Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
40 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Shutdown: Taking it Personally rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Michael Hopcroft
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've got a problem with the Federal shutdown: I'm taking in entirely to personally.

The practical side of the thing won't hurt me too much yet. I understand I will still get my disability check tomorrow and be able to pay the rend (though whether the HUD share of my rent will reach my landlord is an open question). Nobody has told me I will be turned away from my health care practitioners because of eliminated Medicare funds. And I still have my part-time job (in medical records) for my main support.

The problem is that the people who are shutting down the government seem to want me hurt. Figuring, apparently, that if this does inflict pain they can force a surrender on their policy goals. Such as they are.

The tax money I consume, even while working, has always been a sort spot with me. It's clear the taxpayer does not want to spend that money. They'd rather spend it on things they want for themselves. Taxation is, after all, extortion -- give us so much money each year or we'll throw you into prison if you don't pay. So anyone who receives the money thus collected is receiving stolen goods and condemned for it.

Morally speaking, dying is better than consuming tax revenue. Which is why I spent two days in the hospital this week and may, unless I really restrain myself, end up going right back.

I have always believed that if anyone looked me in the eye and told me to kill myself, I would do it -- if possible, on the spot. Well, nobody's looked me in the eye just yet. But given how much I pull out of the system compared to what I put in (for example, the sum total spent on my medications is greater than my wages) I know there is someone out there who could do that. How do I prevent myself from acting on the assumption that the person is out there who would tell me to my face I shouldn't be alive?

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Hopcroft
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shushnik wrote:
I remember telling you to seek therapy before. How's that going? Seems not so solid...


if I were but off from therapy it would be a lot worse. Trust me on that.

Fortunately the worst seems to have passed, at least for now.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
いい竹やぶだ!

South Euclid
Ohio
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
It's better to view taxation as a social contract. I don't mind paying taxes that benefit you because my system of morals supports helping my fellow human beings.

Also, paying taxes is patriotic, as Donald Duck can attest.

12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Shipley
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
flag msg tools
badge
the liberal unsavory type
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have no problem with taxes or that some of the money helps people.

Even most of the people that don't want government to help people want them to be helped in some other way.

And for anyone that doesn't, they don't have any moral authority over you.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Walt
United States
Orange County
California
flag msg tools
Before terraforming Mars, Surviving Mars is required: Paradox Interactive; Steam.
badge
Please contact me about board gaming in Orange County.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Michael Hopcroft wrote:
The problem is that the people who are shutting down the government seem to want me hurt. Figuring, apparently, that if this does inflict pain they can force a surrender on their policy goals. Such as they are.

Though these are the same people who insist you don't need gov't help because Good Christians will support you better than the government does (the gov't being inherently corrupt and inefficient). Any Good Christians come to you with a deal better than the gov't's? I didn't think so. I suspect, in this mythical case, you'd happily take the better deal.

This is not to disparage the good work churches do, seeing the cases government can't; providing that extra help that keeps someone just barely making it from collapsing into a much worse state.

Nor is it to excuse making sure there are two starving people where there was only one before. Churches are no more perfect than any other human institution, and "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Michael Hopcroft wrote:
The tax money I consume, even while working, has always been a sort spot with me. It's clear the taxpayer does not want to spend that money. They'd rather spend it on things they want for themselves. Taxation is, after all, extortion -- give us so much money each year or we'll throw you into prison if you don't pay. So anyone who receives the money thus collected is receiving stolen goods and condemned for it.

No, taxation is paying your tab like any responsible person. This is a republic: sometimes, collectively, we make decisions not all of us agree with. It's still our social contract to pay the tab. I could name a dozen things, just off the top of my head, that I don't particularly like paying for. But I still pay my tab. Happily, even. "I pledge allegiance to ... the Republic ... one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." (The flag is very nice, but it's the symbol; the Republic is the reality.)

