Comments by "romanmir01" (@romanmir01) on "Scalia - The Ultimate Activist Judge" video.

@dffykvn Somebody thinks you are rich, and then somebody thinks that whoever thinks that you are rich, that guy is. The point is very very simple: class warfare is the real fight to the bottom. There was even a joke that originated after the 1917 Russian revolution: a great-granddaughter of one of the 'December Fighters' (there was an attempt to get rid of the Russian Tzar in December of 1825), she looks out of the window in 1917 and sees revolutionaries. Asks them: what is this all about? ctd
1
@dffykvn Remove the incentive for corporations to try and take over gov't by setting up these very harsh and clear rules: Gov't ABSOLUTELY CANNOT do anything in economy to modify economic outcomes for anybody, be they a corporation or an individual person or anything else. Take away gov'ts ability to PRINT MONEY and to set interest rates and to create business regulations and you take away incentive to corrupt the gov't.
1
@dffykvn But the reason why this is happening is because people America have bought this line of thinking completely - that gov't is there FOR THEM. IT IS A JOKE. OK? Gov't is NOT there for you. THIS gov't is NOT there for you. You cannot trust it with your pension, you cannot trust it with your insurance, etc.etc. you cannot trust it with you taxes and with your debts. You must STOP paying income taxes to your gov't, they will STILL print the money to pay for their preferred corporations
1
@dffykvn Gov't buys your votes with money they print. It's that easy. There is no such thing as forced donations - this is Violation of Freedom. You do not force me to donate. I donate myself if I have money. I have money if you do not steal it from me. I can make my own money, do you understand? I can start businesses (and I do), I can hire people (and I do). And it's about all people. Everybody can do this and HAVE done this before any gov't Gov't can come and steal from you and buy you off
1
@dffykvn Helping the poor? USSR was built on the premise of 'helping the poor'. The entire reason why Ayn Rand was against such behavior was exactly because this idea of 'helping the poor' is a thinly veiled attempt to usurp the power, even if the original idea is actually truly about 'helping the poor', (and this is exactly what Russian Revolution of 1917 was about), it eventually degenerates into a civil war, where the distinction between yesterdays and tomorrows rich is that ctd
1
@dffykvn Oh, and let me tell you something about slippery slope. First, they came for the Tsar and his family, and shot him. Then they started killing whoever was on top. Then it was after the big businessmen, many of who left the country of-course, but their possessions were confiscated. THEN they came after the RICHEST farmers. Called them "KULAK". THEN they came after the second in line 'well to do' farmers - "SEREDNIAK" THEN. Well then, it was any farmer who still had some food left
1
@dffykvn Excellent, so you are against harsh sentences for minor crimes (and clearly, this fits the bill perfectly with the most drug offenses, etc.) But HOW do you figure this is a corporation problem as opposed to being a gov't created problem? I believe that gov't is the ultimate authority, that if you get the gov't to do its job and ONLY its job and prevent it from messing with private business, this issue will be solved. Corporations clearly TRY to take over gov't. But remove the incentive
1
@dffykvn Those middle class businesses and professionals, they ALREADY DO much more for the society and economy than they get out of it in return, and yet the society ends up punishing them ever more with taxes. The reason why that happens, is because they are precisely what they are - small business has no representation in gov't and it's not a powerful voting block The large gov't monopolies don't pay taxes and they have all the gov't representation ever The politicians also cater to 'poor'
1
@dffykvn Canada? Is that because you see it on my account? I never understood why so often people bother to go and check. I lived in Canada for 15 years. For a year before that I lived in Israel. For 17 years before that I lived in USSR (Ukraine and Russia). Now I am living in Asia/Europe, I moved my businesses (though I still have 2 in Canada, but they are stagnating). I am a nomad, always looking for a better deal, making sure I don't pay taxes etc.
1
@dffykvn As a libertarian, but not an anarchist (like Machno was in Ukraine early last century) for practical reasons, I see gov't as a necessary evil, that will always form in absence of one, and I grant that a gov't has a purpose: 1.Minimum military. 2.Justice system. Everything else must be taken care of privately. Gov't must not help tycoons, but tycoons are not your normal business and they will always avoid whatever regulation/taxes you try to impose Most important thing: stop gov't ctd
1
@dffykvn I am not crazy. I am looking at the history and I see that all such regimes have ALWAYS justified themselves and all of their actions by saying they are going to 'help the poor' I see this as a step that is always taken in order to subdue the people and to create a dictatorial system that will DESTROY the poor and everybody else I do not trust people to do anything ever, unless it's in their best interest - like if they have a profit motive. I trust people that they want to profit
1
@dffykvn is that yesterday's rich are already killed by the revolutionaries, and now they need to find the new rich to kill. And you know that there is always somebody richer and somebody poorer than you, thus it is ALWAYS possible to say: he is rich, let's get him. You think somebody with 100,000/year is rich. That guy thinks that somebody with 300,000/year is rich. That guy thinks somebody with 1000,000/year is rich, that guy thinks somebody with 10,000,000/year is rich etc. continued
1
@dffykvn the further it continues, once you end up killing the first person, the easier it becomes to justify further killings, because it becomes obvious - anybody who is not 100% with you, is against you, and they are anti-revolutionaries and anti-revolutionaries are 'against the people' (obviously the only people are the poor people) and anybody who is even one iota against any of your ideas must be stopped-terminated now. And this is NOT rhetoric. USSR was built that way, see Ukraine 1930.
