Guns are designed to protect you against oppression, which includes oppression by foreign and domestic tyrants.
Yeah! Because all those critters that hunters kill every year, they sure are oppressive tyrannical bastards! Those white-tailed deer have been holding me down for years, that's for sure!
There shouldn't be any government protected monopolies, private sectors deals with people's needs, whether they are atheists or Muslims or whatever. Government will lose your package if you are an atheist, and I don't want to get into what they will do to you if you are a Muslim.
Your church distributes plenty of material through USPS, and it doesn't seem to get lost at a higher rate than anything else. You pretend to believe in freedom to do WTF someone wants, so why do you care if atheists are not getting their packages through, when your religious material goes through just fine? A true libertarian would say fuck 'em! and instruct them to find a different carrier or start their own. After all, a lost atheist package doesn't hurt you!
So fuck the poor and middle class, civilization is only for the rich.
Walmart is the largest, most profitable Western retail chain delivering cheapest goods to the largest customer base in the world probably.
Only a fascist would look at Walmart and think "there's a company that is good for the poor and the middle class". Walmart destroys jobs, communities, families, and employees. They drive other stores out of business. They drive down the value of real estate. They force employees to work terrible hours for terrible wages and as little for benefits as possible.
In other words, they are a fascist's dream come true. Of-course, your dream world is utter fascism so it fits well for you.
I'd love to see how your phantasmagorical entrepreneurs would compete on price for delivering potable water to a neighborhood.
A company that sells to the poor becomes extremely rich because that's the market where the most money is and figuring out how to satisfy their demands will make you very very wealthy, this includes water as well.
That is a whole lot of verbage with pretty well zero substance. Do you actually have an example of a for-profit company running pipes underground for water delivery? No, of course not.
As I said before, your dream state - a dream reinforced by your church - involves freedom, opportunity, civilization, democracy, and justice for the wealthy, and fascism for the people.
So fuck the poor and middle class, civilization is only for the rich
You're only starting to scratch the surface of roman_mir's fascist fantasy. He believes that civilization is only for those who can afford it, for sure. He also believes that democracy is abhorrent and representation is only entitled to the rich. Similarly he believes that the legal system - including criminal prosecution and defense - only needs to be available to those with money. This all comes from the church that roman_mir goes to - the church of ron paul.
Yes, in roman_mir's fantasy world, it is civilization, government, and laws for the rich - and fascism for the people.
no, only individuals have rights. Groups of people do not have rights that are different from other groups of people
Although in your world, corporations are people, entitled to the same rights as other people. Hence corporations have the right to use lethal force in self defense, right?
Really, though, your statement of
Groups of people do not have rights that are different from other groups of people
Is not in any way representative of your actual beliefs. You have stated many times that you are fundamentally opposed to representative democracy (as is your dear leader of your religious movement), you want the right to select a government extended only to specific people - in other words that is a right that you do want to extend differently to different groups of people.
Of course, that is just another case of you concentrating power in the hands of the few, at the expense of the many. Another word for extreme concentration of power in the hands of very few is fascism. And you, of course, are a champion of bringing forward fascism for the people.
If it is passed and it meets the criteria of being uniform, then it is a Constitutional tax, I cannot say anything about it.
Your religious leader will give you something to say about it afterwards, and you will go back on your word once his word comes down. Unless, of course, he shows you an easy way for people of high incomes to avoid it altogether - in which case you will claim it was an idea stolen from his notes.
You seem to be quite proud of yourself this week, we see you recently managed to get both the karma of your main account as well as that of one of your sock puppets from shit to positive, allowing you to post nearly as fast as you can type. How many other sock puppets are you working here? Did one of them manage to get mod points to get the ball rolling for you? We can plainly see you have already allowed this to get to your head; you may have posted a couple of legitimate comments to get your karma back up but now you're right back to religious rhetoric.
Of course, to you the religion is the truth, the only truth. You will do everything you can to push your church's agenda, in spite of the fact that it would hurt you just as badly as anyone else. You proudly drink the kool-aid and hope that you will - in spite of all reason - be spared the effects of the agenda. You seek to oppress the rights and opportunities of those who are in the bottom 99% of all wage earners; you have an agenda that supports fascism. You claim to want liberty, but you really want fascism for the people.