Michael Hopcroft wrote:
Morally speaking, dying is better than consuming tax revenue. Which is why I spent two days in the hospital this week and may, unless I really restrain myself, end up going right back.

No, no, no! The citizens of the Republic (through their duly elected Representatives--who are not always the jerks we have today) have expressed their will that the social safety net is something we want gov't to handle consistently, evenly, and not willy-nilly depending on your religion, church, location etc. That is one of the things I pay taxes for. Willingly. Happily.

A girlfriend was setting up a new apartment. I happened to have a lot of extra stuff she needed. She's very proud (when did pride stop being a sin?) so she didn't want to take it. I asked her, "Is generosity a virtue?"
"Yes."
"Then if you do not take this, you are keeping me from being virtuous."

Michael Hopcroft wrote:
I have always believed that if anyone looked me in the eye and told me to kill myself, I would do it -- if possible, on the spot. Well, nobody's looked me in the eye just yet. But given how much I pull out of the system compared to what I put in (for example, the sum total spent on my medications is greater than my wages) I know there is someone out there who could do that. How do I prevent myself from acting on the assumption that the person is out there who would tell me to my face I shouldn't be alive?

The sum you spend on your medicines lines my pockets, among others. You're just the conduit transferring tax money to pharma company dividends and stock price increases. (And that is the vast majority of the money.) I would prefer we bargained for drug prices so they were lower, but I respect that my fellow citizens have decided to support the poor, destitute pharma companies through you. Though I'm much happier thinking of you getting the money than Merck, even if I get a kickback from Merck, I pay my tab, as the representatives of my fellow citizens have agreed I should. The social contract.

Some people are healthy and slot right into the perfect job and make scads of money. Some of them crash and burn in mid-life, and never rise above poverty again. Some people stumble through their youth, but find the solutions they need, and excel after mid-life. Some stay rich throughout life; some stay poor. There's no real telling what your fate is: maybe a miracle cure will get through testing in a few years. I do know I support the safety net you're using, and among all the "undeserving poor"(--Pygmalion?) that some politicians whine about, it's good to hear about someone who genuinely needs and benefits from the safety net.

That guy? I'm sorry to say that sorry piece of **** probably exists. And the reason he would say such a thing is because he is such a total failure he is desperate to point a finger at anyone and say, "No! You're an even worse person than I am!" And he's very, very wrong.

Be well, Michael!
15 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clay
United States
Alabama
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A change in perspective may help you here.

The American dollar would not exist without the American government. It is a concept solely given meaning through that institution, so nobody can really claim that their money provides them some utility* other than what that government enables to be provided. In that light it seems fair to allow the government to put some limitations on the use and flow of the currency, including things such as gathering in set percentages to redistribute towards various ends. Why would I be concerned that my meal is incrementally more expensive so that the United States can redirect some of that money to building a bridge on the other side of the country that I will never use? It was their money to begin with, I'm just glad I was able to exploit their system to accomplish some minor daily task.

Even aside from the absurdity of complaining about the concept-creators influencing the usage of their concept, society generally agrees that people need to be taken care of at some basic level. There are varying reasons for this ("It's the right thing to do," "I'd want to be taken care of if something went wrong," etc) but the important thing is that the majority of people have given the idea their approval. The ones that haven't are almost certainly dumb asshole poopy pants, and you shouldn't care what dumb asshole poopy pants say. So you should continue to use the systems that were created specifically so that you could benefit from them and not worry about being seen as a "leech" or something ridiculous for doing exactly what you are supposed to be doing.


*As intended as money, of course. They are free to argue that they get great "paper weight utility" out of stacking quarters on old letters, for example.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
They call me....
United States
Columbia
South Carolina
flag msg tools
Games? People still play games??
badge
Specious arguments are not proof of trollish intent.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bring back Donald Duck...please.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marc P
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Gloomhaven is a great niche game
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Michael Hopcroft wrote:

Morally speaking, dying is better than consuming tax revenue....

