Tucker Carlson: What is destroying rural America?

[PRB]

Yes. No property rights. No civilization. Property rights are the starting point of everything.

No country has EVER, not one, come close to being successful that didn't have strong property rights.

Every country has property rights. So that's a moot point

In fact, there is not one instance of any place in world history not being an impoverished hell that didn't have strong property rights.

what does "strong" mean? that it's enforced more?

Do you want to know what causes poverty? Nothing. Nothing causes poverty.

I'll stop you right here.
Property causes poverty.

Feel free to prove that with data, the rest of your post is rubbish.

[Krugminator2]

I'll stop you right here.
Property causes poverty.

Feel free to prove that with data, the rest of your post is rubbish.

So you are a troll. Neat. Very productive use of life.

Anyways. Scoreboard.

[r3volution 3.0]

That's interesting

So violating property is aggression, but depriving food and shelter for survival is not?

That's correct.

Theft, despite being highly popular, is immoral and destructive.

[Snowball]

That's correct.

Theft, despite being highly popular, is immoral and destructive.

Aha, but it is not immoral or destructive to take what has been ill-gotten back.

Corporate Financial dominance of our society is responsible for endebting our state, municipal
and federal governments. It is responsible for the monopolization and inflation of assets which
includes formerly family farms, this was not done in a nice way.

The fake conservatives of today, along with the fake progressives, are only pushing us
into the arms of the corporate financial machine, which holds two baskets, one in each arm.

[susano]

you don't believe a person has a right to live independent of his ability to produce profits, so I guess we simply disagree on what human rights are, thus we cannot agree on what's voluntary or coercive.

I can turn around and say paying taxes is voluntary because whatever government force is used to compel you isn't really aggression because I don't recognize your right to be free from government aggression. That proves what?

if I held a gun to your head and ask you to give me your money, that's "voluntary" because you "chose" not to be shot, you were given a choice to be shot and you chose not to. I didn't force you to decide to give me your money, and shooting isn't aggression because I don't recognize your right to not be shot.

You're not going to have any kind of welfare state or social safety net (which I believe you're advocating) without taxes, though. Even if the workers own the means of production, not everyone is able to work.

I would agree that "capitalism", or I should say most people within that system, are indifferent to the plight of the disabled, old, sick and those who have had some catastrophe upend their lives. I don't buy into the idea that "charity" will address those problems, either. It's never proven to be true.

[PRB]

That's correct.

Theft, despite being highly popular, is immoral and destructive.

Wow. That's capitalist morality for you.

Protect property by guns, but screw you if you can't eat to live.

[PRB]

You're not going to have any kind of welfare state or social safety net (which I believe you're advocating) without taxes, though. Even if the workers own the means of production, not everyone is able to work.

Correct, there's a million reasons a person cannot work, but one of them should not be "because means of production is privately owned". it may not be the biggest reason, but it's the easiest to solve.

I would agree that "capitalism", or I should say most people within that system, are indifferent to the plight of the disabled, old, sick and those who have had some catastrophe upend their lives.

I appreciate that. that's more than most are willing to admit here

I don't buy into the idea that "charity" will address those problems, either. It's never proven to be true.

yikes. you're a heretic. watch out for Mises mice bombard you with "examples" of it "working"

[PRB]

Aha, but it is not immoral or destructive to take what has been ill-gotten back.

Corporate Financial dominance of our society is responsible for endebting our state, municipal
and federal governments. It is responsible for the monopolization and inflation of assets which
includes formerly family farms, this was not done in a nice way.

The fake conservatives of today, along with the fake progressives, are only pushing us
into the arms of the corporate financial machine, which holds two baskets, one in each arm.

thank you.

this is the problem I have with conservatives, capitalists and libertarians.

They will defend whatever is legal, and ignore morality, or their morality is entirely based on what's legal.

[nikcers]

thank you.

this is the problem I have with conservatives, capitalists and libertarians.

They will defend whatever is legal, and ignore morality, or their morality is entirely based on what's legal.

Forced morality is immoral.

[susano]

People like Tucker who cheerled deadly Iraq war blundering heroes like Bush have helped destroy both rural and urban life.

It is amazing how many discredited neocons' cheerleaders and destroyers of rural/urban life get rebirthed on notorious fakenews outlet Foxnews, it's not just NYT's disgraced fakenewser Iraq war yellow cake Judith Millaer or lies based perpetual wars neocons poodle Hanity, this outlet has served as a cesspool of some of the worst fakenwsers. Tucker is better than some others though, to be fair.

Hold on. You're saying Tucker Carlson was a Bush and invasion of Iraq supporter? I only vaguely remember Tucker from his days at MSNBC when he was a producer for Willy Geist (sp) and don't recall his views about politics or life. He really got on my radar when he supported Ron Paul which about as far away from neocon and the War Party it can get. My take is that he was quite libertarian (small L) and has matured to be more paleoconservative. I also find him to be 100% committed to the truth and truly open minded to any rational POV, be it "left" or "right". You're painting him as a neocon so please produce your evidence because it isn't true.