You oppose the war only because your religious leader tells you it costs money. Why exactly you care about the US budget, when you don't live in the US, is a mystery. You have no moral objections to the war because you have no morals to begin with. Don't put yourself on a moral pedestal, you don't deserve it. If Iraq was instead invaded by Coca-Cola with an army of conscripted employees who were told to go to Iraq or lose their job, you would have applauded it.
The reality is that majority of the voters are morons
Thank you for an unusual dose of honesty. Here you show that indeed you despise voters and democracy itself.
This of course fits well with your standard M.O. of removing rights from the people. You pretend to be offering parity and compassion to people, when you are indeed striving to suppress the people of lower economic classes as much as you possibly can. You aim to take away their right to vote while simultaneously taking away their rights as citizens, employees, and human beings.
In other words, you came to be trying to bring liberty, while you obviously aim to deliver fascism for the people.
Sure, the saying goes: if you want peace prepare for war.
Sort of like how the motto of your religion should be "if you want liberty, prepare for fascism". Except, of course, some people honestly believe that war can bring peace - while any thinking person could tell that your aims would bring only fascism and never liberty.
Don't try to pretend that all of a sudden you are against that. You have repeatedly argued for lower wages for workers. You have repeatedly argued for stripping workers of all their rights. You have repeatedly argued for removing all dignity from workers. You have repeatedly argued for giving even more power to employers.
You have repeatedly made arguments for a fascist society. You are a voice for a religious movement that aims to produce nothing less than fascism for the people.
The followers of Pope Francis have nowhere near the drive of some followers of other religions. We frequently see the results of the devoted followers of a religion that holds itself supreme above all others, whose followers will tirelessly repeat the religious mantras regardless of being confronted with facts that show parts of their beliefs to be based on lies and nonsense. These followers want nothing less than to see the world burn and to see nonbelievers first in the fire. We even have followers of that religion posting frequently here on slashdot, this religion is lead by an American.
This religion is fascism, the product of concentrating power into the hands of very few while trampling on the rights and opportunities of the masses. The leader of the religion of fascism is none other than slashdot sweetheart Ron Paul. It is through religious devotion that his followers aim to deliver fascism for the people.
Your claim of your statements not being ideology might be true, but only in so much as what you are saying is theology more so than ideology. What you repeat every 3-5 minutes on here - now that your karma is positive - is your religious dogma more so than any kind of legitimate philosophical ideology. You have no qualms about spouting things that are outright lies if they support your dogma. You have no problem contradicting yourself in short windows of time if everything you say is coming from your dogma.
There are cardinals meeting in the Vatican today who are less theologically entrenched than you.
It is not possible to separate roman_mir from his religion. You could ask him a question about Java programming and he would invariably end up telling you how either it is great because of ron paul, or terrible because of "socialist" American government. The real travesty here is that there are enough other paullowers on slashdot that his karma has been restored and he now can reply as fast as he can type.
It is also a tragedy that someone who grew up in Russia has absolutely no idea whatsoever of what socialism actually is.
federal gov't was supposed to prevent individual States from setting rules that would for example require re-licensing of businesses and different professionals from one state to another
In other words, that the federal government must prevent states from doing anything that prevents profit.
Now, today you are instead arguing that they should not:
the problem is created by governments, how is it going to be solved by governments? In fact it will be private sector that will solve this problem
So yesterday you wanted more federal government, today you want less. Which is it? Which argument are you trying to make and why can't you decide that? And how will your church help us with it?
Just stand up for what you really want, don't try to appeal to non-believers. You want massively concentrated power and wealth in the hands of very, very few. You want fascism. You want your church leader to deliver fascism for the people.
The hypocrisy of the parent is staggering, and the fact that it was moderated up is baffling. Apparently the cult of ron paul has acquired a large number of moderator points recently and are pouring them all over this zealot.
The intent was for the federal gov't to increase competition between States, not to create monopolies.
OK, you can state that if you want. Of course you have a twisted sense of what it means to "create monopolies" but we can overlook that part for now.
federal gov't was supposed to prevent individual States from setting rules that would for example require re-licensing of businesses and different professionals from one state to another
So you normally advocate for less federal government intervention, except in this case where you pull a complete 180. Here you are asking for the federal government to step in and prevent the states from making decisions on their own. You ordinarily trust smaller government over larger government, but here you see smaller government as somehow being an impediment to profit so you are asking the federal government to step in, squash the smaller government, and provide you with a favor.
The power that Congress had was to regulate the act of interstate commerce but not to regulate a company itself!
