Private Social Media Platform

Still, FairTheft is better than UnFairTheft. I definitely endorse scrapping the tax code in favor of the FairTheft. https://fairtax.org/about

Don't want your compensation taxed? Learn the law.
https://synapticsparks.info/tax/ExamineFedTax.html

Dale Eastman This isn't about me. It's about the country.

A country that has been socially engineered to be idiots and morons. I read bunches of comments of these same folks in the liberty and freedom camps that complain about taxation being theft. Tax on American's compensation for labor happens because they voluntarily sign W4's when no law requires this.

Dale Eastman I am a Libertarian, not just a libertarian. We are a POLITICAL party, not a philosophical debating society. We must advocate changes that reduce the size and impact of government while still being capable of attracting plurality support.

➽ We are a POLITICAL party, not a philosophical debating society.

This discussion has taken a turn I did not see. In reviewing the discussion, I should have.

Philosophical debates would include discussions of what is moral.

The link you supplied to Fair Tax didn't register at first read. Now that it has, I see it as your admission that you and the rest of the Votards in the Liberty Party condone armed robbery and are for the enslavement of your fellow Americans. Your political party is the conglomeration of immoral... folks.

➽ while still being capable of attracting plurality support.

Exactly whose support are you immoral folks trying to attract?

Dale Eastman And you are accomplishing what, exactly? What has jumping up and down yelling "Taxation is Theft!" gotten you? Right now government is at 10, with the D's and R's ready to turn it up to 11. You are shouting that it should be zero. But are you not willing to concede that if we could get it to 5 it would be a huge improvement over the status quo? What is the good of being a party that gets 2% of the vote, except to convince voters that since we're so fringe, all of our ideas must be fringe also. But our ideas wouldn't be fringe if we just toned down our rhetoric a bit. There are 10s of millions of Americans who would gladly vote for a Party that advocates "smaller" government. There are only 10s of thousands that support "no" government. The Republicans are getting all the votes of the supporters of "smaller" government, even though they actually support "bigger" government, because those voters see us as too extreme. We're in a giant hole. You are advocating no hole. But before we can get to no hole, first we have to stop digging.

After writing this comment, I went back through it. You, like others I have had discussions with, have a habit of ignoring certain things in my text. I have numbered the things I would appreciate that you don't ignore.

➽ Dale Eastman And you are accomplishing what, exactly?

That is a valid and excellent question. Socratic Questioning to get at the facts and to determine if the facts are true.

❶ Goose-Gander quote. That logical approach works both ways, so JR, you are accomplishing what, exactly?
I acknowledge you are actually answering that reversal of the question before it was asked.

➽ What has jumping up and down yelling "Taxation is Theft!" gotten you?

Good question. It's just aimed at the wrong person. The tax on one's domestic compensation for labor is NOT theft. So I actually agree with you on the question to all the others.

❷ So I ask this question: What has voluntarily signing a W4 when no law requires it gotten you or those jumping up and down yelling "Taxation is Theft!"

➽ What is the good of being a party that gets 2% of the vote, except to convince voters that since we're so fringe, all of our ideas must be fringe also.

❸ I'm going to slam this cognition back on the table since you and the other Libertarian have both ignored it.
If the Libertarian candidates won a majority of offices by a landslide, how is this Libertarian (party) government is going to get funding to do its government stuff? If this Libertarian (party) government is not going to immediately cut taxes to 0%, then it is extorting the people for its funding.

The logical conclusion of this is a self-evident fact: You and the rest of the Libertarians support enslavement and condone robbery.

➽ our ideas wouldn't be fringe if we just toned down our rhetoric a bit.

I understand this rhetoric as "less government". This just means "LESS ENSLAVEMENT".
Government IS tyranny.

➽ There are 10s of millions of Americans who would gladly vote for a Party that advocates "smaller" government.

There are 10s of millions of Votards who don't realize that they have been brainwashed to believe bullshit.

➽ We're in a giant hole. You are advocating no hole. But before we can get to no hole, first we have to stop digging.

