Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

The Time Alliance wrote:That's Bull. That wasn't your original Argument at all. Your Original argument had nothing to do with Religion. So stop being edgy and post your original Argument.

What do you mean? That was yesterday I have no idea I forget

Why have an argument at all? It's hard enough to follow the RMB conversation as it is.

The Time Alliance wrote:So....

Let's go and use State Socialism as an example. When you do something against the Government you are tortured using methods you have mentioned. But really it's the Government torturing the citizens.

It doesn't change the fact it's torture just because the crime changes.

Why does everything come back to State Socialism with you? All I said was the capital offenses deserve capital punishment. No one said anything about torture. You kill a man, you get electrocuted in a controlled (private) situation. You kill a child, you are hung. You rape someone, you get a vasectomy. Not, you steal a piece of bread, we slowly tear you limb from limb while water drips on your forehead.

The Time Alliance wrote:Capital Punishment is akin to torture.

.......Another Convenient situation.

What is that supposed to mean? Do you want me to get back on how silly Mormonism is or not? We can do that right now if you want? Yeah I didn't think so. I don't even know what we were arguing about.

The government has no right to kill its own citizens. Life, liberty, and property.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:The government has no right to kill its own citizens. Life, liberty, and property.

I'm not talking about government power. I'm talking about fair punishment. Or would you rather we all pay for these murderers to live long lives and die comfortably as old men, living off of our hard earned money?

Pevvania wrote:1. Both deterrence and rehabilitation as answers to criminal punishment are terrifying ideas. They concentrate huge amounts of power in the hands of the government to determine types of punishment and when a convict is "rehabilitated". As Lone Star suggested, a just and libertarian answer would be proportional punishment, so that it should equal the crime and the extent to which someone's rights have been violated. For example, if I took $500 from [nation=short]Liberosia[/nation], I would have to give him $1000.

I find your punishment suggestions very disturbing, [nation=short]Humpheria[/nation]. Rapists may deserve it, but surely the brutality of such an act would soil our own ethics?

Well, I do believe that rape is more of a crime than murder. With murder you just die. With rape, there is much more pain. You have to live with that for the rest of your life.

Rape victims are 3 times more likely than other people to have a major depressive episode, 26 times more likely to have extreme substance abuse issues, and 31 percent of all rape victims develop post traumatic stress disorder(PTSD).

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:What do you mean? That was yesterday I have no idea I forget

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:What is that supposed to mean? Do you want me to get back on how silly Mormonism is or not? We can do that right now if you want? Yeah I didn't think so. I don't even know what we were arguing about.

Capital Punishment.

Humpheria wrote:I'm not talking about government power. I'm talking about fair punishment. Or would you rather we all pay for these murderers to live long lives and die comfortably as old men, living off of our hard earned money?

I agree with Minerva here. They have no right to kill anyone no matter what. Instead they should be either locked up for life or rehabilitated.

Humpheria wrote:Why does everything come back to State Socialism with you? All I said was the capital offenses deserve capital punishment. No one said anything about torture. You kill a man, you get electrocuted in a controlled (private) situation. You kill a child, you are hung. You rape someone, you get a vasectomy. Not, you steal a piece of bread, we slowly tear you limb from limb while water drips on your forehead.

Why water dripping? People being killed in Private sitations? You mean hide torture?

The Time Alliance wrote:I agree with Minerva here. They have no right to kill anyone no matter what. Instead they should be either locked up for life or rehabilitated.

Oh yeah you're right. We shouldn't kill them, we should give them free healthcare, food, amenities, exercise, haircuts, and a chance to go back into a society. The cost of an average life sentence costs the Federal or State government $1.5 million (Department of Justice). That's every murderer sentenced to life in prison. That makes sense.

The Time Alliance wrote:Why water dripping? People being killed in Private sitations? You mean hide torture?

If you read the f*cking quote I literally said that we shouldn't torture. I employed reductio ad absurdum, I wasn't being literal. I said that when you are executed, it should be in private, not public humiliation.