You have that part wrong, as well. Or, at least, you have the interpretation of actual events wrong. Congress is not regulating any companies, the states are. But here you are asking for congress to step in and tell the states how to manage their own situations rather than allowing the states to manage them on their own. Why do you hate states' rights all of a sudden?
Nevermind, we know the answer. You want the federal government to take over all powers from the states, to make businesses more profitable at the expense of the citizenry. You want to accelerate the concentration of wealth and power into the hands of increasingly fewer people while more and more people are merely getting by (at best!). And you want your church leader to be at the helm of it all, with no checks or limits on his power of any kind.
Your system concentrates power, this is called fascism. You are again showing how you will produce fascism for the people.
It is rather appalling that your fascist movement has such a great following here on slashdot that you were able to quickly rebound your karma from posting at -1 to now posting at +1. Will you continue to use your sock puppets to echo your religious beliefs to make it seem like it has even more followers?
If you care, my proposal is to remove power from government
Except for, of course, one person. You want to remove the power from everyone in government except for your personal lord and savior, whom you want to see given unlimited power for unlimited time. You have declared youself in no uncertain terms to be a sworn enemy of democracy. Just because you take power away from over 99% of government, to concentrate it completely unchecked in the hands of one many, does not mean you are taking power away from government.
Employees are special interests.
Minorities are special interests.
Women are special interests.
Children are special interests.
Disabled are special interests.
The sick are special interests.
The old are special interests.
Your religious movement is a special interest, as is its leader. You want government to cave to your special interest while ignoring all others; yet you provide no reason why that would be good for anyone other than yourself.
Any business that wants anything from gov't is a special interest.
That is rank hypocrisy for you to make that statement, as your proposals with pretty well no exception favor what businesses want - the ability to treat people like property with no regulations or consequences whatsoever to prevent them from shitting all over the world to make a dollar.
Government must be very explicitly prohibited from acting for the benefit of any special interest, even from promising to act for the benefit of any special interest.
You are full of shit when you claim that to be a policy you support. You blatantly favor a massive special interest and openly support huge shifts in government policy to favor that interest.
You openly support granting all power to those with the most resources, so that they can continue to acquire more resources and power. You openly support trashing individual rights in the name of profit. Such highly skewed concentration of wealth and power has a name as a political system, and it is not "libertarianism" or "capitalism". The correct name for your system is fascism, and you are again showing us how you aspire to deliver fascism for the people.
The US has a progressive federal income taxation system, from 10 to 35%
You have your numbers backwards. If you were to ever meet someone who makes minimum wage and ask them what they pay in taxes you will find that their taxation rate is far closer to 35% than it is to 10%. The people who pay 10% are at the very top of the socioeconomic ladder in this country.
Why on earth your comment is scoring +2 is beyond me, or any other sentient being.
promising a bunch of stuff to be given out as subsidies and it was popular, because the promise was to make only a minority of people to pay for it (discrimination against a minority based on different levels of income).
That statement would only be true if the US used a progressive taxation system. However, as the US taxation system is the most regressive in the world - and is a part of why the US has the most highly skewed distribution of wealth of any industrialized nation - your claim is 100% bullshit. If anything, the taxation system effectively results in those with the least paying the most for handouts to those who already have the most.
the more lucrative it became for politicians to keep power
Except that you are championing the cause of the first family of fascism, who are politicians that are seeking unlimited power for unlimited time. That is the highest possible accomplishment of keeping power, and how your church aims to produce fascism for the people.
Rand Paul's fillibuster isn't about rights or freedoms, and you know it. Or, at the very least, it is not about a valiant attempt to preserve them for all people as you claim. Any thinking person sees right through your religious propaganda and can tell that Rand Paul is attempting to continue on the fascist goals of his father (and your church leader).
I particularly enjoyed your doublespeak:
Arguing for higher taxes on some bracket of population while arguing for subsidies for yourself is discrimination
Because of course anyone who can use a calculator already knows that the taxes that both Pauls constantly champion for are enormously unfair to the lower economic classes and tremendously beneficial to the higher income brackets - indeed they are, as you said, a subsidy for one bracket.
So as usual, while you are trying to fool people into thinking you are some sort of champion for liberty and freedom, your goals are transparent. You want to see the poor suffer so your heroes can pay lower taxes. You want more power to the people you admire most, with no concern for how it effects others.
