Can you live on minimum wage? (Calculator)

[abandonconflict]

The State is only for protection of the weak against the thieves.

That is what the state says in order to get legitimacy, but it really just serves the interests of the structure of concentrated private power. Obamacare is a great example of this. Under the guise of being an attempt at universal health care, it caters to the pharmaceutical industry and the private insurance industry, neither of which have any interest in the health of the public or individual people. They create patients and seek to enable them to continue to be patients. Cures are bad for profit. The government is essential to the scheme.

 

[Doer]

"Logic goes well with brevity."

..ain't he somethin'? That's my Uncle Buck!

 

[Harrekin]

the pubs are running into exactly what they feared: the dems have them out-numbered..in essence, the only thing they have going for them is cash and the ability to supress the vote by limiting polling through reduced hours, reduced poll places, reduced voter booths courtesy of republican governors..in my precinct last election cycle stood one (1) voting booth where there used to be dozens..

rick scott made a very big mistake by insulting the intelligence of his constituents and will pay for it this november.

I respect your intelligence enough to hope you realise politicians 99% of the time don't represent you. Its about obtaining as much capital as possible while in office, Democrats just pay better lip service to the plebs than the Republicans.

Its a pandering war to distract you from their taking.

Don't bullshit me, Obama will never have to work a day in his life again after the Presidency ends, do you think he honestly gives a fuck about the poor?

 

[Doer]

That is what the state says in order to get legitimacy, but it really just serves the interests of the structure of concentrated private power. Obamacare is a great example of this. Under the guise of being an attempt at universal health care, it caters to the pharmaceutical industry and the private insurance industry, neither of which have any interest in the health of the public or individual people. They create patients and seek to enable them to continue to be patients. Cures are bad for profit. The government is essential to the scheme.

I agree. So, what are the brass tack here? It all goes back to the leaderless band in sudden peril,.... for a thought puzzle. OK? Mind melt that one.

A band of humans, will have a leader, though there may be blood, right? Consider the decimated tribe, by natural causes. Someone has to lead.

In fact, all congregated mammal societies have a hierarchy.

You've been in the shit before, and your leaders put you there. But, let's un-ravel that back the dawn of thought.

If you are in the shit, someone has to lead, if any are to survive. Now I know the snuffies depend on each other, and each other depends on the Sarge. Above that is only trouble.

So, roll that back to the hunting band who's leader just lost it. 3 more saber cats have you all cut off and cornered. No time for the formal leader challenge fight.

But, in hierarchy, here is always a second, in capital standing, to look to, for "oh dear, now what?" The Instant shot caller. Us hunters fall to, deploy the breakout maneuver and roll up the threat.

I have always really wanted to ask you this, quite seriously.

Where does the State emerge from the Tribe which emerged from the leaderless hunting band?

What is that dividing line in your mind, in the history of us, if you care to think about it?

 

[abandonconflict]

"I think it only makes sense to seek out and identify structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in every aspect of life, and to challenge them; unless a justification for them can be given, they are illegitimate, and should be dismantled, to increase the scope of human freedom." ~Noam Chomsky

Your question is making assumptions. It assumes that human nature dictates acquiescence to domination, since you correctly point out that human nature dictates that some will seek to dominate others. Remember, it always boils down to interpretation of nature with these debates.

 

[twostrokenut]

It's better than your convoluted distortion bullshit pitch. Logic goes well with brevity.

Fine then...please say "convoluted" again for trifecta.
State cannot exist without taxing market.

 

[abandonconflict]

Alot of people seem to be equating capitalism with what currently exists, which is crony capitalism.

Govt receiving large donations from certain corporations for "special consideration" is not a capitalist or free market principal, infact it is the opposite to a free market.

People give the Republicans ALOT of shit, the Dems are in on the same circle jerk.

Take money out of politics and let a truely free market bloom, and for the lefties that cry about the environment, it belongs to the commons, so in a free market you could still have a scaled back EPA which protects the equal rights of all citizens to the environment.

All capitalism is crony.

Capitalism and "free market" are not synonymous. Capitalism means privatization of economic infrastructure and resources. There is no freedom in such a system by definition. There is regulation, patents, fences, borders, laws and police. There are people saying "this is mine, no trespassing". They then use it coercively for profit and people are forced to rent themselves out in order to buy the means to survive.

 

[Doer]

"I think it only makes sense to seek out and identify structures of authority, hierarchy, and domination in every aspect of life, and to challenge them; unless a justification for them can be given, they are illegitimate, and should be dismantled, to increase the scope of human freedom." ~Noam Chomsky

Your question is making assumptions. It assumes that human nature dictates acquiescence to domination, since you correctly point out that human nature dictates that some will seek to dominate others. Remember, it always boils down to interpretation of nature with these debates.

I know. And I am well read, like you. I am attempting to get you to help me think of when the State emerges.

I mean, the very first principle of Humans, is the need, the absolute requirement for cooperation. And that is hierarchy for mutual aid, not the need to dominate. That came second, I think.

The first is the need to survive, since life is so difficult and dangerous. And hierarchy seems innate, inherent, and necessary for the long gestation and lengthy adolescence.

