Would you extend that policy to charlatans and the harm they cause?

maybe by differentiating between direct and indirect harm, but both can affect other people so definitely not fully.

Momiji wrote:

can the government stop controlling people's ability to affect themselves (e.g consuming powders)

afterwards i wouldn't care what is "controlled"

If you're forcing people to choose what services they use by forcing them to use tax to fund certain services, then you're controlling people's ability to affect themselves.

if the people can at least choose to use different services (like private hospitals) then it's not really preventing them from affecting themselves in that way... It's more about having taxes at all, which is hard to avoid (only reduced or increased based on how many sectors/services the government controls, either fully or partially)

Also taking away money is two-sided (government gains, the people lose)
which is a tiny bit better than one-sided things like laws that restrict consumption of powders (people lose the ability to consume powders)

You could argue that drugs it two-sided because people harming themselves affects society. It's the same forcing of positive obligations on people the same as taxes, which aren't necessary because you can just privatise the sectors that the government controls.

Time to exercise my ignorance on political matters.

While on topic of drug control, I wonder if the war on drugs could have went better if the government bought out the supply, discarded most of it, and provided it to dealers for a price high enough to cover the costs of buying and discarding it. Artificially inflate the price of it and exhaust supply such that people would have had a harder time acquiring it while still keeping them legal.

That seems like a very dumb idea.

Best solution is to make drugs fully legal (but perhaps only sold at state-owned stores?). That way, addicts can get what they need without risk of impurities etc since then it'd be regulated like any other product.

We should crucify the drug dealers

The government already bankrupts pensioners with the taxes on alcohol and tobacco, and the government is doing its best to smother all of the budding artisan breweries and distilleries in the state. The government trying to regulate the illicit drug industry would be a horror show,.

I don't think pensioners are the ones keeping craft breweries afloat.

I never said they were.

Bird mate, I'm questioning your integrity at this point. Don't turn into some edgy Tasmanian Hitler. :p

B1rd wrote:

The government already bankrupts pensioners with the taxes on alcohol and tobacco

lmfao

what happened to personal agency? "the pensioners literally can't stop buying tobacco and alcohol, which are 2 recreational and unnecessary products!"

DaddyCoolVipper wrote:

That seems like a very dumb idea.

Best solution is to make drugs fully legal (but perhaps only sold at state-owned stores?). That way, addicts can get what they need without risk of impurities etc since then it'd be regulated like any other product.

somehow that comment reminded me of this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJUXLqNHCaI

Milkshake wrote:

somehow that comment reminded me of this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJUXLqNHCaI

Excellent video. The Swiss solution demonstrated is exactly the kind of thing I advocate.

Switzerland is a leader in many areas, with its gun rights, low taxes, free markets, and a private healthcare system that's one of the best in Europe.

You sure do love seeing everything through the lens of propaganda, don't you.

I don't see how pointing out facts is looking at things through a lens of propaganda.

"Switzerland did something well."

YEAH WELL SWITZERLAND ALSO HAS A FREE MARKET AND LOW TAX AND GUN RIGHTS

It's really pathetic to see.

I like Switzerland. You gotta problem with that?

Funny how someone would get so offended over some mere statements about a country.

hey for once I don't see what b1rd said that could be seen as so horrible

Vipper is a Bolshevik, no doubt about it.

In the spirit of free market and to make the economy stronger, I am planning to open a business that sells customer info. They are not allowed to opt out and we are not going to say who's info we sold. Also nobody can sue us because government intervention is bad.

abraker wrote:

In the spirit of free market and to make the economy stronger, I am planning to open a business that sells customer info. They are not allowed to opt out and we are not going to say who's info we sold. Also nobody can sue us because government intervention is bad.

Just like any normal person, I do not like being agressed upon. This business model is a clear aggression against the rights that I as a wealthy person have, according to the contract I entered with Dawn Defense (Personal Security & Privacy+). If you sell my data, Dawn Defense will send armed men to your house to make you pay for your crime [DDefense Privacy+ code chapter A]. What now sucker? Free markets!

Railey2 wrote:

Just like any normal person, I do not like being agressed upon. This business model is a clear aggression against the rights that I as a wealthy person have, according to the contract I entered with Dawn Defense (Personal Security & Privacy+). If you sell my data, Dawn Defense will send armed men to your house to make you pay for your crime [DDefense Privacy+ code chapter A]. What now sucker? Free markets!

You seem like an honest person that is able to stash enough wealth to have a defense contractor back you up. I will make an exception for you and even allow you to have the customer data upon special request. So what do you think about discussing some deals that take of advantage of the poor suckers to put even more money into our pockets?

I've made all my money managing bribes for the independent arbitrators that sometimes work for DDefense, trust me I'm not looking for any more business opportunities. But just out of curiosity, what does your business model look like? Who are you selling to? What data do you obtain and how?

Some struggling startups are looking to expand their customer base and feel like they hit a road block. While some contact us, we usually contact them and offer grants for R&D, engineering developments, or some other thing they need big bucks for, in exchange for some of the consumer data they have gathered over the years. As you know, customer data is one of the most important things for fortune 500 companies. Big buyers like Corruption Corp., Too Big Too Fail Inc., and Illegal Scandal Producer Co. aquire customer data for huge sums of money, often enough to allow us to supply the petty startups. It's a win-win for us! They would become bigger and become buyers of our data and we become bigger to become better sellers of data. Best part is that the poor saps who try to avoid having their data collection by the fortune 500 still have their data collection by startups, and they don't suspect a thing.

