He's not forced by anyone to do anything, he could starve if he wants. It's in his own self-interest to not die.

How is an organization relevant? I honestly missed your point.

Why can't the capitalists be productive without the poor? They can get menial labor jobs in services and manufacturing and still be productive.

What happens to the laborers if they have no one to pay them?

Prevent Karl Marx and Friederich Engels, and all other potential communists from surviving past the age of 3.

Why is this debate even here? There are at least 4 just like it. This debate is as pointless as Qymosabi's and those theism debates.

That is pure speculation. How do we know if that is a bad thing? They had such cheap oil, I sure would like that now.

Ad Hominem attacks have been deeply ingrained in American politics for over 2 centuries. To rid us of them now would be a great discredit to our rich culture.

I just have a question, what happens when the government runs out of money?

And by the way making absolute assertions such as "all expert econimists" is very dangerous because they can be disproven much more easily than saying many expert economists.

Yes these things are impossible without government. But government is a necessary evil. I think what the person you are disputing is saying that the necessary evil shouldn't have too much power to become a malicious evil.

New York State:

Yr 1-3 General all topic history.

Yr 4 Pre 20th century NY

Yr 5 Miscellaneous again.

Yr 6 Ancient Civilizations.

Yr 7-8 American history.

Yr 9-10 World history.

Yr 11 American history.

Yr 12 Government and Economics or Macroeconomics.

I can't believe you're seriously arguing that monopolies are good. If you check the debate record I never said that monopolies are good, I was just doubting their abillity to exist for extended periods of time or at all.

It isn't charity if it isn't given freely. If it is forced it only breeds contempt for the needy instead of the love all men need.

The key word is promote. It does not say provide the general welfare.

Rockefeller's Standard Oil dropped the price of oil to less than that of water. And the price kept going down. How is that bad for society?

Besides the fact that yours are facetious, you forgot that Americans hate protracted war. Why do you think the end of the war was celebrated? Truman would have committed political suicide if he authorized an unwinnable war.

And when people can't afford them they won't buy them and the price will drop. A monopoly cannot exist forever. Furthermore no monopoly has ever risen up naturally.

What degenerate place were you born that didn't teach you English?

The creator of this debate has no ability to speak English. His debate does not have any merit as "Ronald Regan" is not in any history book.

There's a reason why the government has a monopoly on force. The force is divided (in America) between the military, the courts, the police, and the militias.

Patton was the best general alive at his time.

If Patton was so good why wasn't he the ranking officer of the Allies? Why was he relieved of duty for slapping an infirm? Rommel was the best of his time.

So they can be invaded again.

That'll be the day, they were invaded by the Mongols under Subutai. That was before Russia had any unification. Try it now and you have no chance.

The Russians had been spying on the US bomb efforts since 1942.

If we had attacked Russia, Europe would most likely have sided with us.

How could they if they were dead?

At that time China loved us.

In 4 years time China would become communist. I highly doubt Mao loved Americans and their capitalism.

Theres more in the Middle East, and Alaska

Our allies owned the Middle East, we couldn't invade them. Alaska's oil reserves are still there untapped and will remain there until someone overturns Roosevelt's national reserve laws.

Who was stationed there

The Soviet Union was going to invade Japan until the US dropped the bomb so there must have been a lot of soldiers stationed there.

First of all Patton was no Hannibal.

Second Russia has only been successfully invaded once.

Third Russia would have developed an a-bomb before we ever totally conquered them if we could.

Fourth we would have had no allies as Russia could have destroyed them with their millions stationed in Europe.

Fifth China would have aided Russia, and theoretically they could amass a larger army.

Sixth Russia has a lot of oil and the American economy cannot function without it.

Seventh our base closest to Russia was Japan, who would've been wiped out by Siberian forces, and the Japanese militarists.

But in a laissez-faire economy competition can arise. Therefore Wal mart would have to slash prices to nip them in the bud, therefore their prices would drop.

Well there hasn't been a libertarian country in years. How would you know if they were flawed. I'd rather have freedom over serfdom anyday.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18722_5-unfought-wars-that-would-have-changed- everything_p2.html

If Patton who was relieved of service already was allowed to invade Russia, whose army outnumbered the West's by 2:1, whose country had only been conquered once in its entire history by a nonrussian, and who pretty much could strangle all of Europe at that time, bad things would have happened.

In my opinion China is really a fascist country and not a communist country because they have economic freedoms but no political freedoms.

Just because they have a monopoly doesn't mean we have to buy from them.

If Walmart had a monopoly on food, I can still grow some at home. Also wouldn't the economy of scale benefit the consumer as the goods would be cheaper?

