Public vs Private System of Representation

[Xerographica]

We have two completely different systems of representation...private and public.  Which system is better?

Elena uses society's limited resources to make an excellent Greek Salad.  I give her my dollar votes because she represents my interest in good food.  Elena is my representative...I value how she uses society's limited resources so I give her positive feedback.

Elizabeth Warren is also my representative.  I didn't vote for her though.  Why bother voting?  I'm supposed to vote for somebody who represents all my public interests?  If this makes any sense why don't I also vote for somebody who represents all my private interests?

With the private system of representation...I have a robust repertoire of representatives.  Everybody I give my money to is my representative.  And I give my money to a lot of different people because I have a lot of different interests.  If I could replace all these representatives with a couple of people...then I could save all the time that I spend shopping.

But there's a problem with trying to find one person to represent all my interests...nobody comes even close.  So if I did give all my money to one person...I'd be really worse off.  My interests would suffer incredibly.  Especially if this one person also had to represent the interests of 100,000 other people.  My interests would be lost like tears in rain.  Chances are that my Greek Salad would be replaced with a hamburger...without pickles, jalapenos, onions, lettuce and tomatoes.  Elena would be flipping generic burgers instead of doing something that she really loves.  So if the public system can't adequately represent our interest in food...then why do you think it can adequately represent our interest in anything?

Choose you this day whom you will serve.  Use some brain grease to compare both systems of representation and ask yourself which one provides better coverage.  You're not thinking hard enough if you don't grasp how tax choice would far better protect our interests.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Xero is back on the 'private' sauce.

You should just move into the furniture department at Walmart.  :rollin:

[mykcob4]

We have two completely different systems of representation...private and public.  Which system is better?

Elena uses society's limited resources to make an excellent Greek Salad.  I give her my dollar votes because she represents my interest in good food.  Elena is my representative...I value how she uses society's limited resources so I give her positive feedback.

Elizabeth Warren is also my representative.  I didn't vote for her though.  Why bother voting?  I'm supposed to vote for somebody who represents all my public interests?  If this makes any sense why don't I also vote for somebody who represents all my private interests?

With the private system of representation...I have a robust repertoire of representatives.  Everybody I give my money to is my representative.  And I give my money to a lot of different people because I have a lot of different interests.  If I could replace all these representatives with a couple of people...then I could save all the time that I spend shopping.

But there's a problem with trying to find one person to represent all my interests...nobody comes even close.  So if I did give all my money to one person...I'd be really worse off.  My interests would suffer incredibly.  Especially if this one person also had to represent the interests of 100,000 other people.  My interests would be lost like tears in rain.  Chances are that my Greek Salad would be replaced with a hamburger...without pickles, jalapenos, onions, lettuce and tomatoes.  Elena would be flipping generic burgers instead of doing something that she really loves.  So if the public system can't adequately represent our interest in food...then why do you think it can adequately represent our interest in anything?

Choose you this day whom you will serve.  Use some brain grease to compare both systems of representation and ask yourself which one provides better coverage.  You're not thinking hard enough if you don't grasp how tax choice would far better protect our interests.