If you vote, you are still digging.

❹ Where did government get its alleged right to rule?

Dale Eastman We've been trying it your way for 50 years. I actually believe that all rhetoric is wasted at the moment because our system of elections is rigged to prevent 3rd parties or independents from ever gaining a foothold. First Past the Post voting ALWAYS leads to a 2-party outcome. That's why over the past several years I have shifted the focus of my efforts towards passing Ranked Choice Voting across the country and trying to rely Libertarians and all 3rd parties to that cause. https://www.facebook.com/groups/294425008619232 But I still believe that fore the LP to be successful we need to advocate a broad based rollback of government. The end result will NOT be anarchy, it will be more freedom and more prosperity for everyone.

I read what you wrote. I was 196 words into a reply. Nope. Not gonna until you address my numbered points.

❹ Where did government get its alleged right to rule?

❷ So I ask this question: What has voluntarily signing a W4 when no law requires it gotten you or those jumping up and down yelling "Taxation is Theft!"

❸ If the Libertarian candidates won a majority of offices by a landslide, how is this Libertarian (party) government is going to get funding to do its government stuff?

Dale Eastman "The answer to your questions is "less than 1% of the vote."

➽ Dale Eastman "The answer to your questions is "less than 1% of the vote."

I am entirely about "THE LOGIC."

Me: ❸ If the Libertarian candidates won a majority of offices by a landslide, how is this Libertarian (party) government is going to get funding to do its government stuff?

You: "less than 1% of the vote."

Me: ❷ What has voluntarily signing a W4 when no law requires it gotten you or those jumping up and down yelling "Taxation is Theft!"

You: "less than 1% of the vote."

Me: ❹ Where did government get its alleged right to rule?

You: "less than 1% of the vote."

You did NOT pay attention while in your government indoctrination center incarceration (Day jail - public school). Read this again:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and unalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;

I ask again:
❹ Where did government get its alleged right to rule?

Dale Eastman Either you're a moron or being intentionally stupid. The LP is POLITICAL party, not a pholosophical debating society. Or job is attract votes in order to REDUCE the size of government, not eliminate it. I don't say "taxation is Theft" because that is not the way to attract votes. I favor the FairTax which would levy a national retail sales tax on everyone. That answers question #1. Advocating people refuse to file taxes does nothing to attract votes. As far as where does the government get its right to rule, that ship has sailed as far as convincing Americans. the overwhelming majority of Americans believe that government should pay for the military, the courts, national parks, schools, roads, police, fire, etc. The question is how much MORE should they do, because they do thousands of additional tasks whose elimination are ripe for attracting votes. If a person believes in Social Security you are wasting your time advocating for the elimination of SS. But they might still be willing to listen to an argument for self-funding retirement rather than our current failed Ponzi scheme. They might believe in police, but be willing to discuss treating drugs like alcohol. They might be against illegal immigration, but might be willing to discuss increasing legal immigration. They might want government to fund schools, but might be open to giving the money to parents rather than teacher unions. I favor dramatically less government than we have now. I just don't favor NO government because that is a political loser. If you don't understand what a POLITICAL party is for then go join a debating club.

Your reply is 272 words. In those 272 words you FAILED to address all of my numbered concerns.

Actually I speculate that you didn't fail. I speculate that you willfully and deliberately ignored the ones you don't like because they drill too deep into your LP beliefs.

➽ If you don't understand what a POLITICAL party is for then go join a debating club.
➽ The LP is POLITICAL party, not a pholosophical debating society.

Every single political party on the planet IS a philosophical debating party.

Join our party - vote for our candidate because our candidate has the same philosophy that we do. Our philosophy is better than all the other parties' philosophies added together.  And our candidate's better than the other parties' candidates anyway.

I understand EXACTLY what the LP's philosophies are.

➽ Dale Eastman Either you're a moron or being intentionally stupid.

You are not the first individual to call me names because my questions expose the errors in what they believe.

Let's go with I am a moron and I am stupid... So please help me understand your thinking by addressing my questions and concerns.

