Monavis I do not want your “sympathies”, they come at too high a price. Just give it up, you’ll get no approval here and your false martyr routine rings hollow.
Most social or political philosophers start with a study of human history, though many still reach wrong conclusions.
But YouTubing “thinkers” in post-rational America don’t bother with history study: they just invent whatever fantastical history supports their fetish.
[QUOTE=WillFarnaby]
I attack the government because it undermines a civilized society …
[/QUOTE]
Wow! It’s only a slight exaggeration to claim that “government” and “civilization” are synonymous! One can quibble at the margins: “uncivilized” pastoral or hunter/fisher societies might have had chiefdoms, related to family clans. One might want to ask the Farnaby “scholar” how imposed family discipline relates to his theory of governance, but it’s laughable to imagine he could grasp the nuances of the question, let alone answer.
[QUOTE=WillFarnaby]
I consider you deeply challenged. Ireland lasted a 1000 hears without a government.
[/QUOTE]
More hilarity. Ireland was a violent feudal society not unlike anarchic Somalia. It did have the Christian church, a government-like authority, which imposed some stability. When I asked Farnaby whether the tithes he would have paid would have been like a “tax” he exposed himself as a fraud with zero sense of perspective: He got “holier-than-thou” (like a Freeman on the Land 
) and said that he wouldn’t have tithed.
I do want to give Farnaby some credit. He probably has an IQ in the high 90’s and is fun to laugh at. Some of the other Hyperlibertarians are just babbling idiots no more fun than the dullest oinkers in the farmyard.
The hilarity of a tax-phobe pining for Medieval times! Between the King’s fifth and the church’s tithe the base tax rate was 30%, and there were all sorts of tolls and fees on top of that!
Oh, but HE wouldn’t have paid them! 
Nevermind that they would have just killed him in very gruesome ways for that.
Lets see your proof that I lied. Is it because you are angry because I disagree with you? Name calling is a sign of anger and I am not harmed by your retort. You know nothing about me, and you opinion doesn’t bother me in the least. because you believe I am lying doesn’t mean I am.
Strange that you consider me a Martyr I sure don’t and people who know me would disagree with you. If I were a martyr, it would be a good thing. A martyr does for others, I just decided what was best for me in the long run and now I am in my 80’s and have a better life than many of my generation. You don’t have to live as I did, nor did I state you should. My point was not to look a gift horse in the mouth, if you do that personally then that is your business not mine!
Which makes your reply (if you believe your own words) pointless? GD is for debates, if you were curious, but somehow I don’t think you are.
I was replying to the nonsense about Taxation being theft instead of the price of citizenship. Lobohan said it more colorfully a page back, but my opinion is as follows:
This country provides a level of services agreed to by the majority and funded by taxation (or the promise there of). Levels of taxation have not met the minimum needs of the majority and need to be raised.
There are some who are not in the majority who don’t like that. Tough.
There are over a thousand different countries out there in the world and if Objecting Tax Payers want a better deal, they are free to be Enlightened Consumers and head out to any one of them.
Your money is good at any country on the globe. Flights leave on the hour.
It is. You expressed your opinion, he expressed his opinion of your opinion… what do you want, a parade?
You keep saying this, but I don’t believe it. If you don’t care why do you keep replying?
We can get parades? No one told me that was an option. I don’t see it on the User Control Panel.
The same reason you do!
Amen brother.
Sister (in her case)
So, employers are a homogenous group, then, and we may rely with confidence that the virtues you so clearly embody are universal among that class of persons?
What a silly question.
What a pointless rejoinder.
The complaint is that employers tend to look askance at resumes from people who have been out of work for a long time. The testimony that one is an employer and does not have that prejudice speaks well for fisha, but may only mean that fisha is an exception to a rule, or is from Minnesota.
Seriously, you don’t get that?
It’s in alpha order. You’ll find Parade right before Pie and Pony.
If only more employers had this attitude.
What should the response be to a potential employer who refuses to consider hiring someone on the basis that he/she is “overqualified”?
The fear is that someone who takes a job they are overqualified for is that the employee will not do well in the position for a variety of reasons.
I don’t know if there has ever been studies on this, but that is the rationale behind people not wanting to hire overqualified people.
I think it is more the assumption that overqualified candidates will leave as soon as they find a better fit for their skills for more money. Not entirely irrational.