Sure would love national health careFollow

You know, you could stop all these side hang ups if you would just use the appropriate word for what you're talking about: Force.

Apparently not since "Make Your Own Generic Drug" kiosks haven't taken off yet.

Yeah, the cops are gonna go all Rodney King on my Gramma for non-payment of taxes. You are just out there.



Nah the physical act of violation takes care of that...



It's pretty clear how out there you are when you feel compelled to compare everything to sex.

Did your mommy hurt you?

Only because she's part of the public, and not allowed to mix her own heart meds.

Kicking grandma out of her house is just a figure of speech. No one physically puts a boot to the ***, unless of course, granny pulls a shotgun on the repo team and she has to be taken out by the cops.

Otherwise, what you're saying is that any kind of law or regulation you may not necessarily agree with is violence. Enforcing such laws can sometimes entail violence. That's a distinction you need to make.

We also have to codify what activities are crimes, and how severe a crime is and agree on normative prison time, increased punishment when the crime, or similar crimes, are repeated, etc.

It is no reason not to do it. It simply means not everyone is going to agree with every detail.

Am I on Smash's side? Nobby's side? It really doesn't much matter.

Obligatory "WTF are you all still at it" post.

It's the equivalent of arguing with a street crazy, but it's oddly irresistible.

The "exploitation of the poor" is a silly concept in capitalism. If Nike opens a factory in China making shoes, and pays it's workers a dollar a day, and does in fact manage to find workers for the factory, are we to assume that Nike kidnapped the people working there, and are forcing them to work at gunpoint? Or perhaps those workers stupidly disregarded better paying jobs to work for Nike. No, it stands to reason that every single worker in that factory is better off now than before Nike opened that factory. Funny thing to call "exploitation".

On another note, I'd like to know what MonxDot thinks of the probability of new drugs being developed if pharmaceutical companies (and their investors) cannot recoup both the manufacturing costs as well as the research costs of a drug (as well as a profit on top for the investors of the risky venture that is research). That's what patents are for. If somebody develops the cure for cancer tomorrow, they ought to be able to make as much money as they can off their contribution to society. That's the incentive that drives innovation.

The "exploitation of the poor" is a silly concept in capitalism. If Nike opens a factory in China making shoes, and pays it's workers a dollar a day, and does in fact manage to find workers for the factory, are we to assume that Nike kidnapped the people working there, and are forcing them to work at gunpoint?

Yes.

Stay in denial though.