I have always believed that if anyone looked me in the eye and told me to kill myself, I would do it -- if possible, on the spot.


Sorry, man, I just can't parse these two sentences.

Sentence 1: what's so fucking sacred about tax revenues? Are you eligible to benefit from government funding for some sort of condition? Are you working in good faith to try to be a productive person in spite of this condition? If yes and yes, you're good.

Sentence 2: Who has the right to make such a statement? A doctor? A sociopath? A random person on the internet? Seems a strange thing to have always believed.

Just figure out your situation, do the best you can, and don't worry about being a burden. Sounds like you have enough to worry about.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bojan Ramadanovic
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Michael Hopcroft wrote:

Morally speaking, dying is better than consuming tax revenue. Which is why I spent two days in the hospital this week and may, unless I really restrain myself, end up going right back.

I have always believed that if anyone looked me in the eye and told me to kill myself, I would do it -- if possible, on the spot. Well, nobody's looked me in the eye just yet. But given how much I pull out of the system compared to what I put in (for example, the sum total spent on my medications is greater than my wages) I know there is someone out there who could do that. How do I prevent myself from acting on the assumption that the person is out there who would tell me to my face I shouldn't be alive?



Man, I am pretty liberal myself (liberal in the European sense - i.e. opposed to large government) but what you say here is nonsense.

Vast majority of people like having a social-safety net of some sort in case disability/injury happens to them or their family.

Obviously people would prefer to have this social-safety net and have someone else pay for it and the usual economic issues concerning insurance make it so that it is not something private market can provide.
Government does it through enforced payments exactly so that something that large number of people want can actually exist. Therefore - you receiving "government money" is not extortion but simply enforcement of a just (in Rawlsian sense) social contract.

In other words - think of it this way. If an alien (with no experience of games of chance or general notion of probability) observed a roulette or lottery game - he would think it extremely unfair.
After all, some people's money gets arbitrarily transferred to a single individual who is thus made much better off at the expense of his fellow players.
What we do understand though is that each of the other players had appropriate *chance* to be the winner and that therefore game is fair even if it results in the naively unfair outcome.

This is not to say that receiving disability payment is "winning" in a lottery sense - but it is equivalent in that it is instantiation of the probabilistic outcome that is in principle open and desirable to all.

This is not to say there are no stupid/selfish people who would say otherwise and criticize you for collecting your disability payments - but they are as ridiculously wrong (and significantly less ethical to boot) then people who complain how it is *unfair* that they have not won lottery.
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Rost
United States
Fort Wayne
Indiana
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The Message wrote:
A change in perspective may help you here.

The American dollar would not exist without the American government. It is a concept solely given meaning through that institution, so nobody can really claim that their money provides them some utility* other than what that government enables to be provided. In that light it seems fair to allow the government to put some limitations on the use and flow of the currency, including things such as gathering in set percentages to redistribute towards various ends. Why would I be concerned that my meal is incrementally more expensive so that the United States can redirect some of that money to building a bridge on the other side of the country that I will never use? It was their money to begin with, I'm just glad I was able to exploit their system to accomplish some minor daily task.

*As intended as money, of course. They are free to argue that they get great "paper weight utility" out of stacking quarters on old letters, for example.


Hi Clay,

The government has informed me that they want all their money back that they let you borrow—money that you were loaned for the privilege of working. You can write a check payable to the Bureau of the Public Debt, and in the memo section, notate that it's a payment towards your debt. Mail your check to:

Attn Dept G
Bureau of the Public Debt
P. O. Box 2188
Parkersburg, WV 26106-2188

Or go here to make an online donation.

Thanks
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derry Salewski
United States
Augusta
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
I'm only happy when it rains...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think he's confusing 'mathematically' with 'morally.' (not that they have to be different but they probably are for a lot of us.)

