IRS Abuses Power AGAIN

[Hestia]

Just now, jvikings1 said:

Nope. That is a minor detail in the matter (but shows a scenario where he throw away a chance to prove me wrong on the matter). Supporting Joe Biden is the major contradiction that raises major red flags (and makes things difficult for liberty minded folks).

For "liberty" minded folks. Your definition of liberty. Important distinction. 

[Pringles]

3 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

Yep, and I am surprised you are so willing to deny that the deep state does not exist within the political establishment considering your disdain for those in power. You might want to pick something and stick with it.

I don't think he's denying it. I think he's asking if you have any meaningful conviction behind your beliefs. Despite the fact that Patine and I disagree on a LOT. I am asking the same question because it really sounds like a lot of 4chan nonsense is going on around here. Even if I think the same of some of Patines arguments, even I won't deny that there is something that resembles a "deep state." But it's simply the way all governments of the world work. That's why it's best referred to as the Establishment. It's not inherently good nor evil. 

Your man Rand Paul is a part of this "Establishment." In fact, just about anyone in Government probably is. 😛 

[jvikings1]

4 minutes ago, Zenobiyl said:

“The left aren’t your friends, they will cast you aside without a second thought!”

- he says while casting someone aside for wrong-think.

Well, you did not get the quote correct because that is an important piece of the puzzle.

First, it is about his actions, not thought (which actually seem good if backed up by action). Secondly, I am not the one who wants to use force/violence to enforce my viewpoint (thus why the correct quote is an important piece of my statement).

[jvikings1]

5 minutes ago, Hestia said:

For "liberty" minded folks. Your definition of liberty. Important distinction. 

Sure, it is influenced by my specific philosophy. Though is is very hard to claim to be for any definition of liberty while also supporting government restrictions on things (which I imagine you would).

[Hestia]

3 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

Well, you did not get the quote correct because that is an important piece of the puzzle.

First, it is about his actions, not thought (which actually seem good if backed up by action). Secondly, I am not the one who wants to use force/violence to enforce my viewpoint (thus why the correct quote is an important piece of my statement).

Not sure when "the left" uses force/violence either but to each their own...

[Pringles]

1 minute ago, jvikings1 said:

Sure, it is influenced by my specific philosophy. Though is is very hard to claim to be for any definition of liberty while also supporting government restrictions on things (which I imagine you would).

Just because someone is a liberty minded folk, or if you support "Liberty" as vague and subjective as a term that that may be... it doesn't just mean that any and every government restriction is bad lol. 

Now we're talking anarchism it seems. Anarcho-Capitalism perhaps? 😛 

Edited June 21, 2021 by Pringles

[jvikings1]

6 minutes ago, Pringles said:

I don't think he's denying it. I think he's asking if you have any meaningful conviction behind your beliefs. Despite the fact that Patine and I disagree on a LOT. I am asking the same question because it really sounds like a lot of 4chan nonsense is going on around here. Even if I think the same of some of Patines arguments, even I won't deny that there is something that resembles a "deep state." But it's simply the way all governments of the world work. That's why it's best referred to as the Establishment. It's not inherently good nor evil. 

Your man Rand Paul is a part of this "Establishment." In fact, just about anyone in Government probably is. 😛 

For one, being a part of the government/a political party does not make one establishment. Paul, Massie, and any others do not have much political power within the system because they are not part of the Establishment.

For two, you cannot understand (and make baseless claims about 4chan, which I have never visited) because you are not educated on the subject. Maybe if you decided to read about philosophies that disagree with your own (for knowledge-sakes), you would be better prepared to discuss it. It is important to be aware of those who disagree if you actually want to have a conversation (who knows if you actually do or not considering your false claims on my positions and where I get information from).

[jvikings1]

3 minutes ago, Hestia said:

Not sure when "the left" uses force/violence either but to each their own...

Government is the use of violence. Using government for your means is thus using violence for your means.

[Hestia]

Just now, jvikings1 said:

Government is the use of violence. Using government for your means is thus using violence for your means.

Lol ok this is where I tap out. No siree.

[jvikings1]

3 minutes ago, Pringles said:

Just because someone is a liberty minded folk, or if you support "Liberty" as vague and subjective as a term that that may be... it doesn't just mean that any and every government restriction is bad lol. 

