Stefan MolyneuxVerified account

yup! many of our politican conversations can be distilled down to basic differences in how each side perceives the world. This is one of those disagreements. Since both sides start with completely different definitions then it's hard to compromise

How dare you use logic and reasoning on the Twitter?

If government resources are actually seen as private property that was confiscated thru taxes, saying no is the most responsible reply unless there is a social contract agreeing to the expenditure.

if government resources are the only way to counter externalities that prevent the free market from innovating something humans want or need (health care, education, etc) then saying no is selfish and aggressive. It's not that difficult Mr. Philosopher king

So no tax cuts then?

Just like in parenting...saying NO isn’t always easy but usually when you do say NO....it’s responsible!

Most moderates and centrist liberals understand this principal far better than self proclaimed fiscal conservatives.

Resources are infinite. The problem is we have lost our dreams and visions as the human race.

And many younger people have no concept that resources are finite. They have grown up knowing no boundaries. No wonder they like socialism.

Money, like matter, is neither created nor destroyed. Fiat currency is but a magic trick and fraud created for speculation. Money can only be based on value of resources and / or labor, or its entire conceprualization falls apart. Credit based on fiat currency is guess work.

This is why the Conservatives are loathed by so many in the U.K.