>>15
>>17
1: The government is required primarily to preserve justice. It is secondarily needed to fulfil the needs of voters. Tax used to preserve justice is needed absolutely, by definition it cannot be theft since it is needed to prevent crime, however unequal taxation can be considerred corrupt. Tax used for welfare, free education etc.. can be considerred "theft", however it is within the voter's liberty to do so and liberty is a major element of preserving justice since if you force someone into a hopeless situation it will result in violence as history proves irrefutably. There is no choice in the matter.
2: Land ownership isn't theft.
3: The assumption that the free market should be replaced due to the fact that it is no perfect is absurd since nothing is perfect. The free market's main flaws are that it requires justice to prevent corruption and liberty to allow the free flow of information. The free market's minor flaws are that corruption can never be completely eradicated and the free flow of information never reaches the point where all people are omnipotent and never make mistakes.
>>17, I'm not sure what
>>15 was directing this point at, but this point outlines the nature of empiricism in discussions of economics. Not all factors can be taken into account, but this doesn't mean you can ignore them in favour of your ideal whilst blowing them out of proportion for the idea that you oppose. It is illogical.
4: Patents are required to preserve justice. If someone declares some information they generated to be a possession, then by law the theft of that information is a criminal act. If you spent several uears working on a book, then the friend who helped you judge the value of the book, stole the disk it was saved on and published it himself if your friend goes unpunished it will very likely result in violence no matter what the deterant.
5: It is immoral for someone with diabetes not to pay for their own insulin, but it is also immoral to let someone die even though you can prevent it easily. Morality issues are decided by voters when they decide to vote in a government that spends some tax on free health-care for the poor. Parents with the gene that causes diabetes who want their children to have diabetes by passing their genes onto them are guilty of grievous bodily damage with malice against their child.
6: Socialists in Sweden are aware that the only ideas they have that are "acceptable" is heavy regulation over the economy and various state services. As soon as voters realise they don't need a socialist to maintain these services if they want, socialism will diminish.
"Well, 3 months ago the mean growth in the EU was 2.5% while it was 5% in Sweden."
The EU contains many ex-socialist countries that still struggle with corruption, poor education and low development. Do yourself a favour and leave bullshitty unlinked statistics up your ass where you found them.
7: Democracies have listenned to literally 10000s of journalists and academics discussing the economy for decades and come to the conclusion that capitalism is the best policy for the majority of the economy, especially where there are a large number of competing firms involved. In order for new economic systems to gain popularity they must have a rational basis otherwise no-one will take them seriously.
If slaves exist under a system of government, then that government is no democracy.
8: State run education is a failure.
We might not all be millionaires, but we certainly would have an economy that does it's best to generate happiness throughout the entire population.