Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
That's not what I'm saying. Go back to my last post. I suggested that the market is amoral and that voters are moral. I didn't say anything about the tax-adverse being people-adverse. You yet again confuse the issue, and I find your pinning it on me and others in this thread to be both insulting and ridiculous.
|
It is clear that government is more efficient in some respects and less efficient in others. My position is clear - increasing taxes for government to do things the private sector can do more efficiently is the incorrect decision. Those who knowingly advocate for that have an agenda, one that is contrary to what is in the best interest of society. You have been arguing against that, based on my interpretation of our exchanges. I don't know what to make of this most recent post.
Quote:
|
I think you mean your binary outlook and my comprehensive outlook.
|
Right. Forgive me and my stupidity. I know that my point of views are imperfect. Given that I should never have assumed that another shares the same limitation.
Quote:
|
You're a quasi-libertarian monetarist who distrusts government beyond roads, cops, and soldiers. I get it. I just wish you'd not imply what's not there and weasel your way around arguments counter to yours. It's bad enough that you won't even agree with fundamental economic knowledge.
|
Like, people can't time the market???
Quote:
Maybe you should practice what you preach, ace.
Let me help you:
Now here's another chance for you to ask any questions or for clarifications of my position if you don't understand something.
|
How do you determine if government or the private sector is best suited to handle a social issue?
---------- Post added at 07:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:36 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
Not at all. Tons of people outside of the government have done tons of good. People in government have also done tons of good.
She's a rather poor example, I'm afraid. You should check out Christopher Hitchens' writings and videos on Teresa. It turns out she was a bit of a charlatan. That said, there are plenty of people who can do good without government, but the fortunate or unfortunate truth is that private charity and good works haven't been enough in the past to keep civilization stable. Government is needed to deal with things like common defense, vast wealth inequality, and human rights. To deny that is to deny history. In addition, there's no historical evidence to suggest that anarchocapitalism can be successful, in fact there's plenty of evidence to the contrary.
|
I don't support anarchy. I believe there is a role for government in free market capitalism. I have written that many times here, even in this thread.
So, you think Mother Teresa was a fraud - on a relative basis what do you think of Obama?