"Land of the Free, home of the Brave"

[Der_Trihs]

@Starving_Artist

Isn’t it more selfish to want the government to forcibly take money from someone else so it can be spent on you? I think wanting somebody else’s money is much more selfish than simply wanting to keep your own.

Nonsense. “Your” money only exists in the first place because of the society surrounding you that enables you to make it, to keep it, and that makes it worth anything. You owe society money to aid in its upkeep, because without society you wouldn’t have any of that money in the first place.

And on top of that, if no one owes anyone anything then we don’t owe you any consideration anyway; so we might as well just grab your money if we are strong enough. But of course the admiration for selfishness and ruthlessness of libertarian types always stops when it comes to their money and property. They are owed consideration, but other people are not.

[Guinastasia]

Great, now I have Oh Canada stuck in my head. Thanks guys.
[sub]I’ve never seen the flag “by the dawn’s early light”, either[/sub]

[Spoke]

I don’t really think of the US as being more free or brave than other nations.

However, I do buy into the US as the “land of opportunity.” I think it is easier to rise from poverty to become wealthy in the US than it is in many other nations. In fact, a few of my friends have done just that. (Well, at least from poverty to “very comfortable indeed.”)

[Starving_Artist]

@Der_Trihs

Nonsense. “Your” money only exists in the first place because of the society surrounding you that enables you to make it…

Then how’s about if everyone else in society makes their own money because of the society surrounding them? Then they won’t need to try to get the government to take it from somebody who earned it and give it to them?

And why is it always the people who want everybody else’s money who thinks that ‘society’ is responsible for the fact that people who have made money have done so? Simply living in a society in no way means that you’ll succeed. It requires effort, it requires study, it requires risk, it requires savvy, it requires hard work, it requires dedication, it requires analytical ability, it requires sacrifice, and more often than not it requires smarts. If ‘society’ is the main reason people who have money have it, why are all these other qualities necessary? And why aren’t more people wealthy?

The fact of the matter is that most people simply don’t want to work that hard or apply themselves that much. They just want to do their 9 to 5 and come home to relax. But their 9 to 5 won’t pay for all the cars they want, or the big screen TV’s they want, or the recreation they want, or the health care they want, so they cook up phony rationalizations like yours in order to justify getting the government to take money from the ‘rich’ and give it to them. And then when the people who’ve sacrificed and busted their butts complain about the government taking their money, they get called ‘selfish’. :rolleyes:

I say let the people who want to bust their asses and risk their assets and apply their intelligence in order to make money, so so if they can and then keep it. And let the ones who want only to do 9 to 5 do that. And then let everyone live the life that those choices provide.

Another reason I feel this way is that ‘society’ doesn’t lift a finger to warrant entreprenuers against loss or failure. Let’s say for the sake of argument I open a restaurant, invest all my assets and all I can borrow and do due diligence and analyze the market and work to meet health codes and hire and train and supervise employees, and after all that the restaurant for whatever reason fails. Society pays that no attention whatsoever. It’s “too bad for you, pal. Them’s the breaks.” But then if I succeed and start making lots of money through that restaurant I worked so hard to create, then suddenly ‘society’ comes around wanting a hugely disproportionate amount of the money I’m making because ‘they’ helped make it happen.

We don’t have redistributive government because it’s fair, we have it because more voters are 9 to 5er’s than are entreprenuers, and they are more than happy to swallow the line that the only reason wealthy people get rich is because “they” made it happen and so are entitled to a share of the profits.

Such an attitude is illogical, it’s unfair, it’s dishonest, and it’s…wait for it…

selfish!

[SteveG1]

Land of the free? Just looking at some of the changes in my own lifetime, I’d say LESS free than int once may have been.

Home of the brave? Not even close anymore, not when we constantly see so many people who would give away freedoms, sign away rights, in order to have government protect them from some bogeyman and to control or ban whatever they personally don’t like.

No, this is no longer a land of the free or a home of the brave - if it ever was.

[Argent_Towers]

America could be a lot freer.

You can get locked in jail (where you could be assaulted and raped) for growing a plant.

Sorry, no beer on Sunday. It’s against the law. No cold beer at the supermarket; against the law.

You want to open a restaurant here? No can do - this area isn’t zoned for that. You want to serve beer? Sorry, there’s a school across the street.