If you could eliminate one federal department, what would it be?

Humpheria wrote:Oh yeah you're right. We shouldn't kill them, we should give them free healthcare, food, amenities, exercise, haircuts, and a chance to go back into a society. The cost of an average life sentence costs the Federal or State government $1.5 million (Department of Justice). That's every murderer sentenced to life in prison. That makes sense.

If you read the f*cking quote I literally said that we shouldn't torture. I employed reductio ad absurdum, I wasn't being literal. I said that when you are executed, it should be in private, not public humiliation.

I'd rather pay them more than I get them have the thought they died because I cared about my money. That's just my opinion. I don't want the guilt. I believe it's wrong simple as that for me it's more of a Moral decision than an economic one.

Okay calm. No cussing. Cussing leads to insults. Insults lead to bad things as we saw last night. We can do this calmly. I didn't recognize you weren't being literal. And I mistook your goals with private killings.

I still Dislike the idea but I'm Surry for misinterpreting.

Pevvania wrote:If you could eliminate one federal department, what would it be?

Only one....

IRS

FBI-CIA-DoHS- and NSA. Then combine the four into a security force for the president.

Humpheria wrote:I'm not talking about government power. I'm talking about fair punishment. Or would you rather we all pay for these murderers to live long lives and die comfortably as old men, living off of our hard earned money?

Considering its cheaper and more humane, yes.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Considering its cheaper and more humane, yes.

Is it cheaper?

The Time Alliance wrote:Is it cheaper?

Yes. Mostly due to the elimination of legal costs.

The IRS is a bureau of the Department of the Treasury, not a department in itself.

Don't care. Eliminate it pl0x

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Yes. Mostly due to the elimination of legal costs.

Well I didn't know that.....

Well then there is a second reason besides morals. If it is cheaper then I guess it helps economics.

Pevvania wrote:The IRS is a bureau of the Department of the Treasury, not a department in itself.

It's one of the more appalling parts.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Yes. Mostly due to the elimination of legal costs.

Well, you're going to have a long trial anyway. But a long trial plus 1.5 million, no.

Pevvania wrote:The IRS is a bureau of the Department of the Treasury, not a department in itself.

Then I suppose the Department of Transportation, the infrastructure part can be put in the Department of the Interior.

I would eliminate the Department of Agriculture. It spends over $140 billion a year on corporatising farming and erecting protectionist barriers.

Humpheria wrote:Well, you're going to have a long trial anyway. But a long trial plus 1.5 million, no.

Then I suppose the Department of Transportation, the infrastructure part can be put in the Department of the Interior.

They wouldn't have a longer trial, since it costs less than to simply convict a person and send him off to life than to bargain for the death penalty. Average on death row is like 10 years.

The Time Alliance wrote:Well I didn't know that.....

Well then there is a second reason besides morals. If it is cheaper then I guess it helps economics.

It's not cheaper. Including trial costs, a life in prison sentence is over a million dollars more than a death-penalty case. It costs about 300,000 dollars to execute someone (including legal costs) and about 1,567,890 dollars to put a 29 year old (the average cost of a convicted first-degree murderer) also including legal costs. That's one million and two hundred thousand more for an average of both. It totally sounds cheaper.

Humpheria wrote:It's not cheaper. Including trial costs, a life in prison sentence is over a million dollars more than a death-penalty case. It costs about 300,000 dollars to execute someone (including legal costs) and about 1,567,890 dollars to put a 29 year old (the average cost of a convicted first-degree murderer) also including legal costs. That's one million and two hundred thousand more for an average of both. It totally sounds cheaper.

You forgot to divide.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:They wouldn't have a longer trial, since it costs less than to simply convict a person and send him off to life than to bargain for the death penalty. Average on death row is like 10 years.

Read my previous comment. That is death row in it's current state. I think that the process itself should be amended and made more humane. I don't want first time felons to be hung by their toes and beaten in public. Something quick and clean to someone who deserves it.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:You forgot to divide.

What?