[PRB]

Forced morality is immoral.

capitalism is forced morality.

[nikcers]

capitalism is forced morality.

Slave mentality is psychosomatic

[presence]

What is destroying rural America?

Simple.

40% of farm income is subsidy

the top 15% of farms by value receive 85% of the subsidies
the top 1% of farms by value receive 30% of all subsidies

How can a small family farm produce anything of value when large corporate farms are paid once by the consumer and a second time by the state?

And then there is property tax... augmented by biggest line item of bull$#@!: school tax. Every small farm pays 10's of thousands of dollars to educate city people's kids... while many of them homeschool their own.

And then there is state ownership of rural land; especially timber. How can a small timber operation compete against big corps with state contracts to send containers of state trees to china?

Then stone... how can a small stone quarry compete against big corps with state contracts for muh roads?

The entire rural economy is twisted by subsidy, state contracts, state ownership, and regulations that push the little guy out.

[PRB]

Slave mentality is psychosomatic

lolwut

[PRB]

What is destroying rural America?

Simple.

40% of farm income is subsidy

the top 15% of farms by value receive 85% of the subsidies
the top 1% of farms by value receive 30% of all subsidies

How can a small family farm produce anything of value when large corporate farms are paid once by the consumer and a second time by the state?

And then there is property tax... augmented by biggest line item of bull$#@!: school tax. Every small farm pays 10's of thousands of dollars to educate city people's kids... while many of them homeschool their own.

And then there is state ownership of rural land; especially timber. How can a small timber operation compete against big corps with state contracts to send containers of state trees to china?

Then stone... how can a small stone quarry compete against big corps with state contracts for muh roads?

The entire rural economy is twisted by subsidy, state contracts, state ownership, and regulations that push the little guy out.

f yeah capitalism

[acptulsa]

f yeah capitalism

The only problem with capitalism is government insists on picking the winners and losers.

And that is not a capitalism problem.

[PRB]

The only problem with capitalism is government insists on picking the winners and losers.

And that is not a capitalism problem.

but you're ignoring the fact that the winners were already winners, they were just reinforced.

[susano]

Except when the government takes away your house by forcing capitalists to invest in bad investments and then forcing people who screw lugnuts to pay for the losses from bad investments...

There's the rub. This so called free market doesn't exist except on a very individual level (unregulated private buying and selling, tax free). The "system" is skewed to shifting losses to the public at large or "public risk for private profit". This is also where socialist programs benefit big corporations who can get away with crappy wages by shifting the responsibility to taxpayers and the debt system. That's why Wally World provides it's employees with information about how to get social services/welfare.

Though I've never read the book, it's my understanding that "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" is about precisely this. The so called left and the so called right or the so called capitalists and the so called socialists actually are one system. That's always been pretty obvious, to me. All of the talk about capitalism and socialism - as though they exist independently, in "liberal democracy" is false and just intellectual wanking. So, we seem doomed to constant arguing tweaking of this system as the disparity between well off and just scraping by continues to grow. What to do about it, I dunno but the creating money out of nothing, for profit, is probably the heart of the problem.

[acptulsa]

but you're ignoring the fact that the winners were already winners, they were just reinforced.

Like Solyndra and Tesla? They were things before government made them?

Not buying it. Your argument is, basically, socialism is better because government screws up capitalism. But government invariably screws up socialism more, so it doesn't wash.

[PRB]

There's the rub. This so called free market doesn't exist except on a very individual level (unregulated private buying and selling, tax free). The "system" is skewed to shifting losses to the public at large or "public risk for private profit". This is also where socialist programs benefit big corporations who can get away with crappy wages by shifting the responsibility to taxpayers and the debt system. That's why Wally World provides it's employees with information about how to get social services/welfare.

Though I've never read the book, it's my understanding that "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" is about precisely this. The so called left and the so called right or the so called capitalists and the so called socialists actually are one system. That's always been pretty obvious, to me. All of the talk about capitalism and socialism - as though they exist independently, in "liberal democracy" is false and just intellectual wanking. So, we seem doomed to constant arguing tweaking of this system as the disparity between well off and just scraping by continues to grow. What to do about it, I dunno but the creating money out of nothing, for profit, is probably the heart of the problem.

maybe that system is called human nature.

[PRB]

Like Solyndra and Tesla? They were things before government made them?

Not buying it. Your argument is, basically, socialism is better because government screws up capitalism. But government invariably screws up socialism more, so it doesn't wash.

Solyndra was a loser, Tesla was a patent holder, and still a loser.

No, not socialism is better because government screws up capitalism. Socialism is better because workers have more equality. Government screws up everything as long as it's not people owned, people controlled (by people I mean the masses, not humans as opposed to dogs and robots)

[acptulsa]

Socialism is better because workers have more equality.

Yeah, that's been the siren song since Karl Marx. But from Lenin on, the reality has been, in capitalism the worst your boss can do is fire you and give you a bad reference. In socialism your boss can have you executed.

