frigidweirdo
Diamond Member
- Mar 7, 2014
- 46,392
- 9,881
- 2,030
no both are NOT the same you lock up a murderer AFTER he has chosen to kill it is a consequence and it obviously didn't force him to not commit murderNo, I don't think you're an anarchist.
What I'm doing is showing you where there's a gap in your logic. You can't argue for something, if that something then leads to something else which you don't agree on. It's very common for people to end up in certain situation. Most people wouldn't care, they just want to "win", but I think perhaps you're different.
Yes, there's a difference between telling people what to eat or how to make decisions and murder.
But then again, you're making out I'm FORCING people to do something, not leaving them with any choice in the matter, which is completely wrong.
All I've said is that you can push certain types of food by reducing the cost of those foods and other types of food you can increase the cost in order to make them less attractive. People can still buy those foods, the choice is still there. I'm not in favor of banning things. Even with cigarettes, I don't see the need to ban them, let people waste their money on massive amounts of tax if they choose to do so.
In fact I'm even in favor of having other drugs legalized, but with heft taxes placed on them (some of which would go towards making sure that when people are taking them, they're in a safe place and that the impact of those drugs is much reduced). That's choice.
when you start advocating punishments via taxes or other government interference in people's choices simply because it's your opinion that something is "good for them" or "bad for them" you are imposing your will on them.
it's not the government's place to manipulate prices of goods so as to promote behavior simply because you desire that behavior and that is especially true if that behavior does not have any effect on you. What other people eat drink or smoke has absolutely no bearing on your life hence those choices are none of your business and certainly none of the government's business
When you start imposing punishment in form of prison sentencing simply because it's your opinion that it's good or bad, then you're imposing your will on them.
But society imposes all sorts of "punishment" on people, simply because this is what people "think". Why do you think different countries are so different? It's because of how society perceives things. Society can choose to make things better or it can let things slide and things become worse. No matter how you set society up, it's going to be this way.
You say it's not the govt's place to manipulate the price of goods to promote behavior. I say it is. You don't have to like this. But it's going to happen one way or another. Your view is that something shouldn't happen. Fine. Welcome to Utopia. But it's a vision that won't be borne out in reality.
Society can shape the world around it.
Countries Compared by Health > Obesity. International Statistics at NationMaster.com
You have the USA, where people are against govt interference. This leads to a 30.6% obesity level. Americans are FAT.
Then for example you have Germany, more pro-active in people's lives with a 12.9% rate.
How many of those 18% of Americans more who are obese would rather not be fat? How many of them would rather the govt had done something about it?
List of countries by incarceration rate - Wikipedia
You have the USA, where people are against govt interference. This leads to 693 people in prison per 100,000.
Then for example you have Germany, more pro-active in people's lives with 78 people in prison per 100,000.
It would seem in the US they let you free, to then lock you up for doing stupid shit.
I've lived in the US and I've lived in Germany, and Germany is a nicer place to live. So the govt tries to teach people how to live better, so the govt tries use social engineering. And yet it works. The country is a nicer place, it's a better place to live, the freedoms are basically the same, except when it comes to guns, but then again you're safer in Germany. Go to the big cities and you're much safer.
Being pro-active leads to BETTER LIVES. How many people in the US live lives they hate? I mean, when you have someone like Trump getting in the White House because there are so many miserable people in the country that they'll jump at the chance for "hope", a false hope, a fake hope, but they don't care, it's hope none the less, then you realize that the US way isn't working for the people, it's working for the RICH PEOPLE.
you can't distinguish between things that are truly crimes and those that aren't
saying locking up murderers is the same as manipulating prices so as to coerce people to buy what you think thy should buy is an apples to orangutans comparison
and I've already addressed the fact that we incarcerate too may people for nonviolent crime I have and remain in favor of alternate sentencing for nonviolent crimes and incarceration only for those who commit violent crimes
and it's not up to you to make people live "better" lives
people are living the life they want whether you believe it or not and it certainly isn't up to you to tell people how they should live
I'm not comparing locking up murderers to manipulating prices. What I am doing is saying that both of them are about forcing people to act in certain ways, which you seem to be avoiding talking about. They're different, but the act is within the same category, or do you deny that locking up murderers is designed to prevent people murdering?
So, if it's not up to me, or up to the govt to make people's lives better, then why do they bother locking up murderers? If someone wants to murder someone else, then fuck it, let them do it. It's not the govt's place to say who can and who can't murder people. If I want to murder someone, they should stay out of my life. Right?
and obviously locking up murderers doesn't prevent murder it is punishment for the crime and all crime is at it's base one person forcing his will on another. Nowhere have I ever said ALL behavior is acceptable. When your behavior infringes on another then that behavior is NOT acceptable I don't care if its murder robbery assault or forcing people to pay more for simply making a choice you don't like
and "better" is subjective so no it is not up to you or anyone to tell someone what is "better" for them that is an individual choice
This is getting ridiculous. Fine, you want to get off on one about them not being the same. Go ahead, but I'm not playing such games.