1
@Domzdream If you think Cenk will not be swayed by cash, you are in for a rude awakening if he does make it in some day. AFAIC you cannot place your trust into any people when the entire system is fucked up. It's the system that needs to be fixed, you can't fix it simply by applying whatever people you may deem to be better than others. Didn't you just have a similar experience with Mr. Obama there? Didn't you learn anything?
1
@dffykvn But at least if you DO NOT pay income taxes to your gov't, you can immediately BUY something that will retain VALUE, like commodities, like stocks of foreign companies, anything that will retain your capital, because your gov't is going to destroy your money You must protect yourself from your gv't, so that when the society that you live in right now is destroyed, you HAVE the capital to REBUILD what is left of your country. Your fellow citizens will only thank you when you create jobs
1
@dffykvn It's simply a false idea that simply by having publicly funded elections you will have better results. NO. What you WILL have will be an entrenched gov't, with whoever is in power, staying in power forever or only being substituted with whoever he decides should follow. I know that Cenk is an economic moron, but he is also a dufus when it comes to thinking about election funding. He just doesn't pay attention to the history of the world right in front of him.
1
@dffykvn Ha ha ha. There is no social contract, it's a myth for the slaves. Who is paying the taxes? You think the gov't created/subsidized monopolies pay taxes? Really? The taxes are all paid by middle class - and I mean real middle class, not blue collar workers, but middle class as it was created in the 19 century - small business and professionals / contractors / small business owners. When I say 'small' I do mean the kind that does NOT profit from being a gov't monopoly. But (continued)
1
@dffykvn And the guy answers: -We are fighting the power. She asks: -To what end? He replies: -So that NOBODY is rich ever again. She replies: -That's funny. My great-grandfather was fighting so that NOBODY would be poor ever again. ---- The point is that any such idea, where you are conducting class warfare, will only make people more poor, not the other way around. And the most vocal of the leaders always end up with the most blood of them, because the further it goes, ctd
1
@dffykvn Ayn Rand is just one person, whoever she was personally. What about 30 MILLION DEAD UKRAINIAN FARMERS? What about those people, who were farmers and their only sin was to OWN land and to WORK on it and to be able to FEED themselves? Well, the Communist regime took their food and killed those people and sent many of them to concentration camps, they sold that food to the West to buy machines, to build their 'perfect society'. None of that worked out well though.
1
@dffykvn Sure, the Fed is an abomination. But you don't see the gov't being too vocal against it, do you? You know why? You don't bite the hand that feeds you. The Fed has the ultimate authority to print money. It's really counterfeiting, because MONEY is not paper, it's production and it has to be backed by production. Gold makes sense, because it takes production to mine it and it can't be printed. But any production would do. Gov't can grow to any size - Fed pays for its debt with inflation
1
@dffykvn Just replacing one piece of garbage system with another won't help. USA already HAS a system that would work, if it was followed.
1
@dffykvn And 'poor' will always vote for whatever politicians who proposes to steal more money from tax paying middle class (small businesses) and to divide that money among the 'poor'. As always the large gov't monopolies are NOT paying taxes and the 'poor' are not paying taxes. Those who are paying taxes end up squeezed more and more, and that IS middle class - small businesses Gov't officials who offers such programs, whatever they are, should be shot in the head for treason against economy
1
@dffykvn where both Bell and Rogers are gov't invested into, monopolies have destroyed the Canadian Internet connectivity market, what the phone/mobile/TV charges look like. This reminds me, I need to cancel one of my phones, the monthly bills on it are ridiculous even though I am not using it, it's a Canadian number. The health system is public and it's atrocious, many would defend it, I think it is terrible - no competition. Dogs get better treatment due to competition among veterinarians.
1
@dffykvn You are wrong. Cenk is wrong. Anybody who thinks that hasn't thought hard enough. What kind of funding do you think the communist/socialist states had/have? It's hardly private, but those countries end up bankrupt and dictatorial. If you carefully observe what happened in again, say USSR or Venezuela or Belarus or China or Cuba, you will not see any 'private' money in elections, yet during their communist times, China was a disaster, so were/are others like that.