In other words you are campaigning to bring fascism for the people.
Don't be mistaken, just as was the case with his fathers, Rand Paul is not honestly doing this in the name of liberty. Rand Paul is doing this because it is an opportunity to extend class inequality just a little bit longer. Remember Rand Paul went to college and medical school on his father's dime. He then rode into the senate on his father's legacy. There is nothing he values more than keeping his (and his father's) money. By keeping this debate open, he is able to further kick down the road any senate discussion of budgetary matters. He is also able to further delay any legislative action on actual health care matters, which makes both his and his father's practices more profitable.
Just like his father, Rand Paul is set to profit well by continuing economic disparity. He wants nothing more than to see the expansion of - or at the very least the stasis of - the deeply regressive taxation system in the US. He is all in favor of trampling on the lower economic classes in order to improve the welfare of his own.
This invariably erodes the rights and opportunities of the lower classes. This is how you bring about fascism for the people.
Anarchist? Hardly. Anarchy is the lack of power concentration in society. Roman_mir's fantasy world does exactly the opposite of that - it concentrates the majority of all power in the hands of very few.
Another term for roman_mir's fantasy world is fascism.
It is likely no coincidence that there is also a front page article today about the top fascist candidate in the US, who has quite a few supporters here on slashdot. While he is undoubtedly a cult leader in his own right, I will have to pop the bubbles of his followers and point out that he would't want to be the primate of catholicism. I say this because while it is (generally) a lifetime appointment, it wields nowhere near the amount of power - and has far too many restrictions - for his tastes.
Hell, he wouldn't even have trouble with the spirit of the requirement for priest chastity, as it is designed to ensure that the church inherits the belongings of the clergy upon their death. However he doesn't need to lead the catholic church when he already has his own army of devoted followers.
Yes. Large pharma companies famously hate the patent system
Big pharma is undoubtedly the largest exception to that, although they could be convinced otherwise. If you told them that tomorrow they could start releasing any drug they want without testing, but in trade they had to agree to abolition of the patent system, they would jump at the opportunity.
I don't think the *only* reason companies are buying up other patents are for protection. I think we all know some cases where they're being bought up for the purpose of going on the offensive.
In business sometimes people go on the offensive to protect themselves. If they can file a lawsuit before their competitor, they can actually reduce their own legal costs in the course of doing so as they don't have to wait for court documents to reach them and pay their attorneys to evaluate them.
In other words, the first move has a distinct advantage in many legal proceedings.
Slashdot Mirror
Guns are designed to protect you against oppression, which includes oppression by foreign and domestic tyrants.
Yeah! Because all those critters that hunters kill every year, they sure are oppressive tyrannical bastards! Those white-tailed deer have been holding me down for years, that's for sure!
There shouldn't be any government protected monopolies, private sectors deals with people's needs, whether they are atheists or Muslims or whatever. Government will lose your package if you are an atheist, and I don't want to get into what they will do to you if you are a Muslim.
Your church distributes plenty of material through USPS, and it doesn't seem to get lost at a higher rate than anything else. You pretend to believe in freedom to do WTF someone wants, so why do you care if atheists are not getting their packages through, when your religious material goes through just fine? A true libertarian would say fuck 'em! and instruct them to find a different carrier or start their own. After all, a lost atheist package doesn't hurt you!
So fuck the poor and middle class, civilization is only for the rich.
Walmart is the largest, most profitable Western retail chain delivering cheapest goods to the largest customer base in the world probably.
Only a fascist would look at Walmart and think "there's a company that is good for the poor and the middle class". Walmart destroys jobs, communities, families, and employees. They drive other stores out of business. They drive down the value of real estate. They force employees to work terrible hours for terrible wages and as little for benefits as possible.
In other words, they are a fascist's dream come true. Of-course, your dream world is utter fascism so it fits well for you.
I'd love to see how your phantasmagorical entrepreneurs would compete on price for delivering potable water to a neighborhood.
A company that sells to the poor becomes extremely rich because that's the market where the most money is and figuring out how to satisfy their demands will make you very very wealthy, this includes water as well.
That is a whole lot of verbage with pretty well zero substance. Do you actually have an example of a for-profit company running pipes underground for water delivery? No, of course not.
As I said before, your dream state - a dream reinforced by your church - involves freedom, opportunity, civilization, democracy, and justice for the wealthy, and fascism for the people.