You have adequately addressed concern/question ❶. Thank you.

I will acknowledge that you did in fact address my question #❹.

➽ As far as where does the government get its right to rule, that ship has sailed as far as convincing Americans.

Woefully inadequately though. Thus:
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
This is a fancy way to say, in Latin: Your claim; Your opinion; means nothing; my opinion cancels yours.

Therefore I am going to present the same question differently.

The Organic Document of the United States IS the Declaration of Liberty.
❺ Admit or deny?

These words are contained within this Organic Document:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and unalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;
❻ Admit or deny?

➽ the overwhelming majority of Americans believe that government should pay for the military, the courts, national parks, schools, roads, police, fire, etc.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.

So you're clairvoyant and you've read some 340 million minds. ⇇ Rhetorical. No question mark.

➽ I favor dramatically less government than we have now.
➽ I just don't favor NO government because that is a political loser.

You just admitted to wanting a smaller government.
❼ Admit or deny?

You just admitted to wanting a government.
❽ Admit or deny?

To govern is to control.
❾ Admit or deny?

To control other humans is to rule other humans.
❿ Admit or deny?

➽ I favor the FairTax which would levy a national retail sales tax on everyone.
That answers question #1.

That also answers question #3:
❸ If the Libertarian candidates won a majority of offices by a landslide, how is this Libertarian (party) government is going to get funding to do its government stuff?

𝟙𝟙  Is this Libertarian (party) government going to let folks who don't want to pay this tax not pay this tax?

Taking any human's property against their will when they have done no harm to another is theft regardless of what this action is labeled.
𝟙𝟚 Admit or deny?

Since you refuse to answer the very simple questions or defend your claims, I am not inclined to play games. Learn that truth is correspondence with reality, and that bad youtube videos are not evidence. Until you have some falsification criteria and understand what evidence is, there is nothing you could even in theory have to offer any thinking person.

A great primer on critical thought is The Reasonable Woman: A Guide to Intellectual Survival by Wendy McElroy. In it, or in any intro to logic text you can learn that the fact that universalizing from an instance is in fact a well known fallacy, not an ignorant assumption.

Given infinite time and an education you could never make a case for your faith.

Why are you calling me by your maiden name?

I addressed all of your questions. You disrespected my by ignoring my questions and posting laugh reacts.

I asked you to explain what you see in those two vid screen caps. So my apology for assuming you were a sighted person. I'm going to assume you can't see any of the following images.

I'd be happy to never come across another flerfer, chermtrail doofus, moon landing denier, etc...
It would be different if they had evidence, used reason, and understood falsification criteria..

I finally had evidence presented on the chemtrail - contrail controversy that I found to be definitive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q-BZxl-Zxk
And I recommend visiting the site.
Also, as a Boomer, I remember a deeper blue sky. It's faded blue now because of what is being sprayed in an attempt to change the Earth's albedo..

Can you account for the change in fuel quality?
How about the lift capacity of wings and the weight of these massive loads of liquids?
Can you explain how those who are supposedly doing this without the knowledge of anyone flying the planes, on the ground, working air ports, etc, are magically protected from these mystery chemicals that no one has shown any hint of any evidence of?

Oh, and can you justify the universalization from an "instance" as logically valid?

Thank you for admitting that the 3 minute, 12 second video was just too long for your short attention span. And that you couldn't be bothered to visit the source, https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/

Snarky insult comment about your pedigree withheld (self-censored).

Wow.. Thanks for admitting offering any answers is too much effort and you could not be bothered with reason and evidence.

Also thanks for admitting that you fail to understand that universalizing from an "instance" is a well known fallacy and so logically CANNOT count as proof of this faith.
But thanks too for immediately going to personal attacks instead of offering anything any thinking person would accept as engaging in the topic.

Can you also share the "great" youtube "proof" of the sky being CGI, NASA inventing the Ancient Greeks, and the massive ice wall surrounding the flat earth?
Thanks for outing yourself.