Another one of my random ideas I want to get around to making a vid about. The title pretty much says it all. I have most of the good ones but does anyone have any others they'd like to contribute?
10. Love it or leave it
9. Taxation is not theft
8. Without government, everyone will murder, rape, steal etc etc...
7. Who'll build the roads, take care of the poor, run healthcare, tie my shoes etc etc...
6. Without regulation, the rich will dominate us!
5. Redistribution of wealth
4. The "free rider problem"
3.
2.
1. The social contract
Negative Externalities should be on the list.
Ugh...I know that term but it's slipped my rusty memory. Care to elaborate?
Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on January 07, 2012, 03:58:41 PM
Ugh...I know that term but it's slipped my rusty memory. Care to elaborate?
The big example they give is pollution: big factories run by unfeeling, uncaring, greedy fat psychopaths go out of their way to spew as much crap into the air as possible. It's an externality because they don't incur the costs of doing so, and so the price mechanism doesn't work to disincentivize the behavior.
Certain things like currency and science research are too complicated for ordinary mortals. We need the Government to descend from Mount Olympus and give these gifts to us.
Yes, and related to that is the idea of standardization, that government needs to set down standards because it's something that private organizations could never do (despite the existence of IEEE, ISO, and many others that do exactly that).
Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on January 07, 2012, 01:17:59 PM
Another one of my random ideas I want to get around to making a vid about
I look forward to that video :)
But I digress: One of the thing's I've noticed with statist arguments (like for example from the Amazing Atheist) is that they are asking valid questions about how things would be without the government doing things, but fail to grasp the principle behind it. They seem to believe that
only a government can do those things listed, not those big bad businesses...or heaven forbid, self-organised interested individuals (i.e. an ad hoc committee) :o
To those people, the government is like alcohol: the solution to, and the cause of a lot of our problems
Quote from: ebalosus on January 08, 2012, 04:27:38 AM
One of the thing's I've noticed with statist arguments (like for example from the Amazing Atheist) is that they are asking valid questions about how things would be without the government doing things, but fail to grasp the principle behind it.
It's like creationists asking questions like, "If we evolved, where did morality come from?" or "Why are there still monkeys?" Both of these are good questions, and the answers to these can lead you to a better understanding of evolution. But they're not asked with that in mind; they're asked as if these are great unanswerable questions that automatically show the other side is wrong because there couldn't possibly be any answer to them.
That's probably why when I do answer them, they blow me off and go straight back to insisting they can't be answered.
Quote from: Lord T Hawkeye on January 08, 2012, 10:19:14 AM
That's probably why when I do answer them, they blow me off and go straight back to insisting they can't be answered.
Yes, and that's true of both the statists and the creationists.
Quote from: MrBogosity on January 08, 2012, 10:23:25 AM
Yes, and that's true of both the statists and the creationists.
A lot of creationists are also statists, so it makes sense that they would use similar logic.
Quote from: D on January 08, 2012, 10:26:48 AM
A lot of creationists are also creationists, so it makes sense that they would use similar logic.
A lot of creationists are also *statists*. Is that what you mean?
Quote from: Anpanman on January 08, 2012, 10:34:36 AM
A lot of creationists are also *statists*. Is that what you mean?
Oops. You'll have to excuse me. I'm still in "morning mode."
Quote from: D on January 08, 2012, 11:27:54 AM
Oops. You'll have to excuse me. I'm still in "morning mode."
Ha well I never slept. I have a very messed up sleeping schedule.
What really gets me, though, are the ones that aren't creationists--that join the rest of us in attacking creationism--but use the exact same fallacies and tactics in support of the state. They would NEVER accept that kind of argumentation from creationists, yet they themselves rely on it all the time.
Quote from: MrBogosity on January 08, 2012, 12:22:51 PM
What really gets me, though, are the ones that aren't creationists--that join the rest of us in attacking creationism--but use the exact same fallacies and tactics in support of the state. They would NEVER accept that kind of argumentation from creationists, yet they themselves rely on it all the time.
Ironically enough, James Randi, who they idolize, says that true believers will always believe no matter what evidence you throw at them. Not only will they continue to believe, but you presenting this evidence is perceived as a direct threat to them, which is why they continue to reject the facts and downright lie to keep their precious "reality" in tact.
Quote from: MrBogosity on January 07, 2012, 05:26:37 PM
The big example they give is pollution: big factories run by unfeeling, uncaring, greedy fat psychopaths go out of their way to spew as much crap into the air as possible. It's an externality because they don't incur the costs of doing so, and so the price mechanism doesn't work to disincentivize the behavior.
And they conveniently ignore the fact that the only reason that there's no price mechanism is because Government declares that there not be. If full property rights were recognized, then those who are affected by the pollution could bring suit against the polluter for damaging the value of their property, and the disincentive would be there.
What's funny to me is how many members of the "free thought" community are shocked Michael Shermer isn't a statist.