So fuck the poor and middle class, civilization is only for the rich
You're only starting to scratch the surface of roman_mir's fascist fantasy. He believes that civilization is only for those who can afford it, for sure. He also believes that democracy is abhorrent and representation is only entitled to the rich. Similarly he believes that the legal system - including criminal prosecution and defense - only needs to be available to those with money. This all comes from the church that roman_mir goes to - the church of ron paul.
Yes, in roman_mir's fantasy world, it is civilization, government, and laws for the rich - and fascism for the people.
no, only individuals have rights. Groups of people do not have rights that are different from other groups of people
Although in your world, corporations are people, entitled to the same rights as other people. Hence corporations have the right to use lethal force in self defense, right?
Really, though, your statement of
Groups of people do not have rights that are different from other groups of people
Is not in any way representative of your actual beliefs. You have stated many times that you are fundamentally opposed to representative democracy (as is your dear leader of your religious movement), you want the right to select a government extended only to specific people - in other words that is a right that you do want to extend differently to different groups of people.
Of course, that is just another case of you concentrating power in the hands of the few, at the expense of the many. Another word for extreme concentration of power in the hands of very few is fascism. And you, of course, are a champion of bringing forward fascism for the people.
If it is passed and it meets the criteria of being uniform, then it is a Constitutional tax, I cannot say anything about it.
Your religious leader will give you something to say about it afterwards, and you will go back on your word once his word comes down. Unless, of course, he shows you an easy way for people of high incomes to avoid it altogether - in which case you will claim it was an idea stolen from his notes.
You seem to be quite proud of yourself this week, we see you recently managed to get both the karma of your main account as well as that of one of your sock puppets from shit to positive, allowing you to post nearly as fast as you can type. How many other sock puppets are you working here? Did one of them manage to get mod points to get the ball rolling for you? We can plainly see you have already allowed this to get to your head; you may have posted a couple of legitimate comments to get your karma back up but now you're right back to religious rhetoric.
Of course, to you the religion is the truth, the only truth. You will do everything you can to push your church's agenda, in spite of the fact that it would hurt you just as badly as anyone else. You proudly drink the kool-aid and hope that you will - in spite of all reason - be spared the effects of the agenda. You seek to oppress the rights and opportunities of those who are in the bottom 99% of all wage earners; you have an agenda that supports fascism. You claim to want liberty, but you really want fascism for the people.
You oppose the war only because your religious leader tells you it costs money. Why exactly you care about the US budget, when you don't live in the US, is a mystery. You have no moral objections to the war because you have no morals to begin with. Don't put yourself on a moral pedestal, you don't deserve it. If Iraq was instead invaded by Coca-Cola with an army of conscripted employees who were told to go to Iraq or lose their job, you would have applauded it.
The reality is that majority of the voters are morons
Thank you for an unusual dose of honesty. Here you show that indeed you despise voters and democracy itself.
This of course fits well with your standard M.O. of removing rights from the people. You pretend to be offering parity and compassion to people, when you are indeed striving to suppress the people of lower economic classes as much as you possibly can. You aim to take away their right to vote while simultaneously taking away their rights as citizens, employees, and human beings.
In other words, you came to be trying to bring liberty, while you obviously aim to deliver fascism for the people.
Sure, the saying goes: if you want peace prepare for war.
Sort of like how the motto of your religion should be "if you want liberty, prepare for fascism". Except, of course, some people honestly believe that war can bring peace - while any thinking person could tell that your aims would bring only fascism and never liberty.
people's real incomes are getting smaller
Don't try to pretend that all of a sudden you are against that. You have repeatedly argued for lower wages for workers. You have repeatedly argued for stripping workers of all their rights. You have repeatedly argued for removing all dignity from workers. You have repeatedly argued for giving even more power to employers.
You have repeatedly made arguments for a fascist society. You are a voice for a religious movement that aims to produce nothing less than fascism for the people.
The followers of Pope Francis have nowhere near the drive of some followers of other religions. We frequently see the results of the devoted followers of a religion that holds itself supreme above all others, whose followers will tirelessly repeat the religious mantras regardless of being confronted with facts that show parts of their beliefs to be based on lies and nonsense. These followers want nothing less than to see the world burn and to see nonbelievers first in the fire. We even have followers of that religion posting frequently here on slashdot, this religion is lead by an American.
