I'm not racist because

londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
In some instances it could be, but it isn't in every one of them.

That's why a clear definition of what property is and what property rights are is important.

For instance I think we agree that there is such a thing as private property which can be owned or acquired that DOESN'T involve forcible redistribution ?
Click to expand...
What property do you claim on your taxes ? Does your social security number have 9 numbers or are you special with 10
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
You should get a dictionary and maybe brush up on US laws, since property rights come from the gov't.
Click to expand...
Not in some instances. Also, if property rights came from an external authority, they would better be termed "property privileges" rather than property rights.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
I wonder if you know what a property right is and isn't.
Click to expand...
Who said anything about property rights? I mentioned something more specific, but since you don't have a dictionary, I'll let you take your time figuring out how you have once again distorted the argument.
 
Gregor Eisenhorn

Gregor Eisenhorn

Well-Known Member
I'm not racist because while racial epithets are extremely efficient at offending individual/a group of people, there's no sense to it because it is directed at a whole ethnic group. And we all know that one cannot judge a group of people by the actions of some unsavoury individuals, it's just plain stupid.

And of course this reason:
8430ed616cfe5e06b1ab2f001559c14b455fe62673eff6ec7e209a9d3f8ed5cd.jpg
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Protip: Look up the term privatization to understand how private property is used in legalese.
Click to expand...

What about property that isn't in use and lays in a natural state...wouldn't the first person(s) occupying that property and using it have some kind of superior claim of that property over other people ?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
I am not saying the children should not be taken care of. We have a handful of layers of government. I am saying the federal government needs to get out of these programs. Send the money to the states. Why do people take for granted the federal government is better at dealing with all of this stuff?
Click to expand...



Federal involvement was necessary lest any state tax farms became too independent and allow preaching against the Empire and its wishes.


If it isn't good to have a federal overseer, why is it good to have a state overseer ?
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Privates ?

View attachment 3679739
Click to expand...
Right, just keep repeating that bs about how I can't answer a loaded question, when in reality, you can't understand the answer because of your cognitive dissonance. "Free market" is oxymoronic because privatization requires gov't.

Rob Roy said:
What about property that isn't in use and lays in a natural state...wouldn't the first person(s) occupying that property and using it have some kind of superior claim of that property over other people ?
Click to expand...
You mean if the US gov't commits the greatest genocide in history in order to privatize it?

Rob Roy said:
So, you champion forced human interactions ?
Click to expand...
No, why do you WITH EVERY FUCKING POST SO VIGOROUSLY champion forced segregation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top