United States presidential election, 2012

[Emanresu13]

i pretty much don't want to do anything the government tells me to, so it does feel like i'm being forced into stuff

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by Emanresu13

i pretty much don't want to do anything the government tells me to, so it does feel like i'm being forced into stuff

So would you prefer to live on your own on a remote desert island, then?

Otherwise, why should you be able to partake in the infrastructure?

[Emanresu13]

i should be allowed to partake based on what other entities allow. and they can only allow me to partake of something that is their own property.

i also believe the government should have an extremely limited amount of property, thus an extremely limited amount of restriction on me (and others).

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by Emanresu13

i should be allowed to partake based on what other entities allow. and they can only allow me to partake of something that is their own property.

i also believe the government should have an extremely limited amount of property, thus an extremely limited amount of restriction on me (and others).

Huh?

Explain what you mean by restrictions/being forced to do something.

[Emanresu13]

yeah, sorry. hope this is decent.

i can (ideally) only possess an apple if it is rightfully mine. how do i come by this apple? do i pick it from the tree? then the tree must be rightfully mine as well. or, i could purchase the apple from whoever owns the apple (or tree). of course, they must be willing to sell it. my restriction in this case, is not having an apple, possibly being unable to attain it.

the government may force the rightful owner of this apple to sell it to me, against their will. or say they are willing to sell it, but only at a high price. the government may force them to lower their price.

another situation could arise where the government actually owns the apple. in this case, the government may force me to purcase the apple, even though i don't want it. now, my restriction is having an apple i don't want. this is mostly why i think government should have very limited property.

as for how this "forcing" comes about, usually it's through the threat of imprisonment.

[Frank Munoz]

here we go again~
Rubix vs. Emanresu

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by Emanresu13

yeah, sorry. hope this is decent.

i can (ideally) only possess an apple if it is rightfully mine. how do i come by this apple? do i pick it from the tree? then the tree must be rightfully mine as well. or, i could purchase the apple from whoever owns the apple (or tree). of course, they must be willing to sell it. my restriction in this case, is not having an apple, possibly being unable to attain it.

the government may force the rightful owner of this apple to sell it to me, against their will. or say they are willing to sell it, but only at a high price. the government may force them to lower their price.

another situation could arise where the government actually owns the apple. in this case, the government may force me to purcase the apple, even though i don't want it. now, my restriction is having an apple i don't want. this is mostly why i think government should have very limited property.

as for how this "forcing" comes about, usually it's through the threat of imprisonment.

is this just a long way of saying you disagree with the concept of eminent domain? if so, your analogy doesn't fit (land, here).
the government can't force you to sell random commodities. also, price controls are a lot more complicated than that.
you make it sound like it's totalitarianism or something, lol.

[Emanresu13]

eminent domain is pretty awful, sure. not exactly what i meant, but a similar comparison.

it's not just price controls that are more complicated, of course. everything is more complicated. i just prefer to make it as simple as possible. so yeah, it may come across as totalitarian.

the basic premise of government is control. the more government involves itself, the more control is exerted.


and the apple is just an example, i really doubt world war 3 will start because of fruit.

[Reincarnate]

yeah I can't do this

[Emanresu13]

:P

[MarioNintendo]

Opening this thread feels like hacking someone's inbox lol

[igotrhythm]

One thing that worries me about bipartisan cooperation is how the Senate UNANIMOUSLY shot down Obama's budget proposals. So don't blame Obama for not passing one and the subsequent ballooning of the national debt.

As for the Republican obstruction, that sounds more like politics as usual, but with this "sea change" the GOP would probably be wise to return to more centrist stances going forward. Just look at the Republican congressmen that lost their bids because of controversy over their views regarding a woman's (lack of) right to choose. Even the mayor of Troy, MI (not too far from my place) lost her campaign for a second term over her homophobia.

A little birdie told me that the Libertarians are where the Republicans used to be, and I'm tempted to agree.

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by igotrhythm

One thing that worries me about bipartisan cooperation is how the Senate UNANIMOUSLY shot down Obama's budget proposals. So don't blame Obama for not passing one and the subsequent ballooning of the national debt.

As for the Republican obstruction, that sounds more like politics as usual, but with this "sea change" the GOP would probably be wise to return to more centrist stances going forward. Just look at the Republican congressmen that lost their bids because of controversy over their views regarding a woman's (lack of) right to choose. Even the mayor of Troy, MI (not too far from my place) lost her campaign for a second term over her homophobia.

A little birdie told me that the Libertarians are where the Republicans used to be, and I'm tempted to agree.

I think Obama tries too hard to be bipartisan and work with people who have absolutely *zero* interest in making any hard sacrifices. "We'll work with you and come to the middle!" doesn't mean jack when you're refusing to budge on not raising a dime of revenue.

As for a possible "change," it's not going to happen. The GOP willingly got into bed with crazy douchebags and veered to the hard right, and you can't do that for years then suddenly pull a "Well, maybe we should just be friends?" They'll slash your tires and burn your ****ing house down. You can safely predict that the GOP will triple-down on their principles and continue to collectively leap headfirst into the deep end of the batshit pool. Meanwhile, moderate Republicans will continue to abandon the party. Sane people understand that opposing things like gay marriage is acting on the wrong side of history.

It *would* be wise for the GOP to ditch the religious zealotry, bigotry, homophobia, and racism and stick to fiscal conservatism instead... but I wouldn't count on it. People who are immune to facts don't ever change their minds. Ever. It's much more likely that we'll see the party split or something. The current form of the GOP is in its death throes.

In the meantime, I fully expect more liberal victories in 2016.


EDIT:
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/results
Florida finally finished -- victory to Obama.
332 vs. 206

[Ohaider]

not sure who's seen this but i thought it was pretty cute

[DotKritic]

Top 10 reasons to vote for Ded Bob