Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
But it wasn't even implied. That's why it's unclear. You're leaving much to guesswork or open options, like a blank cheque.
But if you know what you need to spend, is that fine?
Are we still cool with either deficits or surpluses based on need?
|
i left nothing open. you see that because you operate on the premise of 'if it's not specifically prohibited, then it's available'. I don't and you should know this. I operate on the premise of 'if its not specifically approved, then it's not available'. this limits the government the way it's supposed to be like the founders intended.
this eliminates deficits and any surplus can be dealt back to the people like it should be.
---------- Post added at 03:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:57 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
btw dk doesn't understand that a state is not a giant human being. that says nothing about the nature of the state. at all. the only contact that position has with the empirical world is by way of dk himself, who i assume exists empirically and empirically cannot get his head around the fact that the state is not a giant human being.
|
what the hell are you talking about?