This religion is fascism, the product of concentrating power into the hands of very few while trampling on the rights and opportunities of the masses. The leader of the religion of fascism is none other than slashdot sweetheart Ron Paul. It is through religious devotion that his followers aim to deliver fascism for the people.
The pope is a testament to humility in comparison to your church leader.
I profess principles, and you have ideology:
Your claim of your statements not being ideology might be true, but only in so much as what you are saying is theology more so than ideology. What you repeat every 3-5 minutes on here - now that your karma is positive - is your religious dogma more so than any kind of legitimate philosophical ideology. You have no qualms about spouting things that are outright lies if they support your dogma. You have no problem contradicting yourself in short windows of time if everything you say is coming from your dogma.
There are cardinals meeting in the Vatican today who are less theologically entrenched than you.
It is not possible to separate roman_mir from his religion. You could ask him a question about Java programming and he would invariably end up telling you how either it is great because of ron paul, or terrible because of "socialist" American government. The real travesty here is that there are enough other paullowers on slashdot that his karma has been restored and he now can reply as fast as he can type.
It is also a tragedy that someone who grew up in Russia has absolutely no idea whatsoever of what socialism actually is.
Yesterday you wrote that the federal government must take control:
federal gov't was supposed to prevent individual States from setting rules that would for example require re-licensing of businesses and different professionals from one state to another
In other words, that the federal government must prevent states from doing anything that prevents profit.
Now, today you are instead arguing that they should not:
the problem is created by governments, how is it going to be solved by governments? In fact it will be private sector that will solve this problem
So yesterday you wanted more federal government, today you want less. Which is it? Which argument are you trying to make and why can't you decide that? And how will your church help us with it?
Just stand up for what you really want, don't try to appeal to non-believers. You want massively concentrated power and wealth in the hands of very, very few. You want fascism. You want your church leader to deliver fascism for the people.
The intent was for the federal gov't to increase competition between States, not to create monopolies.
OK, you can state that if you want. Of course you have a twisted sense of what it means to "create monopolies" but we can overlook that part for now.
federal gov't was supposed to prevent individual States from setting rules that would for example require re-licensing of businesses and different professionals from one state to another
So you normally advocate for less federal government intervention, except in this case where you pull a complete 180. Here you are asking for the federal government to step in and prevent the states from making decisions on their own. You ordinarily trust smaller government over larger government, but here you see smaller government as somehow being an impediment to profit so you are asking the federal government to step in, squash the smaller government, and provide you with a favor.
The power that Congress had was to regulate the act of interstate commerce but not to regulate a company itself!
You have that part wrong, as well. Or, at least, you have the interpretation of actual events wrong. Congress is not regulating any companies, the states are. But here you are asking for congress to step in and tell the states how to manage their own situations rather than allowing the states to manage them on their own. Why do you hate states' rights all of a sudden?
Nevermind, we know the answer. You want the federal government to take over all powers from the states, to make businesses more profitable at the expense of the citizenry. You want to accelerate the concentration of wealth and power into the hands of increasingly fewer people while more and more people are merely getting by (at best!). And you want your church leader to be at the helm of it all, with no checks or limits on his power of any kind.
Your system concentrates power, this is called fascism. You are again showing how you will produce fascism for the people.
If you care, my proposal is to remove power from government
Except for, of course, one person. You want to remove the power from everyone in government except for your personal lord and savior, whom you want to see given unlimited power for unlimited time. You have declared youself in no uncertain terms to be a sworn enemy of democracy. Just because you take power away from over 99% of government, to concentrate it completely unchecked in the hands of one many, does not mean you are taking power away from government.
Employees are special interests.
Minorities are special interests.
Women are special interests.
Children are special interests.
Disabled are special interests.
The sick are special interests.
The old are special interests.
Your religious movement is a special interest, as is its leader. You want government to cave to your special interest while ignoring all others; yet you provide no reason why that would be good for anyone other than yourself.
Any business that wants anything from gov't is a special interest.
That is rank hypocrisy for you to make that statement, as your proposals with pretty well no exception favor what businesses want - the ability to treat people like property with no regulations or consequences whatsoever to prevent them from shitting all over the world to make a dollar.
Government must be very explicitly prohibited from acting for the benefit of any special interest, even from promising to act for the benefit of any special interest.
You are full of shit when you claim that to be a policy you support. You blatantly favor a massive special interest and openly support huge shifts in government policy to favor that interest.
