Re: Awfully quiet in here...

On 11/11/24 08:46, William Hyde wrote:

D wrote:

>
>
On Sat, 9 Nov 2024, William Hyde wrote:
>

D wrote:

>
>
On Fri, 8 Nov 2024, William Hyde wrote:
>

Why SF? I was there 8 years ago and found it dirty with many drug
users on the street.

>
Parts of it, yes.
>
I arrived in SF from a small city with no obvious drug users or
vagrants.
>
This was because the local police grabbed those people, gave them a
beating, and dumped them in the next county.  Somebody else's problem.

>
Sounds like heaven! Police acting, doing something, and solving the
problem! =)

>
So you are in fact in favour of government regulation, provided it is
illegal and hurts people you dislike.

>
Nope... the correct interpretation is that as long as I have to endure
government and having my money stolen in the form of taxes, I prefer
that it does something that aligns with my interests. Shipping drug
users somewhere
else would align with my interests, so there you are correct.

 
So violence to other people doesn't bother you, as long as it is in your
interests.
 
Clearly, if  there were no government, you and like-minded people would
hire some thugs to beat up the indigent and send them to other areas.
 
Because it aligns with your interests.
 
Like-minded people in those areas would also hire thugs to beast up the
indigent and send them to your area.  Eventually the thugs would realize
that it would be less work just to beat you up and take your money.  And
you'd have a government again.
 
William Hyde
 
 

Perhaps Haiti would be the most suitable capitalist option for D?