Freedom

Aug 2018
250
73
USA
Jesus Christ, stop beating your chest and waving your dick around and just answer the question(s) posed to you.
EVERYONE'S a bad-ass on the internet, and BTW pretty much everyone is ENTHUSIED about the idea of staying alive.
Dosen't mean they have the skilss to do so in a given set of circumstances.
I think I will just go ahead and not read that.
 
May 2019
116
8
US
We’ve all seen someone lose something and claim it was stolen. People also have a tendency to blame the wrong people for wrongs done to them. That’s why we have independent outside agents to investigate crimes (Police) and, once the probable circumstances are determined, to force a suspect be presented before yet another independent and further removed arbiter (Judges). The purpose is to remove the emotional element that clouds ones judgement concerning personal affronts.
Without a criminal justice system to enforce laws, neither property nor personal safety would be preserved by anything other than personal, individual ability to do violence to others. Any individual with sufficient ability would harm and take at will, until one stronger comes along. It would be little more than supremacy of might makes right. Which is exactly why, in the absence of a criminal justice system, rational people would re-create one.
While there are laws meant to guide behavior deemed acceptable to society, the vast majority of police activity is directed toward perpetrators of crimes against persons and personal property.
 
Jul 2014
15,246
9,355
massachusetts
What is freedom?
Really?
If you're free to do whatever you want (without hurting someone) but you don't have any money after you pay your rent, buy food, pay your health care, etc. Are you free?
Wouldn't the best measure of freedom be your income after taxes and basic necessities are paid for?
If you have a hundred a week, after you covered your nut, you're free to have a modest evening out once a week.
If you have more than that, aren't you free to do more?

What if you were in a situation where everything got deducted, your rent, your food, your medical, and what you got in your pay check was yours to spend on whatever you felt like spending it on, wouldn't it be true that the more there was in that check, the more freedom you would experience?

What happens if we apply the theory of marginal utility to those "free bucks", there's an argument for steeply graduated taxes.
Leaving more to the people where those bucks make the biggest difference.

Think about it...
 
May 2019
116
8
US
What is freedom?
Really?
If you're free to do whatever you want (without hurting someone) but you don't have any money after you pay your rent, buy food, pay your health care, etc. Are you free?
Wouldn't the best measure of freedom be your income after taxes and basic necessities are paid for?
If you have a hundred a week, after you covered your nut, you're free to have a modest evening out once a week.
If you have more than that, aren't you free to do more?

What if you were in a situation where everything got deducted, your rent, your food, your medical, and what you got in your pay check was yours to spend on whatever you felt like spending it on, wouldn't it be true that the more there was in that check, the more freedom you would experience?

What happens if we apply the theory of marginal utility to those "free bucks", there's an argument for steeply graduated taxes.
Leaving more to the people where those bucks make the biggest difference.

Think about it...
Are you still free if you have less means? Yeah, you are. Freedom is only synonymous with ability in strictly existential terms, not socio-political terms. For example, you don’t have the ability to fly, so you are not free to fly. That’s an existential condition, much like anything else you are unable to do. The socio-political sense of the term “freedom” or “Liberty” is an absence of interference, coercion, or oppression by other people. In this sense, a person with more means (the rich guy) is not more free than a person with less means (the poor guy).
Consider a scenario wherein you live alone in a small thatched hut in the wilderness. After hunting and fishing all day with meager success, you come home to find your cook fire fizzled out. You are no good at building a fire. You are no longer free to have a warm meal tonight.
The guy in the 1000 acres next door was taught how to hunt, build a fire, AND build a cabin. You might say his upbringing gave him more opportunities than yours did. He has much more free time than you; since he hunts more efficiently, puts less effort toward shelter upkeep, and always has a warm meal. Guess what, he does not have more liberty than you. He is not at fault for your circumstances. He does not owe you anything.
However, if some outside agent comes along and takes some of his game from him to give to you each night, some of his Liberty has been lost, even as your time is “freed” up. That guy is very efficient, so he still has plenty of time on his hands. So much so, that he can build a cabin for you (After-all, you weren't spoiled enough by mom and dad to be taught how to do that stuff. He inherited his ability). After that’s done, he actually has enough time to build you a fire each night and still have his evenings to himself. You now have the same shelter as him, same meals as him, and the same fire as him each evening. You are now equally “free” by your use of the word. All you had to do was enslave someone.
 
Last edited: