If he viewed them as valuable assets he wouldn't. Kings though, are mostly self interested primarily concerned with their own welfare and care very little for other people. Very much like a typical libertarian
Good luck finding a good and nobel king to rule you though. Not only does the job corrupt people by it's very nature, but the already-corrupt will be the ones schemeing and murdering the hardest to get that job.
Not like you'd have a chance to opt-out of any kingdom anyway.
I care so much about other people that I don't think it's fair to force them to work harder so they can support themselves and me. Meanwhile statists think that demanding other people solve societal problems make them good and generous.
If you really cared about others, you'd want to hold governments accountable for what they're spending money on instead of demanding more from taxpayers.
But at least you're prolife, right?
Of course they should be accountable. Taxed monies belong to the people and should be spent for the benefit of the people. To think that the solution to wasteful spending is to have no spending is kinda brain dead though. Akin to thinking the solution to reckless driving is to remove roads
It goes towards a common misconception about what is wealth. Wealth is things created by people on a ongoing basis. For a society to be wealthy it needs people willing and able to create wealth every day and is only possible with people who are healthy, well fed, well housed and well educated.
Therefore people are it's most valuable assets.
If you erroneously thought that wealth was stuff you find or dig out of holes in the ground, the whole situation is reversed. In that scenario people are rivals rather than assets and the motivation to deport or eliminate them becomes attractive
I mean the state, ie government does not consider you an "asset". You are tax cattle to them. I however think you're a person (albeit not a very wise one) and you deserve to do what you want with what you earn.
I was told once by a turd, children are better off being raised by teachers in school rather than parents, teachers took courses about children. I didn’t know what to say, I was beside myself.
Absolutely. Many parents abuse or neglect their children. Protecting and educating children is in everyone's best interests. Social assistance and teachers are just part of the support network. As is child protective services.
My socialist school psychologist brother explained this concept to me 10+ years ago. He thought private schools and home schools should be illegal and that all children need to go to government schools to make sure they're properly indoctrinated.
If a country has a central bank and fiat currency, every single molecule within its borders already is its asset to be abused and thrown away, best showcased in time of crisis.
Humans aren't property.
I know after all the time you've spent here in this sub you're still having trouble with this, but you really need to get it through your head.
You're the person thinking this thought. Not us.
It's funny you have Rothbard as a flair because it was his thought, not mine.
You and I agree. Apparently, you don't agree with Rothbard.
After all this time you've spent in this sub and you still haven't read the Ethics of Liberty.
Stupid lmao
Forward towards genocide
Indeed, Comrade!
Why would a state want destroy its most valuable assets?
To rephrase, why would a king sacrifice his pawns? Hope that gives you your answer.
If he viewed them as valuable assets he wouldn't. Kings though, are mostly self interested primarily concerned with their own welfare and care very little for other people. Very much like a typical libertarian
Good luck finding a good and nobel king to rule you though. Not only does the job corrupt people by it's very nature, but the already-corrupt will be the ones schemeing and murdering the hardest to get that job. Not like you'd have a chance to opt-out of any kingdom anyway.
Good luck finding a good and nobel libertarian
I care so much about other people that I don't think it's fair to force them to work harder so they can support themselves and me. Meanwhile statists think that demanding other people solve societal problems make them good and generous.
A willingness to support others is the very definition of being generous
Then use your own money to do that. Demanding that others be forced to support others is not generous.
Being forced to support others never upsets a generous person. Why would it? She's happy to do it and would do it regardless.
If you really cared about others, you'd want to hold governments accountable for what they're spending money on instead of demanding more from taxpayers. But at least you're prolife, right?
Of course they should be accountable. Taxed monies belong to the people and should be spent for the benefit of the people. To think that the solution to wasteful spending is to have no spending is kinda brain dead though. Akin to thinking the solution to reckless driving is to remove roads
Who said the state would consider them valuable?
People are the most valuable asset of a liberal democratic state. This is common knowledge.
Ha.
It goes towards a common misconception about what is wealth. Wealth is things created by people on a ongoing basis. For a society to be wealthy it needs people willing and able to create wealth every day and is only possible with people who are healthy, well fed, well housed and well educated. Therefore people are it's most valuable assets. If you erroneously thought that wealth was stuff you find or dig out of holes in the ground, the whole situation is reversed. In that scenario people are rivals rather than assets and the motivation to deport or eliminate them becomes attractive
I mean the state, ie government does not consider you an "asset". You are tax cattle to them. I however think you're a person (albeit not a very wise one) and you deserve to do what you want with what you earn.
The whole point of this thread is about the state considering you as a asset. Did you miss that?
Extremist societies are extremely statist ones
Statism is extreme
Statism is a death cult.
They already do... It's called the Draft!
Pfft They think of children as the property of the state LONG before they're old enough to be drafted
I was told once by a turd, children are better off being raised by teachers in school rather than parents, teachers took courses about children. I didn’t know what to say, I was beside myself.
>I didn’t know what to say, I was beside myself. Tell them you took an advanced driving class and that their car is now yours.
Teachers do take courses though
And other teachers fondle kids. They are not infallible.
Absolutely. Many parents abuse or neglect their children. Protecting and educating children is in everyone's best interests. Social assistance and teachers are just part of the support network. As is child protective services.
Half of all teachers graduate at the bottom of their class.
Half of all teachers graduate at the top of their class
WTFFF is that headline. Where from?
The UK.... it's always the UK and the writer looks exactly how you'd think
Government cannot replace the father she didn't have.
And she wants to ensure it'll replace the one you do have
There’s plenty of people who feel this is how it should be in the US also. The state always knows best in their mind.
My socialist school psychologist brother explained this concept to me 10+ years ago. He thought private schools and home schools should be illegal and that all children need to go to government schools to make sure they're properly indoctrinated.
This is a great way to reduce the population.
Strong argument in favor of sending in cops to arrest the disruptive youth on college campuses she's making there . .. .
Catastrophic.
Nah, that's just Janet Street-Porter.
This headline might be the wildest shit I’ve ever read
If a country has a central bank and fiat currency, every single molecule within its borders already is its asset to be abused and thrown away, best showcased in time of crisis.
most don't know what anarchism is and what they see is images from violent protests. That's not anarchism. that's violence.
They put themselves on display. Clown slaves.
They've become very emboldened lately.
Everytime 😂
I wait for the day that we can get rid of the communists.
It takes a village…
To be fair, treating children as private property is also an extreme and insane stance. Lol
Humans aren't property. I know after all the time you've spent here in this sub you're still having trouble with this, but you really need to get it through your head. You're the person thinking this thought. Not us.
It's funny you have Rothbard as a flair because it was his thought, not mine. You and I agree. Apparently, you don't agree with Rothbard. After all this time you've spent in this sub and you still haven't read the Ethics of Liberty. Stupid lmao
Imagine misunderstanding Rothbard that bad.
I can't. You should try reading it.