No gambling. You want to go to a casino, you’ll have to drive 200 miles. But you’re “free” to buy useless fucking lottery tickets at a gas station.

You can buy an AK-47 that has been converted to semi-automatic in France. You can’t do that in America. If the gun was once capable of automatic fire, it will ALWAYS be classified as automatic even if it has had that capability completely removed.

[Quartz]

@Claverhouse

Credit/debit cards are generally the only ID most people carry.

Most people I know carry the credit card sized part of their driving license.

[Der_Trihs]

@Starving_Artist

Then how’s about if everyone else in society makes their own money because of the society surrounding them? Then they won’t need to try to get the government to take it from somebody who earned it and give it to them?

Because then society will collapse because no one is paying for it. You may think that Somalia is an ideal model for society, but I don’t.

@Starving_Artist

And why is it always the people who want everybody else’s money who thinks that ‘society’ is responsible for the fact that people who have made money have done so?

Because they are right?

@Starving_Artist

Simply living in a society in no way means that you’ll succeed. It requires effort, it requires study, it requires risk, it requires savvy, it requires hard work, it requires dedication, it requires analytical ability, it requires sacrifice, and more often than not it requires smarts. If ‘society’ is the main reason people who have money have it, why are all these other qualities necessary? And why aren’t more people wealthy?

Because you are wrong about how people make money. Mostly, it’s luck (especially, the luck of being born rich) and ruthlessness. People work themselves to the point of crippling themselves and die poor all the time. Smarts? Being smart won’t make you wealthy; it means that someone already wealthy will make more money off of you. Sacrifice? You don’t get rich by making sacrifices; you sacrifice others.

@Starving_Artist

The fact of the matter is that most people simply don’t want to work that hard or apply themselves that much.

And behold, the classic the-poor-are-lazy line.

[Odesio]

@Desert_Nomad

Much also depends on the definition of freedom. In the US it is often seen as “freedom to (do something)” while in many countries it is “freedom from (being affected by something)”.

This is by far the most interesting idea that’s been brought up in this thread. I admit that I fall into the first category by defining freedom in terms of what I’m able to do. It doesn’t really occur to me to think of freedom in terms of that which I can avoid.

Odesio

[Candyman74]

@BrainGlutton

No, the answer is, “The lyrics of a patriotic song are useless in discerning a country’s national character or even, to any serious degree, its national self-image.”

No, that’s the answer to an entirely different question. Or, rather, an associated point you wanted to make. Certainly true, but the answer to the actual question is your following reply:

But, no, I see no reason to think America’s national character excels anything else in the West in terms of freedom or bravery.

That is, however, an answer to the question!

Where we excel is in brains. Something both Americans and foreigners are reluctant to admit. We did not win WWII or the Cold War by being tougher than our enemies, we won by being smarter than our enemies.

So you believe Americans to be more intelligent than other people?

[Der_Trihs]

@Desert_Nomad

Much also depends on the definition of freedom. In the US it is often seen as “freedom to (do something)” while in many countries it is “freedom from (being affected by something)”.

@Odesio

This is by far the most interesting idea that’s been brought up in this thread.

I don’t think it’s quite true though. Americans IMHO tend to think of freedom not in in terms of “freedom to (do something)”, but in terms of government permission to do things - which means nothing if you haven’t the money, time or other resources to actually do them. Nor does it mean anything if non-government forces keep you from doing so; but somehow it doesn’t count as “not freedom” if it’s a company or church or rich guy trampling on you instead of the government.

[Starving_Artist]

@Der_Trihs

Because then society will collapse because no one is paying for it.

Nonsense. I didn’t say people shouldn’t pay taxes. But I don’t think tax money should be used as a tool to redistribute income from those who’ve earned it to those who haven’t.

@Der_Trihs

Because they are right?

Nope.

@Der_Trihs

Because you are wrong about how people make money. Mostly, it’s luck (especially, the luck of being born rich)

Nope. Sometimes it’s luck but most of the time it’s simply hard work, sacrifice and all the other qualities I listed.

@Der Trihs

and ruthlessness.

Nonsense. Most of the ruthlessness that goes on in business lies in competition with other businesses for the customers’ dollar. And the competition a businessman faces is one of the reasons that being in business is so difficult. And it’s another area where the entrprenuerial spirit differentiates itself from the 9 to 5 worker’s mentality. Again, most people simply aren’t willing to take on these kinds of hassles.