Fun fact: the top 20% of Americans pay 92% of income tax revenue. Eliminating the income tax for the bottom 80% of Americans would lose the federal government only $112 billion per year.

Pevvania wrote:Fun fact: the top 20% of Americans pay 92% of income tax revenue. Eliminating the income tax for the bottom 80% of Americans would lose the federal government only $112 billion per year.

That is fun.

A new study in California revealed that the cost of the death penalty in the state has been over $4 billion since 1978.

Study considered pre-trial and trial costs, costs of automatic appeals and state habeas corpus petitions, costs of federal

habeas corpus appeals, and costs of incarceration on death row. (Alarcon & Mitchell, 2011).

In Texas, a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a

single cell at the highest security level for 40 years. (Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1992).

2.3$ million is bigger than $1.2 million.

Not only that, but if the person is truly innocent, they can give him his life back (and also not have to spend further money on imprisoning him) than if he was killed.

Pevvania wrote:If you could eliminate one federal department, what would it be?

DHS, the simple idea of a domestic standing army should be enough to get riots in the streets

Post self-deleted by Republic Of Minerva.

Pevvania wrote:Fun fact: the top 20% of Americans pay 92% of income tax revenue. Eliminating the income tax for the bottom 80% of Americans would lose the federal government only $112 billion per year.

Until we learn how to cut spending on unneeded stuff like Military, Welfare and Federal agencies this is a large money loss.

*1.5 million. 1.5 to keep them in prison, or 2.3 to execute them. Still cheaper, even though it doesn't match up.

As for the death penalty I doubt it's cheaper for me it is a Moral choice. Nothing more or less.

I have seen no proof of any numbers you are all stating Except from Minerva.

The Time Alliance wrote:As for the death penalty I doubt it's cheaper for me it is a Moral choice. Nothing more or less.

I have seen no proof of any numbers you are all stating Except from Minerva.

Give me a sec. Still typing.

Humpheria wrote:Give me a sec. Still typing.

Okay......

I'd love to see sources for these claims.

Especially a source on your fun fact Pev.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:A new study in California revealed that the cost of the death penalty in the state has been over $4 billion since 1978.

Study considered pre-trial and trial costs, costs of automatic appeals and state habeas corpus petitions, costs of federal

habeas corpus appeals, and costs of incarceration on death row. (Alarcon & Mitchell, 2011).

That is 36 years of death penalties. That piles up. They only spend 184,000 a year (California Yearly Budget-2012) . It costs California 66,000 (Sacramento Bee) dollars per inmate per year. Right now California has 170,588 (Sacramento Bee) inmates. That's 11,258,808,000 (Simple Math) in California, since that's the state you want to use. That's 405,317,088,000 (Simple Math) since 1978. That's more than 4 Billion.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:In Texas, a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a

single cell at the highest security level for 40 years. (Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1992).

In Texas, it costs 22,000 (Death Penalty Info. Com) dollars per year for one inmate. If that inmate is in there for 40 years, like you said, that's 880,000 (Math). You forgot court costs and the fact that most life sentences are longer than 40 years because they are all healthy (Free Healthcare).

Republic Of Minerva wrote:2.3$ million is bigger than $1.2 million.

405 Billion + is also bigger than 2.3 million. Math works, huh?

The Time Alliance wrote:Okay......

I'd love to see sources for these claims.

Especially a source on your fun fact Pev.

Are you satisfied?

Humpheria wrote:Are you satisfied?

Yep.

The Time Alliance wrote:Until we learn how to cut spending on unneeded stuff like Military, Welfare and Federal agencies this is a large money loss.

I disagree. There are quite a few cuts we can agree on:

-Cutting military spending in half to $300 billion. This seems like a drastic reduction, but in 1999 only $364 billion went towards the Department of Defense.

-Eliminating the Departments of Agriculture, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, Labor and Transportation would save $466 billion a year.

The Time Alliance wrote:Okay......

I'd love to see sources for these claims.

Especially a source on your fun fact Pev.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101264757

I dislike when people pull numbers from thin air.