Now we're talking anarchism it seems. Anarcho-Capitalism perhaps? 😛 

Read some Robert Nozick if you wish to educate yourself more on the subject

[Pringles]

Just now, jvikings1 said:

For one, being a part of the government/a political party does not make one establishment. Paul, Massie, and any others do not have much political power within the system because they are not part of the Establishment.

For two, you cannot understand (and make baseless claims about 4chan, which I have never visited) because you are not educated on the subject. Maybe if you decided to read about philosophies that disagree with your own (for knowledge-sakes), you would be better prepared to discuss it. It is important to be aware of those who disagree if you actually want to have a conversation (who knows if you actually do or not considering your false claims on my positions and where I get information from).

Last I checked Rand Paul, despite some mishaps seems to behave like a good little boy with his Comrade Mitch McConnell?

And please, stop trying to say I don't understand or I am not educated on the subject lol. You're full of authoritarian, anti-democratic, and anti-liberty viewpoints which you try to justify by stopping "the left." And think you're some big man for interning with a mediocre Senator.

Give me a break. 

[jvikings1]

Just now, Hestia said:

Lol ok this is where I tap out. No siree.

How does government get revenue? By using the threat of violence to steal money from the people. Without the threat of violence, taxation becomes voluntary. How does government enforce its laws? Through the threat of violence (they will throw you in jail and shoot you if you do not comply). It is no stretch to associate violence with the government.

[Mishfox]

1 minute ago, jvikings1 said:

Read some Robert Nozick if you wish to educate yourself more on the subject

Were you always such a condescending prick?

Edited June 21, 2021 by Mishfox

[Cenzonico]

🍿🍾

[jvikings1]

1 minute ago, Pringles said:

Last I checked Rand Paul, despite some mishaps seems to behave like a good little boy with his Comrade Mitch McConnell?

And please, stop trying to say I don't understand or I am not educated on the subject lol. You're full of authoritarian, anti-democratic, and anti-liberty viewpoints which you try to justify by stopping "the left." And think you're some big man for interning with a mediocre Senator.

Give me a break. 

Was he behaving when he exposed the lies of Fauci and the CDC on the virus? Was he behaving when he holds up the budget process through procedural means because it is not balanced? Was he behaving when he objected to unanimous consent on the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund because he wished to propose an amendment (something that caused a massive uproar)? Was he behaving when he voting against Trump's emergency declaration for the border wall? You must not be paying that much attention if you think he's toeing the line.

Your statement have clearly shown you have no read on the subject. That doesn't mean you have to agree with anything, but it is necessary to have an understanding of a topic. No, I don't think being a lowly intern makes me a big man. In fact, interns that act that way are laughed at by most people. Nice try to deflect with an irrelevant comment though.

[jvikings1]

Just now, Patine said:

Money which they print and define the value of. It would all be such be fancy-coloured toilet paper, and not worth much more (by pre-COVID valuing of toilet paper) without self-said Government declaring so, and deal-making, arranging, and playing the global banking industry to say otherwise.

Agreed. And if you try to use alternatives, they will try to stop you. The Fed is one of the worst institutions within government.

[jvikings1]

8 minutes ago, Patine said:

It doesn't take a disingenuous construct of Lyndon LaRouche's paranoid and fervent imagination to create a framework to abuse power, thoroughly. Look at the flimsy and rickety political infrastructure many classical Third World despotism's do it on. And just as many forms of tyranny and abuse of power exist on the right-wing of the political spectrum, as on the left, if not more - remember, Fascism, Feudalism, Absolute Monarchy, Military Empires and Juntas, Theocracies, Plutocracies, and even the Plantocracies (such as the Antebellum South) are all products of horrid tyranny of the right-wing of the political spectrum. But, the centre-left, or moderate left, I find admirable because they usually have as a central plank and theme that Government should actually give a damn about, and help their common people in times of need and hardship, and use Government resources for the public good, and not just entrust that to, "private solutions," who are built to only seek profit and have no direct legal or Constitutional ties of beholden or responsible to the people they deal with, even on paper.

The simple 2-sided political spectrum is very inaccurate. Take 1930-40s Germany for instance. The Nazis and Communists were very similar on a large number of issues. But academics place one on the far-left and one on the far-right.

[Mishfox]

Just now, jvikings1 said:

The simple 2-sided political spectrum is very inaccurate. Take 1930-40s Germany for instance. The Nazis and Communists were very similar on a large number of issues. But academics place one on the far-left and one on the far-right.