So, first we save ourselves with groups and leaders.

Much later domination occurs. Yes?

(not debating, can't win, already lost, etc)

 

[abandonconflict]

Fine then...please say "convoluted" again for trifecta.
State cannot exist without taxing market.

State taxes labor more than anything.

 

[twostrokenut]

State taxes labor more than anything.

Income is not synonymous with wages traded for labor.

Crony State cannot exist without limited liability.

 

[Harrekin]

All capitalism is crony.

Capitalism and "free market" are not synonymous. Capitalism means privatization of economic infrastructure and resources. There is no freedom in such a system by definition. There is regulation, patents, fences, borders, laws and police. There are people saying "this is mine, no trespassing". They then use it coercively for profit and people are forced to rent themselves out in order to buy the means to survive.

Sorry what?

So who owns shit then?

Libertarian socialism... Reee-tarrrrr-deeeed.

 

[tokeprep]

the pubs are running into exactly what they feared: the dems have them out-numbered..in essence, the only thing they have going for them is cash and the ability to supress the vote by limiting polling through reduced hours, reduced poll places,

Democrats have long, long outnumbered Republicans in party registration and in government. There was a 50-60 year stretch when Democrats had nearly constant control of the entire congress. Republicans winning elections and holding power is a relatively new phenomenon in the recent history of American politics, happening just within the last 15 years. So I wouldn't say Republicans are afraid of being outnumbered, they're quite accustomed to and expect that.

Of course, Republicans aren't really outnumbered, which is what you're overlooking. The Democrat and Republican voting blocs aren't actually up for grabs in elections--we all know how they'll vote. The electoral contests really revolve around winning "independent" voters, who are now by far the largest group of voters in the country. Independents tend to lean Republican, though. In 2012, Romney won independents by 5% over Obama, for example. Independents typically lean Republican.

reduced voter booths courtesy of republican governors..in my precinct last election cycle stood one (1) voting booth where there used to be dozens..

rick scott made a very big mistake by insulting the intelligence of his constituents and will pay for it this november.

Was that a decision made by the state or a decision made by your local election authorities? I'm guessing the latter is the case. If so, are those officials Democrats or Republicans? If they're non-partisan, are you in a Democrat or Republican county?

 

[tokeprep]

State taxes labor more than anything.

Say what...? Which state are you talking about that taxes labor more than anything?

 

[schuylaar]

Democrats have long, long outnumbered Republicans in party registration and in government. There was a 50-60 year stretch when Democrats had nearly constant control of the entire congress. Republicans winning elections and holding power is a relatively new phenomenon in the recent history of American politics, happening just within the last 15 years. So I wouldn't say Republicans are afraid of being outnumbered, they're quite accustomed to and expect that.

Of course, Republicans aren't really outnumbered, which is what you're overlooking. The Democrat and Republican voting blocs aren't actually up for grabs in elections--we all know how they'll vote. The electoral contests really revolve around winning "independent" voters, who are now by far the largest group of voters in the country. Independents tend to lean Republican, though. In 2012, Romney won independents by 5% over Obama, for example. Independents typically lean Republican.



Was that a decision made by the state or a decision made by your local election authorities? I'm guessing the latter is the case. If so, are those officials Democrats or Republicans? If they're non-partisan, are you in a Democrat or Republican county?

thank you for your opinion.

 

[abandonconflict]

Say what...? Which state are you talking about that taxes labor more than anything?

I'm clearly referring to Nebraska.

 

[abandonconflict]

Sorry what?

So who owns shit then?

Libertarian socialism... Reee-tarrrrr-deeeed.

When your ability to cope with information that doesn't fit with your views is in short supply, just fall back on this. The facts I just pointed out to you highlight the flaws inherent in capitalism and weren't presented as an attempt to argue for libertarian socialism.

Duly noted that you failed to defend your remarks.

 

[Harrekin]

When your ability to cope with information that doesn't fit with your views is in short supply, just fall back on this. The facts I just pointed out to you highlight the flaws inherent in capitalism and weren't presented as an attempt to argue for libertarian socialism.

Duly noted that you failed to defend your remarks.

Cool story bro.

Your post PERFECTLY describes libertarian socialism.

So tell me again, who owns property in your utopian world?

And how do we progress from there to now without widespresd property confiscation?

Your throat sore?

Unable to answer?

That's my throbbing member, fucking your bullshit.

 

[abandonconflict]

Your post PERFECTLY describes libertarian socialism.

Actually, we were discussing capitalism and you are desperate to change the subject.

 

[Harrekin]

Actually, we were discussing capitalism and you are desperate to change the subject.

Dude, I'm not a fucking dictionary.

Capitalism:

an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

This is NOT the case currently, and THAT is why shit is so fucked.

You want an institution you don't trust with state healthcare to control trade?

You need a helmet in that bath if you think that.

 

[twostrokenut]

Actually, we were discussing capitalism and you are desperate to change the subject.

wage slavery exclusive to private property and production then?

seems i tried to focus on this earlier but it quickly went out of scope.