@Der_Trihs

People work themselves to the point of crippling themselves and die poor all the time. Smarts? Being smart won’t make you wealthy; it means that someone already wealthy will make more money off of you. Sacrifice? You don’t get rich by making sacrifices; you sacrifice others.

More nonsense. I didn’t say being smart will make you rich. But I will say that being smart - and hard work, sacrifice, etc. - is often a key ingredient in becoming rich.

And remember when I mentioned risk? The fact that being smart, etc. aren’t guarantees of success is one of the areas where risk comes in.

@Der_Trihs

And behold, the classic the-poor-are-lazy line.

Nonsense once again. There’s a big difference between not wanting to bust your ass and take on all the hassles of business, and being lazy. Most people who work 9 to 5 aren’t lazy, they’re just not driven to do all the things that successful people have to do in order to acheive their success.

[Baboonanza]

@Starving_Artist

Then how’s about if everyone else in society makes their own money because of the society surrounding them? Then they won’t need to try to get the government to take it from somebody who earned it and give it to them?

And why is it always the people who want everybody else’s money who thinks that ‘society’ is responsible for the fact that people who have made money have done so? Simply living in a society in no way means that you’ll succeed. It requires effort, it requires study, it requires risk, it requires savvy, it requires hard work, it requires dedication, it requires analytical ability, it requires sacrifice, and more often than not it requires smarts. If ‘society’ is the main reason people who have money have it, why are all these other qualities necessary? And why aren’t more people wealthy?

The fact of the matter is that most people simply don’t want to work that hard or apply themselves that much. They just want to do their 9 to 5 and come home to relax. But their 9 to 5 won’t pay for all the cars they want, or the big screen TV’s they want, or the recreation they want, or the health care they want, so they cook up phony rationalizations like yours in order to justify getting the government to take money from the ‘rich’ and give it to them. And then when the people who’ve sacrificed and busted their butts complain about the government taking their money, they get called ‘selfish’. :rolleyes:

I say let the people who want to bust their asses and risk their assets and apply their intelligence in order to make money, so so if they can and then keep it. And let the ones who want only to do 9 to 5 do that. And then let everyone live the life that those choices provide.

Another reason I feel this way is that ‘society’ doesn’t lift a finger to warrant entreprenuers against loss or failure. Let’s say for the sake of argument I open a restaurant, invest all my assets and all I can borrow and do due diligence and analyze the market and work to meet health codes and hire and train and supervise employees, and after all that the restaurant for whatever reason fails. Society pays that no attention whatsoever. It’s “too bad for you, pal. Them’s the breaks.” But then if I succeed and start making lots of money through that restaurant I worked so hard to create, then suddenly ‘society’ comes around wanting a hugely disproportionate amount of the money I’m making because ‘they’ helped make it happen.

We don’t have redistributive government because it’s fair, we have it because more voters are 9 to 5er’s than are entreprenuers, and they are more than happy to swallow the line that the only reason wealthy people get rich is because “they” made it happen and so are entitled to a share of the profits.

Such an attitude is illogical, it’s unfair, it’s dishonest, and it’s…wait for it…

selfish!

But your whole position is based on the position that successful entreprenuers are better than everyone else in society. Why? Because they happen to excel in a way that generates the most wealth in a capitalist economy?

A fair society realises that low-wealth generating people are also important and therefor should be supported. Entreprenuers need teachers, nurses, policemen. Even more, businesses need the ‘9 to 5ers’ to make up their work force. An economy consisting entirely of entreprenuers simply wouldn’t work.

The argument that slightly higher taxes on the wealthy reduces freedom is horseshit. Higher taxes on the well off only reduce their freedom by a marginal amount, they are rich before and they are rich afterwards and the rich in a western society are about as optimally free as you can get (unless you want to do anything particularly distasteful). In return those taxes, if spent wisely, can dramatically increase the freedom for everyone else in society by making them less likely to die starving on the street.

What is truly selfish is those that have more then their share of freedom already refusing to allow some measure of that freedom to be granted to the rest of society because of some ideological notion that higher taxes = less freedom, when in reality it would make 0 practical difference to their lives.