The Time Alliance wrote:I dislike when people pull numbers from thin air.

http://www.kowaldesign.com/cgi/Budget.pl?estimates=111111

Pevvania wrote:I disagree. There are quite a few cuts we can agree on:

-Cutting military spending in half to $300 billion. This seems like a drastic reduction, but in 1999 only $364 billion went towards the Department of Defense.

-Eliminating the Departments of Agriculture, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, Labor and Transportation would save $466 billion a year.

Pev. I disagree withEliminating Agriculture, Education and Energy. We can cut spending but let's not eliminate.

Pevvania wrote:http://www.cnbc.com/id/101264757

Okay. Thanks.

Pevvania wrote:http://www.kowaldesign.com/cgi/Budget.pl?estimates=111111

Wasn't directed to you but thanks.

The Time Alliance wrote: Pev. I disagree withEliminating Agriculture, Education and Energy. We can cut spending but let's not eliminate.

1. I thought you were an anti-corporatist? If you dislike business influence in government, then surely you must favour eliminating Agriculture, a body whose primary goal is to subsidise and bail out farming corporations?

2. Why not? There has been no correlation whatsoever with education spending and improved test scores in the US. Even if you're in favour of government education, at least give parents choice

3. Again, this department is notorious for its corporate handouts and wasteful projects. Eliminate it.

Humpheria wrote:That is 36 years of death penalties. That piles up. They only spend 184,000 a year (California Yearly Budget-2012) . It costs California 66,000 (Sacramento Bee) dollars per inmate per year. Right now California has 170,588 (Sacramento Bee) inmates. That's 11,258,808,000 (Simple Math) in California, since that's the state you want to use. That's 405,317,088,000 (Simple Math) since 1978. That's more than 4 Billion.

In Texas, it costs 22,000 (Death Penalty Info. Com) dollars per year for one inmate. If that inmate is in there for 40 years, like you said, that's 880,000 (Math). You forgot court costs and the fact that most life sentences are longer than 40 years because they are all healthy (Free Healthcare).

405 Billion + is also bigger than 2.3 million. Math works, huh?

That has nothing to do with the costs of the death penalty, unless you are saying that if all 170k of them were executed, it would be cheaper. How many of those prisoners are LWOP?

There were only 13 executions. Each of them cost 300 million each.

>

The study revealed that, since 1978, California’s current system has cost the state’s taxpayers $4 billion more than a system that has life in prison without the possibility of parole (‘LWOP’) as its most severe penalty. In this article, the authors update voters on the findings presented in their 2011 study. Recent studies reveal that if the current system is maintained, Californians will spend an additional $5 billion to $7 billion over the cost of LWOP to fund the broken system between now and 2050. In that time, roughly 740 more inmates will be added to death row, an additional fourteen executions will be carried out, and more than five hundred death-row inmates will die of old age or other causes before the state executes them.

Pevvania wrote:1. I thought you were an anti-corporatist? If you dislike business influence in government, then surely you must favour eliminating Agriculture, a body whose primary goal is to subsidise and bail out farming corporations?

2. Why not? There has been no correlation whatsoever with education spending and improved test scores in the US. Even if you're in favour of government education, at least give parents choice

3. Again, this department is notorious for its corporate handouts and wasteful projects. Eliminate it.

LISTING EVERYTHING only found in 'Tatem and MLP threads.

1. I am Anti - Corporatist. However it's not the only job of the Dept. Of Agriculture.

2. Source. I'm in favour of Government Education but parents have the choice to send their kids to private schools.

3. AGAIN IT'S NOT THERE ONLY JOB.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:That has nothing to do with the costs of the death penalty, unless you are saying that if all 170k of them were executed, it would be cheaper. How many of those prisoners are LWOP?

There were only 13 executions. Each of them cost 300 million each.