I have seen this kind of crap before. It's just more republican/libertarian bullshit. It's the market will dictate everything lie that they dole out.
First of all the market is scewed and corrupt and what dictates the market is not "your dollar" but exploitation of you and all consumers. There is no "competition" because the big players eliminated them long ago.
Secondly the only protection you have against being exploited IS Elizabeth Warren. So if you don't think that she is doing anything for you, just think about all the safety and other standards that is enforced by the goverment to keep corrupt corporations from harming you and then not allowing you to do anything about it. Also think of all the assets that are available to you because you live in a SOCIETY instead of the wildwest that you advocate. Sidewalks, roads, clean water, trash removal etc... and so on. Just think what that would cost if it were up to the private sector.
Next economics....money is expensive unless you buy it from the government. If all money came only from private interest and they could set the value to whatever they want guess what everything would cost?!
Some things should be left to the private sector but hardly all things. This bullshit that the government is the problem is a Nixonian lie that Reagan popularized on behalf of giant corrupt corporations that didn't want to be responsible and don't care about you or the law!
So yeah you vote with your dollar but it's a worthless vote to say the least. Your civic vote has a greater and more important impact.
I'll give you an example. I live in Dallas. My local football franchise is owned by one of the most corrupt people alive. the product that he puts out is mediocre...8 and 8 for the last, well forever. He pays nothing in taxes, he held the city of Arlington ransom to build his stadium that he alone profits from(the city gets squat in return), he displaced people from their homes to build it using imminate domain as the tool to do so, and he charges the highest prices in the NFL as far as seats and parking. He could care less if anyone votes with their dollar because he'll make his money anyway. TV and the league pay him for his team. They aren't worth watching but hey there isn't ANY competition because he is virtually the only game in town (football wise). If you lived here do you think he would give a rat's ass about you? Absolutely not. People got scammed at the last Super Bowl here and Jerry made a ton of money and they are going to play another one here very soon. That is just one example but that giany corporate corruption is rampent and the ONLY thing that holds the line on it are elected public officials,....and NOT the conservative ones either!

[AllPurposeAtheist]

I sense a distaste for Jerry Jones in your post mykcob. Perhaps Jerry will be willing to hug you on the 50 yard line. I can't stand the bastard either, but I no longer live in those parts..
I lived on Rock Island Rd in Irving, roughly half way between old and new stadiums and on Division Rd in Arlington right down the street from Jerryworld. I knew some of the people kicked out when they bulldozed that area.

[mykcob4]

I sense a distaste for Jerry Jones in your post mykcob. Perhaps Jerry will be willing to hug you on the 50 yard line. I can't stand the bastard either, but I no longer live in those parts..
I lived on Rock Island Rd in Irving, roughly half way between old and new stadiums and on Division Rd in Arlington right down the street from Jerryworld. I knew some of the people kicked out when they bulldozed that area.

Those people got screwed by Jerry. Imminent domain only paid them for 80% of market value. After they devalued the area that didn't ammount to much. Most of the people rented and were forced out against their will. It was the biggest land grab in Texas since they kicked out the Comanches! Yeah I hate Jerry for far more than him owning the NFL er uh the Cowboys. He is the most corrupt individual since of Nixon! He manufactured the NFL lockout to try and break the Players Union. Did you know that the NFL is officially listed as a "non-profit"? Yep it's true and yet they pay millions to lobbiest that support conservatives!

[Xerographica]

I have seen this kind of crap before. It's just more republican/libertarian bullshit. It's the market will dictate everything lie that they dole out.

Wrong wrong wrong.  You attacked libertarianism but my post was about pragmatarianism.  Pragmatarianism (tax choice) advocates allowing taxpayers to choose where their taxes go.  Read through the FAQ...so when you projectile vomit at least you can aim in the right general direction.  

You're so wrong about so many things that it's kinda hard to know where to start.  Well...how about we start on something that we both agree on?  There's no god.  Unless I'm wrong.  It's entirely possible that I am wrong.  

How familiar are you with the bible?  When I was growing up I frequently had to read it.  So I grew up believing in god...until I started thinking for myself...which was around 11 or so.  Did you grow up believing in god?  

Even though I don't believe in god...the bible is full of value.  For example...

"Where your treasure is, there will be your heart also" - Matthew 6:21

If I want to know your true values...do you think I should look at your voting record...or should I look at a breakdown of how you spend your time/money?  

This is what Benjamin Franklin had to say on the matter...

"Words may shew a man's Wit, but Actions his Meaning."

Telling me that you voted for Elizabeth Warren doesn't even reveal the tip of the iceberg.  It cost you perhaps an hour or two to vote for her.  How did you spend the other 8764 hours in the year?  How did you spend the money you earned?  

How you spend your limited resources would reveal whether voting for Elizabeth Warren is simply a facade that makes you feel good to project to others.  In gangsta lingo...you could just be "front'n"...and you certainly wouldn't be the first...