[Der_Trihs]

@Starving_Artist

Nope. Sometimes it’s luck but most of the time it’s simply hard work, sacrifice and all the other qualities I listed.

Nonsense. No amount of sacrifice or hard work will make you rich. Ruthlessness, connections and the right parents will.

@Starving_Artist

Nonsense. Most of the ruthlessness that goes on in business lies in competition with other businesses for the customers’ dollar.

Please. A willingness to ruthlessly exploit your workers (and to engage in outright slavery where possible), to lie, to cheat, to defraud, to poison, to despoil to earth, to corrupt the government; those are where the ruthlessness of business is. Businesses are less ruthless towards each other than they are to everything else, not more.

@Starving_Artist

And the competition a businessman faces is one of the reasons that being in business is so difficult. And it’s another area where the entrprenuerial spirit differentiates itself from the 9 to 5 worker’s mentality. Again, most people simply aren’t willing to take on these kinds of hassles.

Nonsense, it’s luck not hard work or skill. Entrepreneurs are simply rich enough to begin with that they can try over and over until they get lucky.

@Starving_Artist

More nonsense. I didn’t say being smart will make you rich. But I will say that being smart - and hard work, sacrifice, etc. - is often a key ingredient in becoming rich.

Wrong; there’s no connection between being smart and being rich.

@Starving_Artist

And remember when I mentioned risk? The fact that being smart, etc. aren’t guarantees of success is one of the areas where risk comes in.

There’s little risk for the people who own and start businesses; the people who do all the suffering and sacrifice are those “9 to 5” people you despise, while the rich slimeball you love goes on to his next batch of victims.

@Starving_Artist

Most people who work 9 to 5 aren’t lazy, they’re just not driven to do all the things that successful people have to do in order to acheive their success.

Like lie, steal, exploit, betray, destroy, corrupt, poison…

[smileybastard]

@Starving_Artist

Isn’t it more selfish to want the government to forcibly take money from someone else so it can be spent on you? I think wanting somebody else’s money is much more selfish than simply wanting to keep your own.

It isn’t selfish, actually it is the opposite. It is a safety net. We can all fall off the wire and as someone who has if feels really bad.

[Quartz]

@Der_Trihs

Nonsense. No amount of sacrifice or hard work will make you rich. Ruthlessness, connections and the right parents will.

I beg to differ. JK Rowling is the obvious counter-example. Having the right parents will give you a head start, and help you make connections, but you’ve got to make and cultivate those connections yourself and then work hard and make sacrifices. You don’t need to be ruthless, but it does help. Losing a fortune is easy. Keeping one is difficult. Increasing a fortune is a full-time job.

[John_Mace]

@rivulus

I guess I forgot to mention another aspect of the American libertarian fetish that I don’t particularly value: “I’ve got what’s mine; screw you.” Case in point:

Which has always struck me as more about selfishness than about freedom.

So, you think by calling a statement a “fetish” that you’ve scored some debate points? :rolleyes: I was responding to someone who said they felt less free because they couldn’t get more of other people’s money so they could have more leisure time. That’s not “selfish”?

There’s always a balance between self-interest and contributing to the overall society. What is the point of freedom if you can’t pursue your own interests?

[BrainGlutton]

@Starving_Artist

Then how’s about if everyone else in society makes their own money because of the society surrounding them? Then they won’t need to try to get the government to take it from somebody who earned it and give it to them?

If they don’t do that, then most of them won’t make their own money because of the society surrounding them. Ain’t you figured that out yet?

[BrainGlutton]

@Candyman74

So you believe Americans to be more intelligent than other people?

Yes. Not genetically, but by habit. Our society has rewarded demonstrated practical intelligence, certainly not consistently but more consistently than any other society, from day one.

[Der_Trihs]

@Quartz

I beg to differ. JK Rowling is the obvious counter-example.

She’s British. Not a good example in a thread about America.

@Quartz

Having the right parents will give you a head start, and help you make connections, but you’ve got to make and cultivate those connections yourself and then work hard and make sacrifices. You don’t need to be ruthless, but it does help. Losing a fortune is easy. Keeping one is difficult. Increasing a fortune is a full-time job.

Please. We just had a President who demonstrated you can be lazy, stupid and a failure at everything you touch and still end up wealthy and President, if you have the right family and right connections. America is a plutocratic oligarchy, not some meritocracy.