Yes, if all a person does is drain everyone around them, it would be a good idea from certain points of view to let that person off themselves if they feel like it.

I've been depressed before. It's easy to be like 'wow, I have nothing going on now, no amount of energy can change that, no end is in site for this state of being . . . why not end it?' It's kinda wrong most of the time though. (Though, and this is rsp so why the hell not, there are forces out there that want to keep you, and everyone else feeling that way. )

And if some amount of tax money has to go to making sure people have some help dealing with those feelings that are probably wrong, that's not too bad (though fixing the world so we didn't all feel that way might be a better goal.)

But why is the government shutdown triggering these things for you? People who oppose obamacare aren't trying to end all governemt aid are they?

I mean, I am opposed to it after finally learning what it is, but I'm not opposed to whatever taxes I've already been paying into medicare and what not. Well I still wish it was used more effectively.

I kinda wish taxes were like kickstarter-- everyone just made proposals for what they were going to do with the money, and eveyone had a mandate to spend twenty percent of their earnings or whatever on it.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Brown
United States
North Adams
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Michael Hopcroft wrote:

The problem is that the people who are shutting down the government seem to want me hurt.

Morally speaking, dying is better than consuming tax revenue.
I have always believed that if anyone looked me in the eye and told me to kill myself, I would do it.


Let's say that Orangey McGee wants to shut down the gov't. He doesn't necessarily want you hurt, so much as just selfishly want things for himself and not care how it affects anyone else. You, meanwhile, are already thinking about affects on others. So even if Orangey, who is clearly not making the world better, were to think it okay if he lived and you died, fuck that guy, he's a jerk, and don't listen to him.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Michael Hopcroft wrote:


Morally speaking, dying is better than consuming tax revenue. Which is why I spent two days in the hospital this week and may, unless I really restrain myself, end up going right back.

I have always believed that if anyone looked me in the eye and told me to kill myself, I would do it -- if possible, on the spot. Well, nobody's looked me in the eye just yet.

I do not need someone to tell me to do something I think is moral, I only need them to tell me if they think it should be moral. It is clear that you have not killed yourself so it's clear (to me) you do not believe that taking tax money to stay alive is immoral.

Allowing people to die is immoral, not taking taxes. Taxes will not pull you from a car crash, a person may. A human being can be of intrinsic value at any point in thier life, money has no intrinsic value.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jeremy cobert
United States
cedar rapids
Iowa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Michael Hopcroft wrote:
The problem is that the people who are shutting down the government seem to want me hurt.


I agree with you. the Democrats want all of us to hurt during this shutdown and its good to see someone finally call them on it.

we all think its important that we all live under the same laws and if the Democrats want to exempt themselves from the laws that they have written, then we have a case of "some are more equal then others".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jeremycobert wrote:
Michael Hopcroft wrote:
The problem is that the people who are shutting down the government seem to want me hurt.


I agree with you. the Democrats want all of us to hurt during this shutdown and its good to see someone finally call them on it.

we all think its important that we all live under the same laws and if the Democrats want to exempt themselves from the laws that they have written, then we have a case of "some are more equal then others".



As Tripp pointed out on facebook the other day, it's nice to have someone new show up every once in while to remind me that even though our resident conservatives are pretty stubborn and obnoxious, there are some really stupid people out there who could be subjecting us to their empty-headed opinions. Thanks, man!
18 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Born To Lose, Live To Win
United States
South Euclid
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
"Captain, although your abilities intrigue me, you are quite honestly inferior"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jeremycobert wrote:

we all think its important that we all live under the same laws and if the Democrats want to exempt themselves from the laws that they have written, then we have a case of "some are more equal then others".


I hate to derail this thread, but to have glommed on to this minor quibble with the ACA, of all the things that are non-ideal with it, is kind of ludicrous. To think that the whole government should be shutdown because some lawmakers excluded themselves from a law they passed is ridiculous. Has the GOP really really run out of reasons the ACA is broken that this has risen to the top as the most critical? If so, I'd say that The ACA has been vetted and is going to be a resounding success.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom McVey
United States
SF Bay Area
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Quote:
Taxation is, after all, extortion -- give us so much money each year or we'll throw you into prison if you don't pay.


