A chilling quote about Tory philosophy

"When plunder becomes way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorises it & a moral code that glorifies it."

Andy wrote:"When plunder becomes way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorises it & a moral code that glorifies it."

Have the tories turned islamic?

I think it relates to their über Capitalist ethos.
Its a euphemism for pure , unadulterated greed.

Sounds more like the left wing mantra of taking everyone's money with high taxes and state taking ownership of everything...

Andy wrote:"When plunder becomes way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorises it & a moral code that glorifies it."

It's Bastiat and refers to governments confiscating wealth by force through taxation.

Libertarians use this quote all of the time.  

Some Tories may use this quote to define Labour members I guess, but Tories aren't libertarians by any stretch.

Andy wrote:I think it relates to their über Capitalist ethos.
Its a euphemism for pure , unadulterated greed.

It is the dark part of libertarianism, that they don't want to talk about: what happens when you actually achieve liberty?

Original Quill wrote:

Andy wrote:I think it relates to their über Capitalist ethos.
Its a euphemism  for pure , unadulterated  greed.

It is the dark part of libertarianism, that they don't want to talk about: what happens when you actually achieve liberty?

Andy thinks the quote defines Tories, not that it's used by Tories.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

It is the dark part of libertarianism, that they don't want to talk about: what happens when you actually achieve liberty?

Andy thinks the quote defines Tories, not that it's used by Tories.  

Nevertheless.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Andy thinks the quote defines Tories, not that it's used by Tories.  

Nevertheless.

Are you asking what happens with less state sponsored plunder?

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Nevertheless.

Are you asking what happens with less state sponsored plunder?

No.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Are you asking what happens with less state sponsored plunder?

No.

Good.

Maybe you're learning.

The state doesn't plunder; plunder means taking something you haven't earned, and keeping it.

The state does take a portion of some people's earnings, but it earns that portion by providing services, and it doesn't keep it; it spends it on improving living conditions for the people it represents.

Ben Reilly wrote:The state doesn't plunder; plunder means taking something you haven't earned, and keeping it.

The state does take a portion of some people's earnings, but it earns that portion by providing services, and it doesn't keep it; it spends it on improving living conditions for the people it represents.

& a moral code that glorifies it."

Nobody gets rich working a government job. The top-paid federal employee in the U.S., the president, makes about half as much per year as a Hollywood plastic surgeon.

To equate taxation with plunder when nobody's even lining their pockets with tax money is ridiculous.

Ben Reilly wrote:Nobody gets rich working a government job. The top-paid federal employee in the U.S., the president, makes about half as much per year as a Hollywood plastic surgeon.

To equate taxation with plunder when nobody's even lining their pockets with tax money is ridiculous.

It's small scale plunder.

Tell me if I take a dollar from you and give you an apple, have I committed a crime?

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Nobody gets rich working a government job. The top-paid federal employee in the U.S., the president, makes about half as much per year as a Hollywood plastic surgeon.

To equate taxation with plunder when nobody's even lining their pockets with tax money is ridiculous.

It's small scale plunder.  

Tell me if I take a dollar from you and give you an apple, have I committed a crime?

No, you've committed a dick move. Taxation isn't a crime, but it is a dick move. The only problem is, that's the only way society works -- the only way to have a nation-state.

We'd all hate it if we had to prove we had crime insurance before a cop would intervene in our mugging, or fire insurance before a firefighter would pull us out of our burning houses, or war insurance before the army would stop an invading force from killing us.

It would be a major bottleneck if you had to proved you'd paid toward the construction of a road before you could drive on it, or that you'd paid toward the operation of the education system before you were allowed to enroll your children in school.

That's why taxation can't be voluntary. It's not ideal to have to fork over part of your earnings to the government to pay for these things, particularly if you don't use them, but it's also not ideal to live in a place where you can't even walk down the sidewalk unless you've proven you're entitled to, because you paid to use it.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

It's small scale plunder.  

Tell me if I take a dollar from you and give you an apple, have I committed a crime?

No, you've committed a dick move. Taxation isn't a crime, but it is a dick move. The only problem is, that's the only way society works -- the only way to have a nation-state.

We'd all hate it if we had to prove we had crime insurance before a cop would intervene in our mugging, or fire insurance before a firefighter would pull us out of our burning houses, or war insurance before the army would stop an invading force from killing us.

It would be a major bottleneck if you had to proved you'd paid toward the construction of a road before you could drive on it, or that you'd paid toward the operation of the education system before you were allowed to enroll your children in school.

That's why taxation can't be voluntary. It's not ideal to have to fork over part of your earnings to the government to pay for these things, particularly if you don't use them, but it's also not ideal to live in a place where you can't even walk down the sidewalk unless you've proven you're entitled to, because you paid to use it.

And I agree that we need some dick moves. But let's error on the side of fewer dick moves.

More Bastiat, Less Marx.

Let me ask you another question. Should taxpayers build stadiums for sports teams that are worth billions?

Fuck, no. But don't they vote to do that, anyway?

Ben Reilly wrote:Fuck, no. But don't they vote to do that, anyway?

Sometimes. But should the system even allow for that?

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Fuck, no. But don't they vote to do that, anyway?

Sometimes. But should the system even allow for that?

I can't think of a good reason not to allow it. Obviously some people think a new stadium would be a good idea, for any number of reasons, both good and stupid (in my opinion, of course). But in general, I would prefer wealth redistribution to help people who have very little rather than people who have more than they know what to do with.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Sometimes. But should the system even allow for that?

I can't think of a good reason not to allow it. Obviously some people think a new stadium would be a good idea, for any number of reasons, both good and stupid (in my opinion, of course). But in general, I would prefer wealth redistribution to help people who have very little rather than people who have more than they know what to do with.

Because people should only have their money confiscated for necessary public services.

The system Bastiat refers to is confiscation to create a society liked of the confiscators and their supporters.

Pay for cops, feed some hungry kids. Most of us can agree on that. But government has gone so much further than that.

Maddog wrote:Because people should only have their money confiscated for necessary public services.

And the people determine "necessary public services". The system is working.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:Because people should only have their money confiscated for necessary public services.

And the people determine "necessary public services".  The system is working.

But they don't have any real say in how the money is spent.

Nor knowledge really.

He'll, the people in Congress don't even know where the money is going.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

And the people determine "necessary public services".  The system is working.

But they don't have any real say in how the money is spent.  

Nor knowledge really.

He'll, the people in Congress don't even know where the money is going.

Yes, but people have a say in the programs they endorse. Unless it's Georgia or Texas, their vote means something.

I think this sums up Conservative philosophy perfectly.

Only in the eyes of an idiot like you hand shandy...

Andy wrote:I think this sums up Conservative  philosophy  perfectly.

On-point, Andy. Money over human quality-of-life is the RW creado. It brings about Donald Trump's and their parade of caged babies, not defending the nation, and begetting depressions.

Reminds me of that old Pete Seeger song: ...when will they ever learn, when will they ever learn?