You openly support granting all power to those with the most resources, so that they can continue to acquire more resources and power. You openly support trashing individual rights in the name of profit. Such highly skewed concentration of wealth and power has a name as a political system, and it is not "libertarianism" or "capitalism". The correct name for your system is fascism, and you are again showing us how you aspire to deliver fascism for the people.
The US has a progressive federal income taxation system, from 10 to 35%
You have your numbers backwards. If you were to ever meet someone who makes minimum wage and ask them what they pay in taxes you will find that their taxation rate is far closer to 35% than it is to 10%. The people who pay 10% are at the very top of the socioeconomic ladder in this country.
promising a bunch of stuff to be given out as subsidies and it was popular, because the promise was to make only a minority of people to pay for it (discrimination against a minority based on different levels of income).
That statement would only be true if the US used a progressive taxation system. However, as the US taxation system is the most regressive in the world - and is a part of why the US has the most highly skewed distribution of wealth of any industrialized nation - your claim is 100% bullshit. If anything, the taxation system effectively results in those with the least paying the most for handouts to those who already have the most.
the more lucrative it became for politicians to keep power
Except that you are championing the cause of the first family of fascism, who are politicians that are seeking unlimited power for unlimited time. That is the highest possible accomplishment of keeping power, and how your church aims to produce fascism for the people.
I particularly enjoyed your doublespeak:
Arguing for higher taxes on some bracket of population while arguing for subsidies for yourself is discrimination
Because of course anyone who can use a calculator already knows that the taxes that both Pauls constantly champion for are enormously unfair to the lower economic classes and tremendously beneficial to the higher income brackets - indeed they are, as you said, a subsidy for one bracket.
So as usual, while you are trying to fool people into thinking you are some sort of champion for liberty and freedom, your goals are transparent. You want to see the poor suffer so your heroes can pay lower taxes. You want more power to the people you admire most, with no concern for how it effects others.
In other words you are campaigning to bring fascism for the people.
Don't be mistaken, just as was the case with his fathers, Rand Paul is not honestly doing this in the name of liberty. Rand Paul is doing this because it is an opportunity to extend class inequality just a little bit longer. Remember Rand Paul went to college and medical school on his father's dime. He then rode into the senate on his father's legacy. There is nothing he values more than keeping his (and his father's) money. By keeping this debate open, he is able to further kick down the road any senate discussion of budgetary matters. He is also able to further delay any legislative action on actual health care matters, which makes both his and his father's practices more profitable.
Just like his father, Rand Paul is set to profit well by continuing economic disparity. He wants nothing more than to see the expansion of - or at the very least the stasis of - the deeply regressive taxation system in the US. He is all in favor of trampling on the lower economic classes in order to improve the welfare of his own.
This invariably erodes the rights and opportunities of the lower classes. This is how you bring about fascism for the people.
Libertarian is just a fancy word for anarchist.
Anarchist? Hardly. Anarchy is the lack of power concentration in society. Roman_mir's fantasy world does exactly the opposite of that - it concentrates the majority of all power in the hands of very few.
Another term for roman_mir's fantasy world is fascism.
It is likely no coincidence that there is also a front page article today about the top fascist candidate in the US, who has quite a few supporters here on slashdot. While he is undoubtedly a cult leader in his own right, I will have to pop the bubbles of his followers and point out that he would't want to be the primate of catholicism. I say this because while it is (generally) a lifetime appointment, it wields nowhere near the amount of power - and has far too many restrictions - for his tastes.
Hell, he wouldn't even have trouble with the spirit of the requirement for priest chastity, as it is designed to ensure that the church inherits the belongings of the clergy upon their death. However he doesn't need to lead the catholic church when he already has his own army of devoted followers.
Yes. Large pharma companies famously hate the patent system
Big pharma is undoubtedly the largest exception to that, although they could be convinced otherwise. If you told them that tomorrow they could start releasing any drug they want without testing, but in trade they had to agree to abolition of the patent system, they would jump at the opportunity.
I don't think the *only* reason companies are buying up other patents are for protection. I think we all know some cases where they're being bought up for the purpose of going on the offensive.
In business sometimes people go on the offensive to protect themselves. If they can file a lawsuit before their competitor, they can actually reduce their own legal costs in the course of doing so as they don't have to wait for court documents to reach them and pay their attorneys to evaluate them.
In other words, the first move has a distinct advantage in many legal proceedings.