• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Obama's "Truth Team" Explains "You Didn't Build That"

Holy Christ!! and then he said this yesterday

There are a lot of people in government who help us and allow us to have an economy that works and allow entrepenuers and business leaders of various kinds to start businesses and create jobs. We all recognize that. That's an important thing.

I know that you recognize that a lot of people help you in a business. Perhaps the banks, the investors. There's no question your mom and dad. Your school teachers. The people that provide roads, the fire, and the police. A lot of people help.
 
Everybody knows what he meant. He meant government is the reason anything good happens.
 
PhDeac said:
That would have been a strong statement by Romney. No doubt.

Of course, libertarians always seem to leave a hole in their logic probably because they have no idea what society would be like with minimal government.
Click to expand...

You seem to be confusing libertarians with anarchists. Libertarians understand that things such as national defense, law enforcement and the criminal justice system probably are best left to an entity known at the state.

Minimal government does not include rent-seeking from the usual suspects from either side of the aisle and using the police power of the state to interrupt private liberty of contract.

As for the Dodge City remark, none of us knows for sure just how wild the Wild West was. I doubt there was a murderer hiding behind every bush or corner.
 
RaleighDevil said:
You seem to be confusing libertarians with anarchists. Libertarians understand that things such as national defense, law enforcement and the criminal justice system probably are best left to an entity known at the state.

Minimal government does not include rent-seeking from the usual suspects from either side of the aisle and using the police power of the state to interrupt private liberty of contract.

As for the Dodge City remark, none of us knows for sure just how wild the Wild West was. I doubt there was a murderer hiding behind every bush or corner.
Click to expand...
I'm always amused by people who think lower tax advocates somehow don't want to pay for the PD, the FD, utilities, the armed forces, and stuff like that. I've seen many otherwise intelligent people throw that shit out.

Politics makes people retarded.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
I'm always amused by people who think lower tax advocates somehow don't want to pay for the PD, the FD, utilities, the armed forces, and stuff like that. I've seen many otherwise intelligent people throw that shit out.

Politics makes people retarded.
Click to expand...

Would you consider that lower tax advocates benefit from public services that are taken for granted?

Everyone wants to pay for the FD when their house is on fire.
 
ONW said:
Would you consider that lower tax advocates benefit from public services that are taken for granted?

Everyone wants to pay for the FD when their house is on fire.
Click to expand...

So tired of this canard...

We're adding $4.0B a day to the national debt, and it's not all police and fire protection. It's the entitlements, stupid (generally, not you personally).
 
  • Like
Reactions: ONW
ONW said:
Would you consider that lower tax advocates benefit from public services that are taken for granted?

Everyone wants to pay for the FD when their house is on fire.
Click to expand...

Of course they benefit from it. It has nothing to do with wanting lower taxes. It really has nothing to do with it when argued at a federal level since the FD and PD are funded by state and local taxes.
 
jhmd2000 said:
So tired of this canard...

We're adding $4.0B a day to the national debt, and it's not all police and fire protection. It's the entitlements, stupid (generally, not you personally).
Click to expand...

The debt service isn't helping either.

I was trying to say that tax payers don't always appreciate or use/benefit from everything their taxes go toward. And yes there is eventually waste when you are spending other peoples' money
 
RaleighDevil said:
You seem to be confusing libertarians with anarchists. Libertarians understand that things such as national defense, law enforcement and the criminal justice system probably are best left to an entity known at the state.

Minimal government does not include rent-seeking from the usual suspects from either side of the aisle and using the police power of the state to interrupt private liberty of contract.

As for the Dodge City remark, none of us knows for sure just how wild the Wild West was. I doubt there was a murderer hiding behind every bush or corner.
Click to expand...

What laws do libertarians support?

Serious question.
 
Whatever our current system of government is, it has no control whatsoever of the military industrial complex and that leads to 100s of thousands of civilians in foreign nations being killed by America. Libertarians at least would stop America from doing horrible things abroad in our name.
 
PhDeac said:
What laws do libertarians support?

Serious question.
Click to expand...

Libertarians believe that government should provide public goods, meaning the benefits of the goods are indivisible (can't separate how much each is using) and non-rival (one person's use does not preclude use by another). National defense qualifies as a public good under this definition. Government transfer payments do not.
 
But what laws to libertarians support?

Laws are restrictions on individual freedoms. To what extent do such restrictions serve as public goods?
 
jhmd2000 said:
So tired of this canard...

We're adding $4.0B a day to the national debt, and it's not all police and fire protection. It's the entitlements, stupid (generally, not you personally).
Click to expand...

This post is a pretty good example of a one-side-only view as to what's wrong with government spending. House Republicans just made sure to protect our military NASCAR sponsorships, for Pete's sake. It's not all about entitlements. It's also about things like fleets of useless stealth fighters that don't work and disappearing taxes for major corporations that happen to donate to your party. Until the right gets serious about their own spending hypocrisy they shouldn't dictate on the subject.
 
What? How are laws necessarily restrictions on individual freedoms?
 
PhDeac said:
You're kidding, right? Name some laws.
Click to expand...

Uh, OK:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

There are about fifteen more of those where that came from, and then a whole mess of budgetary and appropriation statutes.
 
Last edited:
Are you that dense?

The First Amendment tells us what Congress cannot do. That is a restriction.

Beyond that laws by their basic nature exist to distinguish between what people want to do and what they should not do in the best interest of the larger society. Restrictions. That's why the First Amendment has to lay out which freedoms are to be protected because laws exist to restrict freedoms. If laws by their very nature didn't restrict freedoms, we wouldn't have to lead off the Constitution by stating which freedoms laws should not restrict.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top