They will not indeed submit to more labours and privations than other people, for the relief of distressed fellow creatures: but they make amends by whining over them more.  It is not difficult to trace this sort of affectation to its cause. It originates in the common practice of bestowing upon feelings that praise which actions alone can deserve. - J.S. Mill

It's not praiseworthy for you to have feelings towards people who are less well off.  But I'm sure you feel morally superior for voting for Elizabeth Warren don't you?  

Now, here's some extremely simple logic.  Tax choice advocates that you be allowed to choose where your taxes go.  So it would give you the opportunity to earn some truly deserved praise by spending all your tax dollars on the poor.  But maybe you're going to want to argue that the poor wouldn't receive enough money?  If so, then recognize that there's nothing praiseworthy about that sentiment.  It's not noble, or admirable to sacrifice others for your feelings.  It's fake, shallow, hollow, empty...and deserving of nothing but contempt.  

If you have no problem sacrificing your own interests to help those less fortunate...then you should totally support tax choice.  But if you do have a problem with tax choice...then it's because it would reveal that your concern for others is simply an illusion.

In the bible, god sacrificed his own son to save the world.  He didn't sacrifice me...or you...or our parents or our children...he sacrificed the thing he valued most in the world...his only son.  Of course it's just a story...but it accurately communicates just how much god valued the world.  

Markets work because they allow you to accurately communicate how much you're willing to give up for the things you want.  Without this accurate communication...there's no way of knowing which uses of society's limited resources will provide the most value for society.  In other words, without a market there's no way of accurately determining demand.  Right now we don't really know what the demand for public goods is...which means that the supply can't possibly be correct.  The supply is wrong...it's inefficient...we're getting too much of some public goods and not enough of others.  But this problem is easy enough to solve simply by allowing people to shop for themselves in the public sector.

You believe in the current system just like I used to believe in god.  I was told to put my biggest problems in god's hands...just like you put your biggest problems in Elizabeth Warren's hands.  God doesn't exist...but Warren does exist...right?  If she truly does help you solve your biggest problems...then by all means give her all your taxes.  But please try and fathom the possibility that people should be free to choose who they trust to solve their problems.  

The bible gets this one right as well...

And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. - Joshua 24:15

The bible, for all its fallacies, has a recurring theme of allowing the people to choose which god they worshiped.  It's not a consistent theme though as there are also numerous examples of intolerance.  Intolerance continues strong today as is evidenced by the popular unwillingness to allow other people to choose where their taxes go.

[Plu]

[youtube:1gsmhuz3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTAAsCNK7RA[/youtube:1gsmhuz3]

[Jason78]

Pragmatarianism (tax choice) advocates allowing taxpayers to choose where their taxes go.

Can I choose not to be taxed at all?   After all, there are people that earn much more money than me that could easily afford it.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Well, your libertarian wet dream isn't happening so I'm not worried to much.

[Jason78]

What if Elena was a money lender that used societies limited resources to game the system and accrue massive amounts of "positive feedback"?

Elena then chooses to spend this massive amount of positive feedback to make sure that laws on money lending are favourable to her.


Then we have a runaway cycle of positive feedback that continues until the only profitable enterprise is to lend money like Elena.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

What if Elena was a money lender that used societies limited resources to game the system and accrue massive amounts of "positive feedback"?

Elena then chooses to spend this massive amount of positive feedback to make sure that laws on money lending are favourable to her.


Then we have a runaway cycle of positive feedback that continues until the only profitable enterprise is to lend money like Elena.

That's quite common online where companies pay armies of people to post "positive feedback" about them. In fact we at AF could potentially pay a PR firm to post positive feedback about us wonderful,  caring atheists on thousands of "Christian" sites.. Let the "market" decide.  After all, we're ALL wonderful and caring...right?

[mykcob4]

I have seen this kind of crap before. It's just more republican/libertarian bullshit. It's the market will dictate everything lie that they dole out.

Wrong wrong wrong.  You attacked libertarianism but my post was about pragmatarianism.  Pragmatarianism (tax choice) advocates allowing taxpayers to choose where their taxes go.  Read through the FAQ...so when you projectile vomit at least you can aim in the right general direction.  