If we lived in a truly Laissez-faire society, I highly doubt Wal-Mart would have no competitors. The people would just stop buying their products. And Wal-Mart would have to abdicate.

The Church tried making paganism look like Christianity, in order to get the gentiles to join. For example: St. Brigid might never have existed, she may have been a Christian adaptation of a Celtic goddess.

RON PAUL REVOLUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is technically their right to do so. It niether picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

Did I say buying them makes them feral? I said if we don't keep them domesticated and in their place in the pet store, they will become feral.

What would a pet store sell if the sale of animals is banned?

Would you rather have them run wild, and become feral, and possibly attack humans? Animals are supposed to be companions not hostile to man.

There is so much oil that is untapped. It would really be a waste to move onto a different source when there is so much left.

If the government tries to take my arms, they will try to take everything else. When the government wants my arms I will give them to them, by that I mean I will give them the bullets by discharging them in their bodies.

Why would blacks leave America if it became a third world country? Wouldn't they be right at home?

Please stop the religious debates, especially including Holy Books. No one ever has good points and it eventually devolves into monkeys throwing feces at each other.

You have to first ask for forgiveness, and show sorrow. So yes we are responsible.

When in Rome, do as the Romans. But there are no dictators in Rome so the law providing for dictatorial amnesty does not apply to anyone.

It is also like a murderer expecting to get off for turning himself in.

"My neighbor has the right to do anything that niether picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." -Thomas Jefferson.

So no.

How do you plan to increase wealth by taking it from the creators of wealth? This decreases incentive and harsh enough tax policies will cause stagnation which is detrimental to everyone.

Have you ever actually met the average white American Qymosabi? You are the only racist person I've ever met online, ever actually.

they happen when loopholes exist

Who creates the loopholes?

But when so many nations increase tariffs international trade stalls horribly. Which is what happened.

What more do you want computers to do?

Oil is the cheapest form of energy we have which is why we aren't switching immediately.

Bland is very subjective.

In America we have a republic where the majority rules if it doesn't violate the rights of the minority. If the minority is destroyed we have the evils of ochlocracy where the majority can do whatever they want to the others.

Ok then bubbles happen no matter what. Also the government increased tariffs after the crash, which is pretty anti freetrade and the economy went up in flames.

How many monopolies were actually bad for people?

If we do how will Qymosabi rage against the white machine if he gets all of their points that they earned on their own?

I've never gotten an answer to this question either. How austere.

Offering incentives is a regulation. Offering incentives causes bubbles. The free market can fix the bubbles if it's allowed to, unless there is some reason why it keeps getting bigger.

The government took over their company and had them fired. That's a pretty unfair punishment.

In addition it's a major violation of human rights. The first right that every man was created with is life.

You have to earn an education. If it was a right then we would all already have the knowledge that we need to know.

No it doesn't. Glenn Beck is a huge fan of MLK Jr. MLK wanted everyone to be treated equally by everyone else. Beck wants the government to be accountable and have to follow the law like everyone else. I think that their tight.

what about all the "jobs lost" from the 600 thousand children that are killed each year?

Because of our stupid labor laws children can't work.

Well the public schools should be run by the states, and the colleges should be run by the market. And if people don't want that debt then they shouldn't go to college. It's their choice.

I'm pretty sure that the subprime mortgage crisis and housing bubble were caused by the government encouraging banks to loan money to people who had no means to pay for them in the long run. The banks wouldn't have done so without government interference.

That's why I advocate cutting taxes for everyone, and who said constant war was necessary? I think less war is better for the economy.

You just said it's a huge industry. Imagine all of the money lost from not buying these ads, and then all the jobs lost. That's a bigger crime than addicting people.

Let's keep the federal government's nose out of education. It was one of the top systems in the world until Carter created his Department of Education.

How about we throw out this ridiculous 75,000 page tax code that no one has read, and institute a flat tax at 20%. Then everone's is paying the same. We also save money because we can fire the entire IRS.

I didn't say the free market isn't what caused the depression. I'm saying that the restrictions on the free market slowed down its recovery. The free market has its problems but it is the only one that works.

Aren't all fun facts irrelevant? Or as Groucho Marx says: irrelephant? Also a fun fact.

And the regulations is the reason why the Great Depression lasted for 12 years in America. If we let the market fix itself it would have been shorter.

And my right to say that is constitutionally protected.

Fun fact: because this is not a government website, the owner could censor whatever he feels like, and you could not stop him.

Niether does it change the fact that regulations decrease economic growth and performance. And those things benefit everyone.

I was just trying to say that the "common good" isn't in everyone's best interest. Nietzsche's paradox of democracy: in a democratic society I have 2 masters: my will and the majority's will. There is no guarantee that they will ever coincide.

