:rolleyes:
Except what the Democrats did was nowhere near the same as whats going on in Congress. Running away and hiding under the bed in a dive motel room in Illinois is not the same as actually casting a vote for (or against) something.
Be angry if you want for the votes someone casts, but it’s at least less cowardly than what Wisconsin Democrats did at that time, which was not cast any votes at all!!!
No, actually, I don’t. Like… can you elaborate a little bit.
Congratulations, you have defeated someone on the internet. What will you do next, cure cancer?
I’m fine with shutting the government down. I can’t think of any “benefit” they provide me that I could possibly miss.
Are you real?! :dubious::smack::eek:
What about highways and clean water?
And that’s the problem. It’s all about you. Fuck anyone who isn’t you.
It’s also incredibly pointless, as we’ve already shown that we will absolutely not back down if you try to shutdown the government. It’s a concept that has never worked–it just scores them political points, when they know it will fail.
And I’m doing my best to keep my fellow Christian friends from falling for it.
(I also just made the connection between that and why people like Donald Trump. They look “strong” because they wouldn’t negotiate. Of course a portion of them just like people who superficially look strong.)
Yes, I am.
You probably think this is me.
But really, I [URL=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDyb_alTkMQ&t=0m26s”]am.
I’d rather have those benefits provided by the Free Market, at half the price and twice the quality level, than government can achieve.
The what prevents companies from lying, the water is not clean but they say it is? If I am assuming wrong I apologize but are you going with the free market/libertarian idea that companies will be “regulated” by the marketplace, that if they do wrong or lie or harm people they will loose business/go out of business because they now have a bad reputation?
Well what about BP and Wal-Mart? They are both making huge profits despite having bad reputations.
And roads? Would you prefer all roads be toll roads? Like turnpikes? Aren’t turnpikes kind of a pain in the ass? Maybe… if the truly perfect EZ pass so you never had to stop, slow down, go through a ticket booth. I guess (serious statement) that turnpikes are better maintained than highways? So maybe turnpikes have both bad points and good points…
Yes, I would prefer that. In my humble opinion, it would be much better than government provided benefits. If one corporation gave me poor service, I would be free to dump them and try a competing corporation. With government provided services, you don’t have that option; you take what they give you, and you pay for it, or you go to jail.
You are free to disagree with me of course, but I would love to give it a shot.
Are you ideologically opposed to fire stations and libraries too?
We could probably/maybe be in agreement about turnpikes. What about Corporate responsibility though? BP had the worst oil spill in history… and had very very high profits even after that, record profits I think, but, that last detail may be wrong. People say they hate sweatshops and the loss of american jobs… but most of us still shop and wal mart anyway…
And, what about poor people and police and fire departments* and schools and emergency rooms? If you can’t afford a car, and you can’t afford a smart phone, just a pay as you go flip phone, how are you possibly going to be able to afford these other municipal necessities?
*There is a private run firehouse somewhere in Georgia, I heard about it once. It works very well and very efficiently. Pretty much everyone in town pays their fire department dues up front each year. But if you miss your payments the fire department still puts out your fire. Then you have to pay the payment you missed plus a fine too I think… not sure about the whole payment thing, I just know it all worked out and they found some way to make sure everyone was covered.
You are bad at this whole constitution thing. Congress has plenary power over the purse. Congress could have shut down the Iraq war if they wanted to. Defunding military activity is a way Congress can intercede in foreign wars - as was done in Vietnam with the Foreign Assistance Act of 1974.
Shutting down the government is precisely within the power of Congress. If Congress was required to approve of whatever budget the president wished then that branch of government would not serve as a check against the other.
Yes, I am. And you are good at this whole putting words in my mouth thing. I never said congress can’t shut down the government, only that they shouldn’t. Just because one has the ability and right to do something, does not necessarily mean it is the best course of action, or right or fair. A government shutdown should only occur under the - gravest - of emergencies.
BTW- I agree with you that sometimes/often a shutdown is necessary or morally necessary to prevent (or try to prevent) a war.
Of course it’s been tried. It was called the Gilded Age. It didn’t work too well.
But, of course, I likely won’t convince you with so simple and rational an argument. Neither Socialists nor Libertarians can ever be convinced their pet fantasies have been tried and found wanting; they all demand that the failure was due to people not revolution-ing hard enough, or external wreckers, or the rain or something.
Therefore, I’m going to propose a simple thought experiment; since your idea has Never Been Tried, this is just as valid an experiment as whatever drew you to Libertarianism in the first place, so no complaining about how it’s unrealistic.
The experiment, which comes from here, by the way, is simple:
Now, I’ve played kind of a trick on you, because if you ask any question which has been answered in Section 2 of the FAQ, we’ll all call you lazy and point and laugh. Horrors. Really, I consider the objections answered in the FAQ to be trivial, and I’d like to, just once, see a thread progress a bit faster than usual, without such easy stuff bogging us all down.
To summarize: Section 2 of the FAQ I linked to is what I consider the game-theoretic argument against Libertarianism. Namely, Libertarianism forces people into horrible equilibria due to the fact there’s nobody outside the various profit-driven systems to force coordination on the actors which would lead to better outcomes. Pollution is the classic example: Nobody wants it, but it’s expensive to reduce, and so it happens, reliably and empirically, unless there’s some government which forces companies and people to clean up their acts.
What would you say are the key failings of socialism in this regard?
Reading for comprehension seems to be a skill you need work on as well. I never said that you said that congress can’t shut down the government. You’re not doing so well here.
Oh, ok. Well I guess you’ve won the debate now. Hooray for you.
BWAHHAHAHHAAHHHAAAA!
Idiot.