B1rd wrote:

Funny how someone would get so offended over some mere statements about a country.

Yes, B1rd, that's all they were.

Intellectual dishonesty must get tiring.

abraker wrote:

Some struggling startups are looking to expand their customer base and feel like they hit a road block. While some contact us, we usually contact them and offer grants for R&D, engineering developments, or some other thing they need big bucks for, in exchange for some of the consumer data they have gathered over the years. As you know, customer data is one of the most important things for fortune 500 companies. Big buyers like Corruption Corp., Too Big Too Fail Inc., and Illegal Scandal Producer Co. aquire customer data for huge sums of money, often enough to allow us to supply the petty startups. It's a win-win for us! They would become bigger and become buyers of our data and we become bigger to become better sellers of data. Best part is that the poor saps who try to avoid having their data collection by the fortune 500 still have their data collection by startups, and they don't suspect a thing.

Wouldn't it be terrible if our own states were already spying on us who can then lock us in jail for breaking one of the 10,000 victimless crimes and there was nothing we could do about it. Oh wait...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency

abraker wrote:

Some struggling startups are looking to expand their customer base and feel like they hit a road block. While some contact us, we usually contact them and offer grants for R&D, engineering developments, or some other thing they need big bucks for, in exchange for some of the consumer data they have gathered over the years. As you know, customer data is one of the most important things for fortune 500 companies. Big buyers like Corruption Corp., Too Big Too Fail Inc., and Illegal Scandal Producer Co. aquire customer data for huge sums of money, often enough to allow us to supply the petty startups. It's a win-win for us! They would become bigger and become buyers of our data and we become bigger to become better sellers of data. Best part is that the poor saps who try to avoid having their data collection by the fortune 500 still have their data collection by startups, and they don't suspect a thing.

So you are like a middleman between big and small corp? That is really smart, I can see that getting seriously big in only a small amount of time.

I don't know a lot about the rest of the Fortune 500, but Dawn Defense is a top5 company as you know and I do know quite a lot about them. Basically: They are always on the lookout for more data.

One strategy they succesfully applied over the years was, that they would enter the market in particularly crime-ridden areas and offer their protection+ contracts for only a fraction of the cost to a part of the population (lets say in neighborhood A). Things would usually go really bad after that, because with a part of the population now being under the protection of DDefense, crime would usually start shifting to be concentrated on everyone that DOESN'T have a DDefense contract (say everyone in Neighborhood B). Neighborhood B would see sharply increasing crime rates over a span of only weeks, and since there is not a lot of money there, no other defense contractor would be willing to offer protection as that would incur great financial losses. Then after shit goes really bad in neighborhood B, DDefense would, as the only firm, enter the market and offer contracts for insanely high prices. Didn't I just say entering such a market would be a financial loss? Yes, but here is the catch: Just before they entered the market, they terminated all the contracts in neighborhood A, making crime shift back there, meaning that neighborhood B practically became safer over night without DDefense even having done any protecting. B-neighborhood inhabitans would often still buy the insanely overpriced contracts, even though crime went back to being unconcentrated again.

Influencing crime-rates for financial gain by selling only to parts of the population is a strategy that DDefense perfected over the years, but to know where exactly this strategy is best employed, information is critical. They would be very interested in dealing with you I am sure.

B1rd wrote:

Wouldn't it be terrible if our own states were already spying on us who can then lock us in jail for breaking one of the 10,000 victimless crimes and there was nothing we could do about it. Oh wait...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency

There are some things to be said about the old system, but at least everyone could go to elementary school there. I heard that education firms upped their rates AGAIN recently. Competition is dead in that field, it's all just one big cartel. It used to just be higher education, but now... Price fixing basically ruined even the most basic education for the bottom 20% of the population. Imagine being born in a family like that..

What are you even talking about

I'll reply to the satire after work, however

B1rd wrote:

What are you even talking about

For once, I have to side with b1rd on this one. Looks like Railey suffered a satire overflow.

Has science gone too far?

Do not fret, Bird, for Tanna Justice is going to ensure your freedom, for a de rigueur fee, of course.

hi
stop fighting about politics and come play a game of exciting classic forum mafia https://forums.tuuba.moe/viewtopic.php?id=264
thanks

(also you can provide all your top pain management tips in case my wisdom tooth hole starts hurting more again)

I'll come back when I get an apology from a certain someone...

B1rd wrote:

I'll come back when I get an apology from a certain someone...

that's not how apologies work, you broke the rules and you got punished as a result, no one is going to apologise to you
stop being a god damn egg

most of us are kinda glad you're gone anyway so there is that

don't wait for their apology. just kiss them already, silly boy.

Tupsu wrote:

B1rd wrote:

I'll come back when I get an apology from a certain someone...

that's not how apologies work, you broke the rules and you got punished as a result, no one is going to apologise to you
stop being a god damn egg

most of us are kinda glad you're gone anyway so there is that

I know right, posting memes in ITT is literal hate speech

I'm sure you're glad I'm gone, meanwhile, have fun begging for members for your dead forum.