1
@dffykvn Surely, you would say same thing about anybody who creates their own business because they want to improve their conditions and then they end up generally wealthier than their counterparts. So anybody who ends up wealthier because they work more, they create successful businesses, they hire people and pay salaries and produce something market wants/needs, they should be punished for it, right? Obviously the system in Russia was difficult, but it became WORSE after the Revolution.
1
@dffykvn No. The point is to enforce the Constitution and to stop having entrenched politicians in Congress/Senate. They are there for their entire lives, that's insanity. Public funding will absolutely not solve this problem, it will not solve it, I don't know if it will make it worse necessarily, but history of other countries show that it's the same problem (in some cases public funding DOES mean dictatorship.)
1
@dffykvn The correct way of fixing this problem is to push for stricter following of the Constitution. All bills, every single bill that is proposed by gov't must be tested for Constitutionality right away. But of-course, the problem IS career politicians. What people are missing is that the Congressmen are SUPPOSED to have TERMS by the Constitution. Do you realize that people like Barney Frank have been in Congress forever. He has been there 15 times now. In a ROW.
1
@dffykvn The 'poor' in USA have gained enormously from the country becoming richer and richer, but the country was only becoming richer as the middle class (small businesses / professionals / contractors) was growing. It was really growing in 19 century, when gov't wasn't stopping it from growing and wasn't counterfeiting money through printing and short term interest setting. Charity was always there, but it wasn't always there enforced by gov't.
1
@dffykvn Most important thing: stop gov't from collaborating with tycoons. That's the only thing that must be done. Stop gov't from collaborating with businesses of any kind. Stop gov't from participating in economy and you won't care about tycoons, tycoons of the past also became tycoons BECAUSE they were collaborating with gov't, which was clearly on the side of the richest individuals always. Poor and middle should be all libertarian! That's right, that's because only market helps them
1
@dffykvn Oh, I see, you think that in Canada the democracy is so much better and that there are no entrenched politicians there catering to their preferred corporations? You are sadly mistaken. You should check on the history of Canadian parliament and politics, there is plenty of corruption there and Canadian monopolies are getting worse and worse, and there isn't even an 'air' of those being free market capitalists or something of that sort. Just check out how Bell and Rogers (telcos) ctd
1
Cenk in the office. Well, he'd give Lenin run for his money. Certainly he is not as educated as Lenin and not as intelligent. He also not as politically experienced and pretty much a dumb ass. But in terms of reigning terror upon people he'd personally consider to be the enemy of the 'poor' or whatever, yeah, he wouldn't have problems shooting people, doing mass executions, concentration camps, nationalizations, etc.etc. I see Cenk as a closeted dictator.
1
@dffykvn Oh, Oh, I didn't say it was gov't PROBLEM! FAR FROM IT! For gov't it's excellent - somebody is WILLING to PAY MONEY. Ha ha ha ha. No. The problem is for the economy of the host society, which ends up being destroyed. You think gov't is some great force that will be for you when you need it? No. Gov't is a system, built of people, who also WANT TO GET PAID Obviously the gov't creates large monopolies, and large monopolies pay to make gov't more powerful to destroy the market further
1
@dffykvn Yes, but socializing risk and privatizing profit - that's what GOVERNMENT IS DOING. What do you think FDIC and Freddie/Fannie and 'Medicaid'/Medicare' and 'student loans' and all other gov't insurance and loan programs are? That's what they are! All of those, including bail outs, stimulus packages, any money at all that gov't ends up paying, it's ALL doing it - privatizing gains and socializing risk. ANY GOV'T INSURANCE SOCIALIZES RISK. Which part of that is unclear?
1
@dffykvn Well, clearly, anybody who does business can see - if you lobby the gov't and it's successful, you end up with protection of your business, with subsidies, with monopoly and with destruction of your competition by gov't regulation and taxation. What is so difficult to understand there? So to fix it you do not attack corporations. After all - corporations are just people trying to do business. What you do is you change rules of gov't. You follow the Constitution.
1
@dffykvn Rand had an estate left after she died, I doubt she had many issues paying her bills all by herself. But it doesn't change the argument, regardless of any Rand's personal actions. She saw Russian revolution, she saw the cited reasons for it and she saw the outcomes of it. AFAIC she was correct that the idea of social justice when taken to its ultimate conclusion, ends up in an internal bloody class war and a civil war, when revolutionaries feel justified killing to promote 'justice'
1
@dffykvn At some point you have then put forward a question: If by using the Interstate commerce and the Welfare clauses you can have gov't justify and pass any laws it wants whatsoever, then are there any real limits to what gov't can do? If that is the case, then why bother pretending there is a Constitution, why not just say: gov't can do whatever the fuck it wants and stop with the BS pretenses? No. In reality the welfare clause was not there to pay welfare or intrude into private sector
1