[susano]

You literally just did. You said deprivation of means of survival is not coercion. So you do not believe a person has a right to live via eating and being housed, unless he can produce profits through "exchange voluntarily".



glad you admit government is necessary to protect rights.


no, you never had the brain to comprehend it, try reading it again.

The system created by the constitution views "rights" differently than you're describing them, which is more like the European Union. Constitutional rights are not granted by government, they are derived from God or by matter of being born. They don't demand that someone else provide you with anything. It's the freedom to do your own thing as long as you don't interfere with others doing theirs. Your view of "rights" come with demands and those are government granted privileges, framed as "rights" and are subject to change. Genuine rights don't change. The only moral way to achieve the kind of "rights" that you want is voluntary/opt-in socialism, which is fine, afaic. I would immediately opt out of paying for schools but would gladly contribute to assisting the poor, for instance. I guess that would be kind of like how insurance works.

[presence]

There is nothing wrong with socialist fabrics or capitalist hierarchies. True socialism is the relationships we have with families, friends, mutual aid societies, and churches. True capitalism is the relationships we have in unregulated; un-taxed markets. The problem is the state; the mafia; criminal gangs who's power comes not from economics or love, but violent psychopathy. Once it gets involved our social fabric becomes frayed as our dependency moves from being cared for to being kept. Likewise our free markets become skewed away from economic efficiencies toward depredation by politically chosen parties. Across the board inefficiencies develop; resources and incentives are no longer aligned with the needs of individuals but instead with corrupt desires of bureaucracies.

[nikcers]

There's the rub. This so called free market doesn't exist except on a very individual level (unregulated private buying and selling, tax free). The "system" is skewed to shifting losses to the public at large or "public risk for private profit". This is also where socialist programs benefit big corporations who can get away with crappy wages by shifting the responsibility to taxpayers and the debt system. That's why Wally World provides it's employees with information about how to get social services/welfare.

Though I've never read the book, it's my understanding that "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" is about precisely this. The so called left and the so called right or the so called capitalists and the so called socialists actually are one system. That's always been pretty obvious, to me. All of the talk about capitalism and socialism - as though they exist independently, in "liberal democracy" is false and just intellectual wanking. So, we seem doomed to constant arguing tweaking of this system as the disparity between well off and just scraping by continues to grow. What to do about it, I dunno but the creating money out of nothing, for profit, is probably the heart of the problem.

Just becauss there isn't a lot of capitalism doesn't mean we should get rid of it. We should aim for as much capitalism as possible and weed put as much corruption as possible.

[nikcers]

lolwut

Slave mentality is wanting someone to lorde over you and make choices for you because you aren't smart enough. Psychosomatic means that you have that mentality because you believe that you aren't smart enough to make good choices. Capitalism is the system that lets people make the most amount of choices.

[susano]

None of these phrases mean anything unless we agree on the premises. Since you admit you don't believe a person has a right to be free from being deprived of food and shelter, it's no wonder you would call being forced to starve due to property "not coercion".

I'm not an expert on history or the reasoning of the founders but I'm deducing that "rights", as endowed by the Creator, mean natural rights as in nature. It's very free but not warm and fuzzy. It's the Serengeti and there is nothing fair about it. Jordan Peterson is right about natural hierarchies. Some are gonna make it and some won't and there is no equality other than before God which doesn't have anything to do with the material/physical world. It is what it is and it's harsh, I would agree. None of this precludes people from being compassionate and caring about each other and that's where I think voluntary socialism would be a good answer. Nobody is forced but many will choose to help others, if only for selfish reasons and to assure that they, too, will have support if needed.

[nikcers]

I'm not an expert on history or the reasoning of the founders but I'm deducing that "rights", as endowed by the Creator, mean natural rights as in nature. It's very free but not warm and fuzzy. It's the Serengeti and there is nothing fair about it. Jordan Peterson is right about natural hierarchies. Some are gonna make it and some won't and there is no equality other than before God which doesn't have anything to do with the material/physical world. It is what it is and it's harsh, I would agree. None of this precludes people from being compassionate and caring about each other and that's where I think voluntary socialism would be a good answer. Nobody is forced but many will choose to help others, if only for selfish reasons and to assure that they, too, will have support if needed.

You would think we wouldn't have to make the argument that life isnt fair, that you should keep your hands to yourself and off otber peoples stuff and that there is no free lunch. The baby mentality is tiresome. All of these people thinking the government is going to give them free stuff but not knowing where the government gets stuff. Socialism doesnt mean no one has to work and capitalism doesnt mean lots of people go hungry. False comparisons between capitalism with voluntary charity not feeding everyone when people are going hungry right now with all of these safety nets.

[susano]

Property causes poverty.

That's ridiculous.

[susano]

Correct, there's a million reasons a person cannot work, but one of them should not be "because means of production is privately owned". it may not be the biggest reason, but it's the easiest to solve.



I appreciate that. that's more than most are willing to admit here


yikes. you're a heretic. watch out for Mises mice bombard you with "examples" of it "working"

I'm not a Libertarian. I'm a free agent