>

The study revealed that, since 1978, California’s current system has cost the state’s taxpayers $4 billion more than a system that has life in prison without the possibility of parole (‘LWOP’) as its most severe penalty. In this article, the authors update voters on the findings presented in their 2011 study. Recent studies reveal that if the current system is maintained, Californians will spend an additional $5 billion to $7 billion over the cost of LWOP to fund the broken system between now and 2050. In that time, roughly 740 more inmates will be added to death row, an additional fourteen executions will be carried out, and more than five hundred death-row inmates will die of old age or other causes before the state executes them.

That is why I want to amend the process to make current executions more humane and faster so there aren't five hundred dying of natural causes.

The Time Alliance wrote:I dislike when people pull numbers from thin air.

I cited my arument

That wasn't referring to ANYONE.

The Time Alliance wrote:That wasn't referring to ANYONE.

Then why bring it up?

Humpheria wrote:Then why bring it up?

It was meant to be an add-on to the statement of sourcing.

The Time Alliance wrote:LISTING EVERYTHING only found in 'Tatem and MLP threads.

1. I am Anti - Corporatist. However it's not the only job of the Dept. Of Agriculture.

2. Source. I'm in favour of Government Education but parents have the choice to send their kids to private schools.

3. AGAIN IT'S NOT THERE ONLY JOB.

1. Clearly not as anti-corporate as I am. I say an end to corporate handouts, full stop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwKpT7P9OiU

2. http://moz.com/rand/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/spending-test-scores.jpg

3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i4u3FHBxbE&list=PL2w2AA116bYVv4ErpI79O5jI-zpdifAGx

The Time Alliance wrote:It was meant to be an add-on to the statement of sourcing.

Fair enough

Pevvania wrote:1. Clearly not as anti-corporate as I am. I say an end to corporate handouts, full stop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwKpT7P9OiU

2. http://moz.com/rand/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/spending-test-scores.jpg

3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i4u3FHBxbE&list=PL2w2AA116bYVv4ErpI79O5jI-zpdifAGx

All these sources. I'll respond when I can connect to YouTube.

The Time Alliance wrote:All these sources. I'll respond when I can connect to YouTube.

Alternatively, look here:

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/energy

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/agriculture

Also I'm against government bailout but it isn't their only job. They have jobs of regulation but I'll drop this until I can watch the videos.

Pevvania wrote:Alternatively, look here:

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/energy

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/agriculture

Thank you.

The Time Alliance wrote:Also I'm against government bailout but it isn't their only job. They have jobs of regulation but I'll drop this until I can watch the videos.

No anti-corporatist can be pro-regulation.

Pevvania wrote:No anti-corporatist can be pro-regulation.

Yes they can. Regulations limit the corporation not help them.

The Time Alliance wrote:Yes they can. Regulations limit the corporation not help them.

This is one of the most ludicrous myths in the field of economics. My chapter on regulations in a little treatise I wrote (here - http://www.nationstates.net/nation=pevvania/detail=factbook/id=220993) addresses the regulation fallacy.

Looks like the kiddies in The Federal Islands 2 got their just desserts.

Pevvania wrote:Looks like the kiddies in The Federal Islands 2 got their just desserts.

Well. There goes that branch of my party.....

The Time Alliance wrote:Well. There goes that branch of my party.....

Care to respond to my budget? I'd like to reach some sort of an agreement.

Aaargh. Trouble be a-brewin' off the port bow.

Hey, it's P...Pirates. Space Pirates. He's back. Hi SP!

Pirates? Heave to and take in sail! Run out the cannon!

Oh. Right. We used to have space pirates.

Where's my jar of space dirt?

Conservative Idealism In Libertatem wrote:Hey, it's P...Pirates. Space Pirates. He's back. Hi SP!

An' greetin's back to ya, me Republican matey.

The Silver Chair wrote:Pirates? Heave to and take in sail! Run out the cannon!

Sail? Cannon? YO-HO-HO! Such devices be the yawn of antiquity! Us space pirates be f'milyer only with the finest in ion technology! We got a fleet of twenty frigates, an' don't you be forgettin' that any time soon!

Space Pirates wrote:Sail? Cannon? YO-HO-HO! Such devices be the yawn of antiquity! Us space pirates be f'milyer only with the finest in ion technology! We got a fleet of twenty frigates, an' don't you be forgettin' that any time soon!