And, who gets to decide the common good, Mr. Machiavelli?

And those legislation punished the CEO's of big corporations. That's a bill of attainder.

Also no bills of attainder may be passed and a lot of those laws were directed towards the big companies.

No. Everybody must follow rules for the good of society. So you're saying that if it is for the good of society that there be no black people, they should make a law ordering their extermination, and that they (blacks) should be compliant with it?

No I'm sorry if my argument was unclear. I meant that the fear of making the world blind stopped the nulcear holocaust. And the fear was brought about by the arms race. So I was trying to say that the arms race was a good thing in a lesser of two evils way.

That was the basic military strategy of the cold war. Keep building more nukes (eye pluckers) so the enemy fears retaliation (plucking more eyes) and the ensuing MAD (blindness).

But isn't it unjust to take away a proprietor's economic freedoms? Soon their political freedoms will be stolen as a result of their loss of economic freedom. It's happening in America as proprietors are becoming restricted and thus becoming pariahs. Our administration considers them the face of all evil.

you bought into the sleight of hand that business freedom equals individual freedom.

Our political freedom is derived from the economic freedom that was and is prevalent in Great Britain. The law protected landowners' rights. And in England land is king. So each landowner was his own master, thus we have political freedom.

We wouldn't be economically devastated if that commie wasn't in the White House, and we never would have joined the war.

You're right, I've never looked at the war in this way. Interesting that if that commie FDR wasn't in office we wouldn't have joined the effort and their would never have been a cold war.

I see your point, but just a query: would you rather have the Soviets occupying Europe or the States?

But the article did not mention any gun control legislation which is the topic of the debate. So if you can't furnish the law it proves that no gun control is safer.

Symbolic speech is allowed in schools. Tinker v. Des Moines

What does this have to do with gun control legislation? It isn't even mentioned in the artice.

Now you've made me get my book of facts. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2328368.ece

It is, but as a private entity social networking sites retain the right to ban whomever they want.

I am not entirely sure of the whole objectivist dogma; Atlas Shrugged is my next book after Wealth of Nations. But it is about freedom where Communism is about serfdom. I think that freedom>serfdom. Therefore Objectivism>Communism.

Cut taxes to promote foreign investment. This will give my people jobs, and more money for my country.

Hasn't the end of the world been predicted numerous of times? And if the Mayans were so smart and had precognition, why couldn't they foretell their own demise, and prevent it?

http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome If I wasn't too lazy to get my Arguing with Idiots book I would have more info. Maybe later.

Governments don't care. The Nazis are usually pictured as the face of evil unless you're Robert Mugabe. Most people would support the outlawing of the Nazi party. But the "I was not Jewish so I didn't speak up" domino effect comes into play where eventually our beliefs will be outlawed.

The United States was never meant to be a democracy because democracy is just as bad as monarchy.

I hate political parties as they divide the country. But as a matter of course, I prefer bloated government to total government. Ron Paul Republicans are the best.

No he shouldn't. America should elect someone who wants to fix the problems, instead of pushing them aside, like Ron Paul, or Chris Christie.

No, he went back on campaign promises, and disregards the Constitution even after he swore he protect and defend it.

Isn't animal cruelty a crime? Animals are technically not people. So shouldn't it apply to unborn humans when one ends their life?

I believe that we should stop having arguments concerning God, or Divine Providence. It will just amount to insults and anger and no one will have convinced the other of their belief.

On a different note, I found out yesterday that all 50 states in the Union recognize God/ a Supreme Being in their constitutions. http://www.usconstitution.net/states_god.html

If the explorers thought that the Earth was flat then why did they try sailing around it? Columbus knew it was roughly spherical as did the Greeks.

Whatever can counteract the battery acid about to be injected into my arm.

Ok, that's an exceptional case. I can't fathom how awesome that is, or imagine how it is possible. But nobody in our government is smart enough to read and absorb that much legal mumbo jumbo.

How can anyone save God read a 2500 page bill in less than 10 days excluding Sundays? Therefore he cannot possibly read the bill in that time.

Any Federal law on abortion is inherently illegal because the Federal government has no authority to regulate abortion. The States individually have the power to. I would be ecstatic if every State in the Union outlawed abortion, just like murder is outlawed.

Isn't that a bastardization of Mark Twain? Suppose you were an idiot, then suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.

I'm from New York. My state had a $9 billion budget deficit. The legislature didn't want to cut anything. Governor Paterson cut so much out of the budget. He decreased NY's spending by almost $9 billion. I don't know what fairy tale you live in, but this is not what happened in NY.