You're so wrong about so many things that it's kinda hard to know where to start.  Well...how about we start on something that we both agree on?  There's no god.  Unless I'm wrong.  It's entirely possible that I am wrong.  

How familiar are you with the bible?  When I was growing up I frequently had to read it.  So I grew up believing in god...until I started thinking for myself...which was around 11 or so.  Did you grow up believing in god?  

Even though I don't believe in god...the bible is full of value.  For example...

"Where your treasure is, there will be your heart also" - Matthew 6:21

If I want to know your true values...do you think I should look at your voting record...or should I look at a breakdown of how you spend your time/money?  

This is what Benjamin Franklin had to say on the matter...

"Words may shew a man's Wit, but Actions his Meaning."

Telling me that you voted for Elizabeth Warren doesn't even reveal the tip of the iceberg.  It cost you perhaps an hour or two to vote for her.  How did you spend the other 8764 hours in the year?  How did you spend the money you earned?  

How you spend your limited resources would reveal whether voting for Elizabeth Warren is simply a facade that makes you feel good to project to others.  In gangsta lingo...you could just be "front'n"...and you certainly wouldn't be the first...

They will not indeed submit to more labours and privations than other people, for the relief of distressed fellow creatures: but they make amends by whining over them more.  It is not difficult to trace this sort of affectation to its cause. It originates in the common practice of bestowing upon feelings that praise which actions alone can deserve. - J.S. Mill

It's not praiseworthy for you to have feelings towards people who are less well off.  But I'm sure you feel morally superior for voting for Elizabeth Warren don't you?  

Now, here's some extremely simple logic.  Tax choice advocates that you be allowed to choose where your taxes go.  So it would give you the opportunity to earn some truly deserved praise by spending all your tax dollars on the poor.  But maybe you're going to want to argue that the poor wouldn't receive enough money?  If so, then recognize that there's nothing praiseworthy about that sentiment.  It's not noble, or admirable to sacrifice others for your feelings.  It's fake, shallow, hollow, empty...and deserving of nothing but contempt.  

If you have no problem sacrificing your own interests to help those less fortunate...then you should totally support tax choice.  But if you do have a problem with tax choice...then it's because it would reveal that your concern for others is simply an illusion.

In the bible, god sacrificed his own son to save the world.  He didn't sacrifice me...or you...or our parents or our children...he sacrificed the thing he valued most in the world...his only son.  Of course it's just a story...but it accurately communicates just how much god valued the world.  

Markets work because they allow you to accurately communicate how much you're willing to give up for the things you want.  Without this accurate communication...there's no way of knowing which uses of society's limited resources will provide the most value for society.  In other words, without a market there's no way of accurately determining demand.  Right now we don't really know what the demand for public goods is...which means that the supply can't possibly be correct.  The supply is wrong...it's inefficient...we're getting too much of some public goods and not enough of others.  But this problem is easy enough to solve simply by allowing people to shop for themselves in the public sector.

You believe in the current system just like I used to believe in god.  I was told to put my biggest problems in god's hands...just like you put your biggest problems in Elizabeth Warren's hands.  God doesn't exist...but Warren does exist...right?  If she truly does help you solve your biggest problems...then by all means give her all your taxes.  But please try and fathom the possibility that people should be free to choose who they trust to solve their problems.  

The bible gets this one right as well...

And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. - Joshua 24:15

The bible, for all its fallacies, has a recurring theme of allowing the people to choose which god they worshiped.  It's not a consistent theme though as there are also numerous examples of intolerance.  Intolerance continues strong today as is evidenced by the popular unwillingness to allow other people to choose where their taxes go.

