Reply to Re: blah
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
You state: "when I actually try to convince people I supply evidence when it availble." This can mean either that there is no evidence, or that you are not trying to convince anyone, something I assume from the rest of your post. This becomes unbelievable when you are posting roughly 1/3 of the posts in a disscussion. (Using exclamation marks, angry smileys 
and defending your own points fierely)
When I want to make a statement, I just make the statement. When someone wants me to explain what I just said I do another post in which I explain myself. (That makes a total of two posts)
If I then reply to someone who disagrees to defend myself I am no longer just making a statement, I am trying to confince someone, in which case I should supply evidence. I don't know how you see this, but this is my view, so I agree with Striker on this one. Striker has given you some good advice, take it I'd say.
If you want to know what my views of goverment are, this is mine:
The goverment is there to:
A: provide protection
B: Provide basic services
C: provide equal chances for all
D: provide financial help for the weak
E: create a law that protects people, their freedom and comfort
F: enforce the law
A little bit of explaination:
A: Protection is a task for the goverment, an army could never survive as a private endevour. The police should protect us (as much as is reasonably possible) from crime.
B: The goverment should provide things like roads, sewers and health care. In my opinion even public transport should be free.
C: It's nice to think that if you let everything go its way everyone can do what he wants. Unfortunatly this is not true, so it's the governement's responsibility to make sure that everybody has (about) the same chances. (Like children of poor parents should be able to go to university too) I am not trying to achieve equal outcomes for all (which is communism), but equal chances.
D: It's not always someone's own fault if things go wrong, like if someone gets ill. That's when the goverment should give some help to get things going again.
E: The law should protect people, it's the goverment's task to edit the law when neccessary. Twenty years ago hardly anyone was confronted with cybercrime, nowadays more protection is needed. It should also protect their freedom, good protection means little if that means no personal freedom. I also believe the goverment should protect our comfort (comfort is probably the wrong word, I couldn't find a better word
). I mean if the goverment never acted against microsoft at all, it would be totally impossible to buy a computer without windows installed (it still almost is, but atleast not completely). I wouldn't like to live in freedom when that would mean I have to work 65 hours a week, 7 days a week, 360 days a year. (just to give an example)
F: I think this one explains itself really...
EDIT: Funny, just after I posted this google-ads came up with a link called Honest political debate.
and defending your own points fierely)When I want to make a statement, I just make the statement. When someone wants me to explain what I just said I do another post in which I explain myself. (That makes a total of two posts)
If I then reply to someone who disagrees to defend myself I am no longer just making a statement, I am trying to confince someone, in which case I should supply evidence. I don't know how you see this, but this is my view, so I agree with Striker on this one. Striker has given you some good advice, take it I'd say.
If you want to know what my views of goverment are, this is mine:
The goverment is there to:
A: provide protection
B: Provide basic services
C: provide equal chances for all
D: provide financial help for the weak
E: create a law that protects people, their freedom and comfort
F: enforce the law
A little bit of explaination:
A: Protection is a task for the goverment, an army could never survive as a private endevour. The police should protect us (as much as is reasonably possible) from crime.
B: The goverment should provide things like roads, sewers and health care. In my opinion even public transport should be free.
C: It's nice to think that if you let everything go its way everyone can do what he wants. Unfortunatly this is not true, so it's the governement's responsibility to make sure that everybody has (about) the same chances. (Like children of poor parents should be able to go to university too) I am not trying to achieve equal outcomes for all (which is communism), but equal chances.
D: It's not always someone's own fault if things go wrong, like if someone gets ill. That's when the goverment should give some help to get things going again.
E: The law should protect people, it's the goverment's task to edit the law when neccessary. Twenty years ago hardly anyone was confronted with cybercrime, nowadays more protection is needed. It should also protect their freedom, good protection means little if that means no personal freedom. I also believe the goverment should protect our comfort (comfort is probably the wrong word, I couldn't find a better word
). I mean if the goverment never acted against microsoft at all, it would be totally impossible to buy a computer without windows installed (it still almost is, but atleast not completely). I wouldn't like to live in freedom when that would mean I have to work 65 hours a week, 7 days a week, 360 days a year. (just to give an example)F: I think this one explains itself really...
EDIT: Funny, just after I posted this google-ads came up with a link called Honest political debate.
