Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

Your reading comprehension I'll just point out two problems so I can save myself considerable time walking you through what you should have learned in maybe high school grammar classes, because at this point were not even talking about the issues, were just struggling with your illiteracy. Im not your grammar teacher, go back to school.

So in other words, since I have debunked all of your ridiculous, and at times, extreme and illogical notions, the issue is suddenly my reading comprehension. Is that also the reason why you dishonestly cherry pick my posts and deceptively quote me out of context? If I go back to school and improve my 'literacy', would that make you a more honest and thoughtful poster?

Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

Quote from: rugrats on November 02, 2014, 10:33:01 AM

Quote

then you've painted a picture that it's either prostitution or death and the last thing they might be able to turn to is charity.

Quote

You created that scenario, then you mischievously assign it to me.

Really, I mischievously assigned it to you? Did I mischievously sneak in that then and those 3 other points that led up to that?

What do you think I meant with the word then? Well lets look at the whole context shall we?

You wrote the bolded bit and the three other points, genius. Not me. The only thing I am not sure of is whether you are lying, or just simply forgot (unlikely, since it's been just a day).

Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

Quote from: rugrats on November 02, 2014, 10:33:01 AM

4.) Is there any chance of charity?

If on the off chance there was literally no better option than sex trafficking, then you've painted a picture that it's either prostitution or death and the last thing they might be able to turn to is charity.
If there is no chance for charity, then what do you want me to say? There's nothing that can be done for these people, and they're certainly not better off by being strong-armed out of jobs that are terrible and immoral, but are at least keeping them alive.

Moron, you are quoting yourself. I didnt write that hence why I said You created that scenario, then you mischievously assign it to me.

Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

I was walking through scenarios that would give us a different understanding of the situation, depending on what the situation is, because Should a 12-year old fuck a 40-year for money? depends on a lot of factors, so I said If on the off chance there was literally no better option than sex trafficking, then youve painted a picture that its either prostitution or death and the last thing they might be able to turn to is charity.

One more time moron, you are quoting yourself (again). I didnt write that hence why I said You created that scenario, then you mischievously assign it to me.

Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

So you taking that position depends on whether this 12 year old was in the off chance situation of having literally no other options other than sex trafficking or death (through starvation).
I didnt paint you in it, force you in it, or do anything mischievous by any normal standards.

Moron, you wrote the posts; the words are yours. I didnt write them. After writing the post, you then claimed I wrote them one day later, and went on to argue against yourself.

Here they are:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=827010.msg9403771#msg9403771
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=827010.msg9406005#msg9406005

Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

The other problem you have is with both mainstream economics and Austrian Economics. You keep trying to say that because I cant prove something empirically, I have lost all credibility.

Not something specifically, voluntary charitable contributions in a tax free society and how the current almost non-existent private welfare is superior.

Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

Quote from: rugrats on November 02, 2014, 10:33:01 AM

You cant predict how society will react towards the poor in a tax free environment.

You would get laughed out of any serious economics class if you said something like this, because you could say this to any mainstream or Austrian economics professor and it would be true. That doesnt discredit our entire understanding of economics, any more than it discredits my position on the welfare system.

No, I wouldnt. No mainstream or Austrian economics professor would dare make such a ludicrous claim. Besides, didnt you yourself say

Quote

Austrian Economics cannot predict with utmost certainty outcomes in a marketplace because marketplaces are inherently chaotic and unpredictable.

Quote

the well-established fact that economics is not testable

Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

Now, it would be a fair criticism that I hadnt made a connection all the way from praxeology to the welfare system, but I certainly cant do that in a forum post, and the way Austrian Economists understand economics gives them a different way of addressing economic problems that avoids the empirical issue, but again, the fact that economics is empirically untestable or predictable is pretty much a universally accepted fact of economists.

First, duh. Second, arent you contradicting your owns words one paragraph above?
Third, we are not talking about economics. We are talking about your a radical societal sociopolitical and psychological change involving the welfare system in a tax free environment.

Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

The fact that you dont see this connection either again reflects your reading comprehension issues, or a deeply flawed understanding of economics (Probably a combination of both). Dont debate this with me, go debate this with the entire Economics profession.

Big talk from someone who doesnt even understand the term diminishing marginal utility. Once again, we are not having an economic discussion here.

Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

Quote from: rugrats on November 02, 2014, 10:33:01 AM

The original question @turvarya asked you was "Should a 12-year old fuck a 40-year for money?"
It's a simple yes or no question.

No, it really isnt. I walked through 4 different steps that would lead to different answers depending on what the situation is.
It is probably immoral because I dont think 12 years old is old enough to consent, but the whole consent issue for what age group is a gray area that I havent seen a really good answer to from anyone. It is certainly immoral in my society.
So doing this whole yes or no thing for this very complex issue just reflects a very puerile and not well considered moral philosophy.

This is not a matter of consent. This is not a complex issue. A 12-year-old girl is not mentally, emotionally and physically prepared to fuck a 40-year old. Even a 12-year-old is starving, you should feed her instead of asking her to choose between fucking a 40-year-old man or starving to death. I am not a violent man by any stretch of the imagination, but I would literally risk my life to prevent a psychopath or a pedophile from taking sexual advantage of a 12-year-old girl. I am sure most rational, sane people would react the same way.

Quote from: DumbFruit on November 02, 2014, 02:52:33 PM

So. I wish you the best in luck in all your endeavors, but I cant continue with this because youve demonstrated a lack of reading comprehension, a lack of basic knowledge of economics, and very poorly considered moral philosophy. You dont need to be doing debates, you need to be taking some basic level English, Economics, and Philosophy courses. Cheers.

Dumbfruit, the reason why I easily poked holes in your juvenile grasps of economics is because one of my degrees is in Economics. I originally held myself back on several occasions so I dont embarrass you. But when you started to cherry pick my posts and misquote me after failing to offer any substantiation for your radical, extreme and cruel notions, I had no choice but to call you out.

Moreover, if I am so dumb, what does it say of your own mental capacity, considering you failed to substantiate any of your arguments against me?

And for heavens sake, if youre going to quote from a book, make sure you at least read it first instead of just copy pasting. See how foolish you ended up looking with Leesons book?

Finally, one word of advice for you. Dont let anyone on this forum know your real identity. Because if your earlier posts about sex with minors ever gets out, you can pretty much kiss goodbye to any chance of a respectable professional career. Not only that, your extended family, neighbors and community members might also take preventive actions against you.