Advertisement
by Genivaria » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:09 pm
by Cisairse » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:12 pm
Novus America wrote:Cisairse wrote:
Where I live property taxes are basically nothing more than filling out a form; I often forget that other jurisdictions have serious property taxes.
In any case, I would argue that all taxes are opt-in. You don't pay property taxes if you don't own property. You don't pay sales taxes if you don't buy things. You don't pay capital gains taxes if you don't trade stocks. Etc.
I find the idea of having conscription be a requirement to engage in government-sponsored programs mostly agreeable, assuming that you can choose economic conscription rather than military service.
Well I am not sure what exactly you mean by economic conscription but I do agree an alternative civilian service should be available for those not best motivated or suited for military service.
by Cisairse » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:13 pm
Genivaria wrote:And to make sure there's not any confusion on being denied government benefits, make it so you're evaluated in your last year of high school and if you're found to be medically unfit (or some other valid reason) then you won't be penalized.
That way you're not punishing people for failing to show up when they don't own a car or some other reason.
by Genivaria » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:20 pm
Cisairse wrote:Genivaria wrote:And to make sure there's not any confusion on being denied government benefits, make it so you're evaluated in your last year of high school and if you're found to be medically unfit (or some other valid reason) then you won't be penalized.
That way you're not punishing people for failing to show up when they don't own a car or some other reason.
What if you don't attend high school, as many people do not?
by Cisairse » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:23 pm
by Genivaria » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:25 pm
Cisairse wrote:Genivaria wrote:You're talking about home-schoolers? They make up about %3.4 of the population so if you have a suggestion to address that I'm all ears, otherwise...*shrug* no policy is perfect.
Home-schoolers or dropouts. Plenty of people who should have graduated with me back in HS dropped out at the end of junior year and got their GEDs.
by Cisairse » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:27 pm
Genivaria wrote:Cisairse wrote:
Home-schoolers or dropouts. Plenty of people who should have graduated with me back in HS dropped out at the end of junior year and got their GEDs.
Dropouts have the choice of seeking out the evaluation during school or seeking it out later.
If they do neither then they are considered to have avoided it intentionally.
by Duvniask » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:28 pm
Novus America wrote:Duvniask wrote:Conscription has literally nothing to do with it.
"government should pay for my Starbucks", Jesus Christ, this is like some Fox News, Boomer type shit.
No, conscription does have a lot to do with it. I am not against social democracy, just the Sanders/DSA misunderstanding of it. Social democracy is a much more than just more welfare, it is a social contract, nothing is “free”. Society has an obligation to you, but you have obligations to society (such as fighting to defend it). Thus saying free healthcare and free college shows a complete misunderstanding of it.
by Genivaria » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:36 pm
Cisairse wrote:Genivaria wrote:Dropouts have the choice of seeking out the evaluation during school or seeking it out later.
If they do neither then they are considered to have avoided it intentionally.
Seems kinda strange to require someone to actively seek out something that for everyone else seeks them out. How do you address the issues you mentioned earlier, about people who don't have a car or for whatever other reason can't (or don't know they should) seek out the evaluation?
by Duvniask » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:36 pm
Genivaria wrote:Duvniask wrote:Conscription should only exist during wartime, or as deterrence against hostile neighbors (i.e. as in South Korea). I fail to see how my "responsibility" to be in boot camp would be worthwhile outside of that.
If you want citizens to give something back as a "responsibility" to their rights, well, first of all there's taxation; second, there are a myriad of ways to do it aside from military conscription.
Exactly why is conscription not acceptable to you?
by United Muscovite Nations » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:37 pm
by United Muscovite Nations » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:39 pm
by Duvniask » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:42 pm
by Cisairse » Sun Jun 14, 2020 12:42 pm
Genivaria wrote:Cisairse wrote:
Seems kinda strange to require someone to actively seek out something that for everyone else seeks them out. How do you address the issues you mentioned earlier, about people who don't have a car or for whatever other reason can't (or don't know they should) seek out the evaluation?
Considering that the 'seeking out' in this case would likely involve something as simple as walking to an office in the school; I don't see it as a burden.
by Genivaria » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:02 pm
Duvniask wrote:Genivaria wrote:So is countering the 'social cohesion' thing your only argument?
Oh I don't think you understand how this works. You're making the positive case for its continued existence, so you go ahead and give your reasons.
What exactly is your argument for forcing people to perform military training if the nation is not at risk of war? If you cannot show that it is necessary, then you have nothing to argue with.
by Genivaria » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:05 pm
by Cisairse » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:14 pm
Genivaria wrote:The argument about the population being more invested in a nations foreign policy with conscription is also supported by the fact that Richard Nixon openly stated that abolishing the draft would gut the anti-war movement.
The thing they were protesting against didn't end, it just stopped forcing people most people to care.
by Genivaria » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:19 pm
Cisairse wrote:Genivaria wrote:The argument about the population being more invested in a nations foreign policy with conscription is also supported by the fact that Richard Nixon openly stated that abolishing the draft would gut the anti-war movement.
The thing they were protesting against didn't end, it just stopped forcing people most people to care.
Although, the main reason for this is that a lot of the anti-war movement was due to people's families etc getting killed in a war they opposed. A lot of anti-war protesters didn't really oppose intervention in Vietnam in general, but specifically opposed themselves and their loved ones being forced by the government to die.
by Cisairse » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:24 pm
Genivaria wrote:Cisairse wrote:Although, the main reason for this is that a lot of the anti-war movement was due to people's families etc getting killed in a war they opposed. A lot of anti-war protesters didn't really oppose intervention in Vietnam in general, but specifically opposed themselves and their loved ones being forced by the government to die.
I think that mindset is problematic honestly, it basically says "Yeah I support the war as long as it's other people dying for it." Which I feel like we have now.
by Mirjt » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:33 pm
Genivaria wrote:Duvniask wrote:Conscription should only exist during wartime, or as deterrence against hostile neighbors (i.e. as in South Korea). I fail to see how my "responsibility" to be in boot camp would be worthwhile outside of that.
If you want citizens to give something back as a "responsibility" to their rights, well, first of all there's taxation; second, there are a myriad of ways to do it aside from military conscription.
Exactly why is conscription not acceptable to you?
by Genivaria » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:36 pm
Mirjt wrote:Genivaria wrote:Exactly why is conscription not acceptable to you?
Because it is unacceptable to demand people fight, injure, kill, traumatize, destroy, and risk all the above happening to themselves as well, all for the sake of the state. It is unacceptable to pit the working class (or really any members of humanity) in one area of the world against themselves in another area of the world.
by United Muscovite Nations » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:39 pm
Genivaria wrote:Mirjt wrote:
Because it is unacceptable to demand people fight, injure, kill, traumatize, destroy, and risk all the above happening to themselves as well, all for the sake of the state. It is unacceptable to pit the working class (or really any members of humanity) in one area of the world against themselves in another area of the world.
So then you're specifically talking about wars of aggression.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Atrito, GMS Greater Miami Shores 1, Katinea, Post War America, Spirit of Hope, Turenia, Unmet Player
Advertisement