The communists were nothing like the fascists, both in ideology and in political tactics. This is just right wing red scare revisionism.

[jvikings1]

2 minutes ago, Patine said:

There is no standing law against inter-personal or inter-private group quo-quid-pro barter, or agreeing, in good faith with no exploitation, on an ad hoc basis, to do work or services directly for goods.

For one, such a structure would require the cooperation of a large number of people (very difficult). Then, you might have to deal with tax problems with such transactions (making it even harder).

[jvikings1]

Just now, Patine said:

The same could be said of Libertarians and Syndico-Anarchist.

Not denying it. Libertarianism taken to its extreme is anarchism. There are plenty of answer within libertarian reading why that doesn't have to be the end result though (Robert Nozick being a prime example).

[jvikings1]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

The, "spectrum," part is meant to account for that, too. That's why it's not a political, "dichotomy." or even a political, "scale," (like the alphabetical music scale, for instance).

The 4 part spectrum is a much better indicator of the ideological positioning of different groups/leaders/politicians. It allows differentiation between economic issues and social issues.

Edited June 21, 2021 by jvikings1

[Dobs]

2 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

By supporting Joe Biden and groups like the Lincoln Project, you made these tasks much harder. They are no friends of those causes and their supporters would gladly throw people like you into the furnace at any point if it would benefit them. This isn't about Trump. Plenty of good liberty folks I know did not support/vote for him, but they also did not go around promoting Joe Biden like you did. Because the deep state/Establishment/left is not and never will be a friend/ally. Such an action casts doubt on where you actually stand (actions speak louder than words).

Maybe my opinion would change if you show something for that to happen, but I have not seen it yet. Today, your comment strengthened an attempt to undermine a part (although small) of the argument against taxation of churches (something you should support based on your claimed positions) because of a technicality (which could actually be explained by context).

I really didn’t though. My support for Joe Biden was a temporary but necessary action to save our Republic from the most anti-liberty President in American history. In that we succeeded. And so now the fight drags on against another, slightly less anti-liberty but still clearly no good, President.

And it really didn’t, my comment served to set context and facts. We don’t need non-truths to win. If correcting the record made you feel as though your point was weaker, perhaps you’re not as good at defending as you thought. For me, I didn’t see this as changing the fact that churches must be left as tax exempt one iota, regardless of their profit or not.

Luckily, though, you aren’t the liberty gatekeeper. You have suspect opinions of your own... but that’s ok! Our whole movement is about, well, liberty. You’re free to express it how you want and we’re lucky to have a broad tent with diversity of thought. So let’s hang up these tired divisions and (as you said in a reply to me a few posts back) take on the Federal Reserve (among countless other policy goals).

[Dobs]

4 minutes ago, Patine said:

I thought you were discussing Donald Trump, and not George W. Bush. 😬

No! Your initial thought was actually correct my friend! Don’t let your hate boner get in the way, glad we could clear that up for you! 😃 

[Timur]

On 6/21/2021 at 11:15 AM, Hestia said:

While that's fine and dandy, most religious organizations are not about accruing profit. Speaking from my experience (as a small-church going individual), it is tough for some of these rural, small churches to pay for even the basics. We have to scrape every penny we have to even re-do our outmodeled air conditioning or repair our crumbling parking lot. I just don't see where people draw the line and the demarcation on it to be convinced that it's a good idea.

I agree. I think that small churches should be tax-exempt. However, I think some of those mega-churches should be taxed.

[Timur]

16 hours ago, Mishfox said:

1. Libertarians are racist

libertarian want to tear down the government and let the free market do everything. This is a euphemism for handing control of the country and its wealth to rich white men, who coincidentally are the largest demographic of libertarians. They also oppose affirmative action and in the early days opposed the civil rights act.

2. Libertarians vote for republicans, who are fascists.

it’s simple really. If you vote for fascists, you are a fascist. I don’t care what they say about “liberty” and “freedom” because they will vote for people who want to kill black peoplein the streets every. Single. Time.

 

 

 

 

“When Donald Trump talks about deporting 11 million illegal immigrants, that’s just wrong,” says Gov. Johnson. “When he talks about building a fence across the border, that is just wrong. When he talks about killing families of Muslim terrorists, that is just wrong.”