Stop whining and be thankful that you don't live like most of the people in this shithole of a world do.

I am thankful. But I ask you again:
Is the fact that other people don't live so well any reason to deny the people that DO have rights of their rights?
That's like saying that since a lot of people don't have internet, you're a subhuman and selfish person for using your internet right now. I don't see you selling your computer and giving the money to charity.

People who think they owe nothing to their fellow human beings are in turn owed nothing by them.

You didn't answer the question at all.

Oh, don't bother. I don't know if he's an idiot or a troll, but there is no having a sensible conversation with him. It's like trying to cut down a tree with a herring.

Didn't we already establish that according to Rousseau, the first concern of a government (any government) should be protection of individual property, while equity and equality of their subjects a second? Not to mention that Rousseau does not believe all people to be equal, which does make him a bad example for an "appeal to authority" case.

Meh, I try to give everybody a fair shot before I just give up and consider them a troll.
Granted, I always give them a bigger benefit of the doubt than I should, but I at least try to solve things rationally first.

You'll notice he hasn't denied being 13 years old. XD

Such a generous young man you are. lol
There is nothing to solve between you and I.
Such a sharp, biting wit you have.

So basically you're giving up on the argument, as you refuse to answer my question and have no reasonable counters for what I've said.
A'ight.

Guess there's nothing more to discuss here.

That wasn't a denial. XD

I believe you are mistaken. From Political Economy...

In establishing the general will as the first principle of public economy, and the fundamental rule of government, I have not thought it necessary to inquire seriously whether the Magistrates belong to the people, or the people to the Magistrates; or whether in public affairs the good of the State should be taken into account, or only that of its rulers. That question indeed has long been decided one way in theory, and another in practice; and in general it would be ridiculous to expect that those who are in fact masters will prefer any other interest to their own. It would not be improper, therefore, further to distinguish public economy as popular or tyrannical. The former is that of every State, in which there reigns between the people and the rulers unity of interest and will: the latter will necessarily exist wherever the government and the people have different interests, and, consequently, opposing wills. The rules of the latter are written at length in the archives of history, and in the satires of Machiavelli. The rules of the former are found only in the writings of those philosophers who venture to proclaim the rights of humanity.

So, it is the general will that is the chief concern of gov't, not property.

rich, you didn't correctly site your source.

That amounts to plagiarism, which is illegal and subject to persecution for copyright infringement.

Why limit yourself? I say anyone who worries about scammers when most people in this world have no human rights is a subhuman lout. Anyone who even dares complain about Steam, when most humans have no human rights doesn't deserve to live. Anyone who thinks DRM-free is important, while most people have no human rights is a worthless prick.

Hey, by this definition you yourself are a little piece of despicable scum. So stop complaining about DRM you subhuman filth.

For the most part I agree with you. lol