Okay I read you're entire INACCURATE rant and it is mostly bullshit!
1) You have no idea who I am what I value. You ASSUME a great deal and you are entirely wrong. You somehow think that I have a biblical idea about saving the poor...NOT AT ALL. 2) As far as pragmatism goes your theory is bullshit.
3) I can't vote for Warren as she isn't running in any election that I can vote in.
The idea that the private sector is better suited on all things that the government is just utter bullshit. It is a fact that without regulation by an authority to oversee business allows the biggest and most corrupt players to exploit everything without consequence hence denying competition and fairness and denying oppertunity.
4) I am not talking about charity or the poor or anytrhing like that and never once did in this thread. That was a complete ASSUMPTION on YOUR part.
5) As far as my knowledge about the bible goes, I don't see what that has to do with anything, but I went through a very strenuous cadacism for 12 years which is like sunday school on steroids if you must know.
6) "pragmatism" is just another republican/libertarian scam. "Tax choice"? Really. So you want everyone in the entire county to specifically dictate where and how much taxes go to where and when. That isn't practical. It isn't even logical. It's like education. The reason Repuke and libaturds want vouchers isn't to increase education. It's so they can systematically abolish it. If public schools have funds syphoned off because of vouchers then the system collapses and then the kids that can't afford to pay for school don't get an education or they get a brainwashed religious education.
7) As far as how I spend my money and what I don't spend it on is a total ASSUMPTIOM by you also. I don't need to justify anything to you but I will say I dedicate a good portion of my EARNED income to help others. I don't do it for praise! I have NO idea why you went off on this illogical tirade about "frontin'" and praise and projection and moral superiority. It's just a nonsensical rant that isn't relavent.
8) When I vote for someone or on an issue I don't just show up and pull a lever. I spend far more than the 2 hours that you ASSUME. I spend months and indeed years on issues and people deciding what is best and how I should vote.
So don't hand me this crapfest rant. You made a lot of assumption that just aren't true.
Notice PLU not one personal insult...not one, but I'm sure you won't recognize that.

[Xerographica]

6) "pragmatism" is just another republican/libertarian scam. "Tax choice"? Really. So you want everyone in the entire county to specifically dictate where and how much taxes go to where and when. That isn't practical. It isn't even logical. It's like education. The reason Repuke and libaturds want vouchers isn't to increase education. It's so they can systematically abolish it. If public schools have funds syphoned off because of vouchers then the system collapses and then the kids that can't afford to pay for school don't get an education or they get a brainwashed religious education.

A division of representation isn't logical?  It's more logical to expect you to be everything to everybody?  That's beyond absurd.

Can you tell me how many different people you gave your money to last year?

[mykcob4]

6) "pragmatism" is just another republican/libertarian scam. "Tax choice"? Really. So you want everyone in the entire county to specifically dictate where and how much taxes go to where and when. That isn't practical. It isn't even logical. It's like education. The reason Repuke and libaturds want vouchers isn't to increase education. It's so they can systematically abolish it. If public schools have funds syphoned off because of vouchers then the system collapses and then the kids that can't afford to pay for school don't get an education or they get a brainwashed religious education.

A division of representation isn't logical?  It's more logical to expect you to be everything to everybody?  That's beyond absurd.

Can you tell me how many different people you gave your money to last year?

Representative democracy is absurd? You think capitalistic chaos is logical? You can't be serious!

[Xerographica]

Representative democracy is absurd? You think capitalistic chaos is logical? You can't be serious!

If we implemented pragmatarianism...congress would still be there.  So you could still give all your money to your elected representative.  Which congressperson would you give your taxes to?  

What's chaotic about this?  I'm an entrepreneur.  I created this thread and you've been buying it with your time.  You're free to stop buying it at any time.  Nobody is forcing you to spend your time here.  You're welcome to spend your time on any other thread.  The choice is yours.  It's up to you what you put in your shopping cart.  

Capitalism is the best. It's free enterprise. Barter.  Gimbels, if I get really rank with the clerk, 'Well I don't like this', how I can resolve it? If it really gets ridiculous, I go, 'Frig it, man, I walk.' What can this guy do at Gimbels, even if he was the president of Gimbels? He can always reject me from that store, but I can always go to Macy's. He can't really hurt me. Communism is like one big phone company.  Government control, man. And if I get too rank with that phone company, where can I go? I'll end up like a schmuck with a dixie cup on a thread.   - Lenny Bruce