Taxation is the price of civilization. As that rabid pinko, Adam Smith, wrote:
"The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state."
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom McVey
United States
SF Bay Area
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
jeremycobert wrote:
Michael Hopcroft wrote:
The problem is that the people who are shutting down the government seem to want me hurt.


I agree with you. the Democrats want all of us to hurt during this shutdown and its good to see someone finally call them on it.

we all think its important that we all live under the same laws and if the Democrats want to exempt themselves from the laws that they have written, then we have a case of "some are more equal then others".


Congress isn't exempt. In fact, Congressmen and (some) congressional staff are the only employees for a large enterprise that currently offers health insurance that *have* to switch to using the healthcare exchanges:

From http://www.factcheck.org/2013/05/congress-and-an-exemption-f...

"But there is no bill in Congress calling for an exemption from the health care law. In fact, members of Congress and their staffs face additional requirements that most Americans don’t have to meet.
Under the health care law, their insurance coverage will have to switch from the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, the group of private insurance plans that cover 8 million federal employees and retirees, to the exchanges created by the law. Those exchanges are meant for those who buy coverage on their own, the currently uninsured and small businesses. Members of Congress and their staffs would be the only employees of a large employer in the exchanges, which are set to begin offering insurance in January.
So, why is the false “exempt” claim making the Facebook rounds? There is reportedly concern on Capitol Hill that the Office of Personnel Management, which administers the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, won’t be able to smoothly transition members and their staffs into an exchange. The concern, as a Roll Call story explained, was that the government wouldn’t be able to make contributions toward the federal employees’ premiums, at least at the beginning of 2014. That would mean employees would pick up the whole tab for their insurance policies. Right now, the government pays 72 percent of premiums on average."


3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom McVey
United States
SF Bay Area
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
TheChin! wrote:
jeremycobert wrote:

we all think its important that we all live under the same laws and if the Democrats want to exempt themselves from the laws that they have written, then we have a case of "some are more equal then others".


I hate to derail this thread, but to have glommed on to this minor quibble with the ACA, of all the things that are non-ideal with it, is kind of ludicrous. To think that the whole government should be shutdown because some lawmakers excluded themselves from a law they passed is ridiculous. Has the GOP really really run out of reasons the ACA is broken that this has risen to the top as the most critical? If so, I'd say that The ACA has been vetted and is going to be a resounding success.


Congress didn't exclude themselves from the law. Far from it - they're the only employees of a large organization that previously provided healthcare insurance that *have* to use the exchanges. During the drafting of the ACA, Rep. Senator Grassley put an amendment in to take Congresspeople and their staff off the Federal Employees healthcare system and onto the healthcare exchanges because he thought the Democratic Senators would baulk at having their own insurance changed. He was wrong, and that amendment was approved by Democrats and became law. What was recently ruled on was that the Office of Personnel Management ruled that the federal government could still pay a contribution to the premium paid for congresspeople and their staffers.

See http://www.factcheck.org/2013/05/congress-and-an-exemption-f...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clay
United States
Alabama
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
spookyblast wrote:
The Message wrote:
A change in perspective may help you here.

The American dollar would not exist without the American government. It is a concept solely given meaning through that institution, so nobody can really claim that their money provides them some utility* other than what that government enables to be provided. In that light it seems fair to allow the government to put some limitations on the use and flow of the currency, including things such as gathering in set percentages to redistribute towards various ends. Why would I be concerned that my meal is incrementally more expensive so that the United States can redirect some of that money to building a bridge on the other side of the country that I will never use? It was their money to begin with, I'm just glad I was able to exploit their system to accomplish some minor daily task.

