Gavitor

LOL people here still feed the trolls I see.

Fact is your failure to plan ahead does not make it ok to steal from me. It's Immoral to steal from me regardless of circumstance. Morality does not stop people from taking a particular action. By the way, if you have to make up a particular scenario to try and dispute something you're already doing it wrong.

Thank you for reaffirming what he already said... Also there's no such thing as karma. I just treat people how they treat me. It lets them set the standard for how they will be treated.

How can something that doesn't exist be competent?

Women generally date older men. When i was in my early 20s it wasn't uncommon for 18-21 year olds to be looking for guys 25-35.

Storing information is putting it in the world, be it writing it down or typing it on a computer. Information can be erased yes. it can also be copied. So if your computer catches fire and your information is lost I can simply give it back to you since I was able to copy it. Oh look, being able to copy it was actually a benefit to you. except that I cannot use it unless you gave it to me. What's wrong with that? How is it rightly considered theft? Duplicating something means the original is still in place. Stealing means removing the original thing without the owners consent. Since copying something does not remove the original thing and doesn't deprive the owner their property copying is not stealing.

2.to bring into existence by intellectual or creative ability Did you? Having an idea in and of itself does not bring something into existence... When you attain information you can not be deprived of said information. So is it relevant or useful to call information property? Your work was not taken. You still have whatever it is you produced and you still have the ability to trade/sell it. I'll ask again If something can be duplicated endlessly does it matter if it's property or not? Also why?

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/produce To produce something is to take an idea and actually do something with it. IE create something outside of your mind like the plane you mentioned. There is only 2 ways to get an idea. 1. is to come up with it yourself 2. is to be given that idea by someone else. You can not "take" an idea from someone else without them willingly giving it to you because you cannot read minds (if you can by all means explain how) It's impossible to steal an idea. Also if I buy your idea you still have it. Ideas don't just vanish from your mind once transferred to someone else. they duplicate each time. If something can be duplicated endlessly does it matter if it's property or not? Also why?

So you're saying they own what they create outside of their mind correct? So how are they losing ownership of the thing they created if I use my own energy and resources to create the same thing for myself?

what if 2 people come up with the same idea at the same time? Who owns the idea?

That's why I'm investing my fiat into things that can't be duplicated as easily or at all.

if food, water, fuel, and raw materials in general could be duplicated would you forbid others from doing so when it doesn't remove those things from you? Would a star trek style replicator be outlawed?

Rights dont exist as tangible things in the world. They are something we made up to facilitate human interaction. you can defend the idea of property rights even if they dont actually exist.

What does any of this bullshit have to do with a lack of rulers and voluntary associations/interactions? Lets start simple. Do you own yourself?

What about it?

Yes, and what you just asked was addressed by stef on the video.

I noticed this. did you even understand what he said?

Empirical based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic. Data facts and statistics collected together for reference or analysis.

hes an agnostic about everything which is a contradictory position to have... Same with being skeptical about everything, which means you are skeptical about being skeptical... honestly I dont think he really believes what he says. He was basically arguing there are no absolutes and laughed when Stef brought up that saying and how its contradictory.

Hmm... So its wrong to call someone the "wrong gender" but its a ok to purposefully infect someone with HIV and not disclose that you have HIV when giving blood.... Yea California sure has their priorities right.

It's really not hard to figure out though. Why do they think the earth is over populated? Because 8 billion is a big number? How do they know how many people can live on the planet? These people just assert its over populated and there is a simple solution to their perceived problem. Why do you need to convince them that its not true when they have failed to convince you (and anyone with two brain cells to rub together) that it is?

How did you come to this conclusion?

So can they be reasoned with or are you just assuming such because in one sentence you say they can and in another you say maybe they can. As far as I'm concerned they are the same until they stop being in that group. If they can be reasoned with then they will give up that irrational position and so wont be in that group.