So, if 51% of people decide you’re not entitled to any of your paycheck, then you’re not?
That’s not exactly how representative government works. By voting for a person, instead of an issue, you are forced to prioritize your concerns. Because of that, those most affected by an issue are more likely to let it sway their vote. Therefore, those most affected will also be more influential on that issue. It’s far more nuanced than 51% vs. 49%.
Also, something isn’t the right thing because the government did it, it’s the right thing because it helps people. It just happens to be that the actions of a representative government are most likely to help people overall. That doesn’t mean that the government can’t occasionally be wrong, but it’s far better than running a country based on the arbitrary, and frankly idiotic libertarian rules.
Pointing guns at people that just aren’t doing enough…makes you a thug.
You can say that, but if so, the same would apply to pointing guns at people who disagree with your property rules.
In what area of life do 90% of Americans have the same standard of living that they did 40 years ago?
There’s less home ownership, for one. There are also less jobs available, and job requirements are frequently much more demanding.
Since the early 1970’s, regulation of the American economy has grown at an unprecedented rate.
That’s ridiculous, and you know it. In particular, financial and environmental regulations were utterly dismantled. Tax rates were also slashed.
How is “Don’t hurt people or take their stuff”… a dogmatic principle to be ashamed of?
It isn’t. What is shameful is the dogmatic adherence to your bizarre property rules even when they hurt people immensely. Similarly, we both agree that you shouldn’t “take people’s stuff.” We disagree on how to distribute that stuff. I support property rights resting on the will of the people and the benefit of the people. You support dogmatic rules resting on nothing.