*As intended as money, of course. They are free to argue that they get great "paper weight utility" out of stacking quarters on old letters, for example.


Hi Clay,

The government has informed me that they want all their money back that they let you borrow—money that you were loaned for the privilege of working. You can write a check payable to the Bureau of the Public Debt, and in the memo section, notate that it's a payment towards your debt. Mail your check to:

Attn Dept G
Bureau of the Public Debt
P. O. Box 2188
Parkersburg, WV 26106-2188

Or go here to make an online donation.

Thanks


Oh hey, it's funny because it highlights a situation in which I would totally take the exact opposite position! Except I wouldn't, if they took back the money for some reason on what basis could I stop them? I probably would complain if they were singling out individuals as you do in your example but that's more on the basis on them being douches than doing something that they shouldn't be able to do.

It's usually more fruitful to directly attack a position rather than to try to show human inconsistencies that don't actually exist.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Rost
United States
Fort Wayne
Indiana
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The Message wrote:
spookyblast wrote:
The Message wrote:
A change in perspective may help you here.

The American dollar would not exist without the American government. It is a concept solely given meaning through that institution, so nobody can really claim that their money provides them some utility* other than what that government enables to be provided. In that light it seems fair to allow the government to put some limitations on the use and flow of the currency, including things such as gathering in set percentages to redistribute towards various ends. Why would I be concerned that my meal is incrementally more expensive so that the United States can redirect some of that money to building a bridge on the other side of the country that I will never use? It was their money to begin with, I'm just glad I was able to exploit their system to accomplish some minor daily task.

*As intended as money, of course. They are free to argue that they get great "paper weight utility" out of stacking quarters on old letters, for example.


Hi Clay,

The government has informed me that they want all their money back that they let you borrow—money that you were loaned for the privilege of working. You can write a check payable to the Bureau of the Public Debt, and in the memo section, notate that it's a payment towards your debt. Mail your check to:

Attn Dept G
Bureau of the Public Debt
P. O. Box 2188
Parkersburg, WV 26106-2188

Or go here to make an online donation.

Thanks


Oh hey, it's funny because it highlights a situation in which I would totally take the exact opposite position! Except I wouldn't, if they took back the money for some reason on what basis could I stop them? I probably would complain if they were singling out individuals as you do in your example but that's more on the basis on them being douches than doing something that they shouldn't be able to do.

It's usually more fruitful to directly attack a position rather than to try to show human inconsistencies that don't actually exist.


I’m taking issue with your claim that it’s their money Clay. Does Fantasy Flight own your copy of Arkham Horror? Ought they be entitled to reclaim pieces of it for redistribution? After all, they were the original creators.

The government created the medium of exchange, yes, but you acquired your money through honest trade (I’m presuming). In what way are they ethically permitted to recapture it?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
spookyblast wrote:
The government created the medium of exchange

You feel ok about not compensating them for its use?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Rost
United States
Fort Wayne
Indiana
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jmilum wrote:
spookyblast wrote:
The government created the medium of exchange

You feel ok about not compensating them for its use?


I compensated the person that gave it to me through my labor. Same thing if I were to trade my copy of Warhammer Quest for Clay’s copy of AH; I would have no obligation to compensate Fantasy Flight.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J
United States
Lexington
Kentucky
flag msg tools
admin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You are taking advantage of the medium of exchange created and secured by the government.

Why don;t you just use barter?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Rost
United States
Fort Wayne
Indiana
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jmilum wrote:
You are taking advantage of the medium of exchange created and secured by the government.


The USD is secured? Against what? Certainly not against inflation. Do you mean that they force others to accept it by fiat and not freely on its own merits?

But, the government is happy to permit competing currencies it seems—ones that it had no hand in creating—so long as they are still able to take a percentage of it.

wrote:
Why don't you just use barter?


What? Next you'll ask me why I don't just stand in one place because it so happens the government owns the land.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.