TheRealMafoo said:
ManusJustus said:
TheRealMafoo said:
I am glad you feel that way, but in a free country, you should not be allowed to pass laws that that force others to trade 4000 for those services.
|
No, in a free country you can decide wether you want those services or not. You think you're on on the side of 'free' but that is actually not the case. And thats not to mention numerous services that, using your logic, are forced on us by our government everyday. Maybe I dont want to pay for road construction, maybe I dont want to pay for military funding, but I am forced to do so and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
I see that this hypocrisy was already mentioned and you responded that with "the government protects, not provides."
I find it disheartening that you refuse to see the error in your logic. Not only can protect and provide be used simultaneously for the many services the government provides, but the government can also protect people by providing healthcare and education. I know I would like to be protected against cancer just as much as I want to be protected from Al Quieda. And what about services that have nothing to do with protection, such as the road system. Anybody with knowledge of economics knows that the government has to provide most of the road system since is it uneconomical for private companies to do so. Or I guess the government is protecting my low-rider from dirt roads that I would otherwise use...
|
The problem is both of you think that some minimum standard of living is an entitlement. That giving away liberties for services, thus centralizing power, will never backfire.
|
How is the military, police force, and court system not giving away liberties for services? How does healthcare increase the standard of living while a police force providing security, or a major road going through a rural area, do not increse the standard of living?
Your problem is that you want to categorize government provided services as good or bad, and your means for doing so are based entirely on your emotions. You want the government to protect your house from criminals, so that is good, but you dont want to the government to protect you from cancer, so that is bad. Perhaps someone else, say a indendent minded gun owner, would rather protect themselves from criminals than pay taxes for a police force that is based far away, but doesnt have enough money for health insurance so they want the government to provide it. See, such methodology fails.