I like you already.

Wow Alchandria has really taken the lead. That literally escalated quickly.

Space Pirates wrote:An' greetin's back to ya, me Republican matey.

Aye, thes' indiff'r'nt cor-sairs be rem'mbr'n th' lingo'f pir'ts, th't we 'ave.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:Wow Alchandria has really taken the lead. That literally escalated quickly.

Indeed. I'm still pulling for Einsiev.

Conservative Idealism In Libertatem wrote:Indeed. I'm still pulling for Einsiev.

We've got an hour yet, let's start cheating!

I'm glad we have things in place to stop that sort of thing.

Miencraft wrote:We've got an hour yet, let's start cheating!

I'm glad we have things in place to stop that sort of thing.

*cough* FRAUD Act *cough* Bet TFI wished they had one of those things.

On topic: Luxembourge doesn't seem to be a citizen.

Also on topic: The Citizen Application and Register should really be more visible.

Pevvania wrote:Care to respond to my budget? I'd like to reach some sort of an agreement.

You mean regulations.

I mean I guess I understood what you're saying on how the regulations are corporatist.

Space Pirates wrote:Sail? Cannon? YO-HO-HO! Such devices be the yawn of antiquity! Us space pirates be f'milyer only with the finest in ion technology! We got a fleet of twenty frigates, an' don't you be forgettin' that any time soon!

Who are you?

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:Wow Alchandria has really taken the lead. That literally escalated quickly.

I noticed........

Miencraft wrote:On topic: Luxembourge doesn't seem to be a citizen.

Also on topic: The Citizen Application and Register should really be more visible.

Of course not. That's a country silly.

Humpheria wrote:*cough* FRAUD Act *cough* Bet TFI wished they had one of those things.

Oh, ha ha. The Citizen list helps in part to deter voter fraud, but there is always the interference of renegades...

Perhaps I should give TFI's IRU-esque system a spin by proposing a similar act there.

The Time Alliance wrote:You mean regulations.

I mean I guess I understood what you're saying on how the regulations are corporatist.

Come on, Alliance! It's time we clean up DC! Agree to my budget plan for FY 2015, and America will be on the road to recovery! I urge you!

The Time Alliance wrote:Of course not. That's a country silly.

I can't tell if you missed the point or I missed the joke.

In case you missed the point, check the voters for Alchandria. Fortunately, it's just the one, and Alchy's still in the lead.

Miencraft wrote:I can't tell if you missed the point or I missed the joke.

In case you missed the point, check the voters for Alchandria. Fortunately, it's just the one, and Alchy's still in the lead.

Oh. I never noticed that.....

Humpheria wrote:*cough* FRAUD Act *cough* Bet TFI wished they had one of those things.

No kidding...

The Time Alliance wrote:Oh. I never noticed that.....

Good thing we've got people that look for this stuff!

The Time Alliance wrote:Oh. I never noticed that.....

Come on! Shake my hand! We can clean up DC together!

Happy spring break guys!

Conservative Idealism In Libertatem wrote:Pev keeps getting rejected.

Hahaha.....

Einsiev wished us a happy spring break! WE MUST CROWN HIM AS OUR KING!

Conservative Idealism In Libertatem wrote:Einsiev wished us a happy spring break! WE MUST CROWN HIM AS OUR KING!

HAPPY SPRING BREAK!

Conservative Idealism In Libertatem wrote:Aye, thes' indiff'r'nt cor-sairs be rem'mbr'n th' lingo'f pir'ts, th't we 'ave.

Ooooh, ya think ya can out-whit ol' Capt'n Macready, eh? Ya think he's too old in 'is boots fer conversations an' the like? Fanciful hogwash if I've ever witnessed it! I'd 'ave yer left arm in a toss-em any day o' th' week!

The Time Alliance wrote:Hahaha.....

Come on, at least answer me.

Is it wrong that I read Pirate Lingo with a Scottish accent?

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.