]

How's about explaining it in English instead of Graphese?

It's shown in a pretty succinct way already, I won't spoonfeed you.

[United American Commomwealth]

How's about explaining it in English instead of Graphese?

It's shown in a pretty succinct way already, I won't spoonfeed you.

He's a socialist, all he knows is spoonfeeding.

[Torrocca]

It's shown in a pretty succinct way already, I won't spoonfeed you.

He's a socialist, all he knows is spoonfeeding.

wow really owned me there eggz dee xD

How's about explaining it in English instead of Graphese?

It's shown in a pretty succinct way already, I won't spoonfeed you.

So basically from what I'm reading it's hardly Libertarianism at all, just another system that seems pretty shit NGL.

[The South Falls]

It's shown in a pretty succinct way already, I won't spoonfeed you.

He's a socialist, all he knows is spoonfeeding.

And you're a rightist, all you know is mocking socialists for spoonfeeding. Perceived. Not real.