Extremism in the Defense of Liberty
In a recent post, supporters were asked to submit the reasons why they are MAD, and to give us their solutions to the problems we face today. Give us your take on the situation, as we will continue to feature your ideas:
Where does one begin? I say with natural rights! I have a right to life, liberty and property! These are individual rights that we are born with (maybe even the unborn), they are non-negotiable, self-evident, and cannot be trampled on with the “justification” that the end justifies the means. They are negative rights, they cannot be provided, they exist as long as man exists. Collectivists believe our income is society’s income, and that everyone has an equal right to his share of income…they have the right to enslave us. Ergo, our right to private property is now a “collective right,” the State decides how we shall choose to use our property, what and how much we can speak, and what we can and cannot do: we are subjects of the State.
Thus, our income is taxed, i.e. stolen, from us, corporations are subsidized with our stolen money, failure is rewarded via stolen money…our rights are manipulated…the Constitution is no longer applicable…a slipper slope to unlimited government, indeed.
I am MAD because I LOVE LIBERTY! Liberty is essential for man’s survival, essential for us to choose our means of living, essential to find happiness, and essential to love our fellow man. The Constitution is Liberty in action! And the Constitution has been manipulated, tortured, reinterpreted, and forgotten about…therefore, Liberty itself has been manipulated and reconfigured, so today many will say that we need greater control for greater liberty and to practice our liberty we need a greater controller! What!? I need not say more.
Liberty is sacred:
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty,or give me death!” Patrick Henry
I say hide your money before it is gone, organize others who love liberty before we cannot, converse with others on liberty before we cannot, buy lots of guns before we cannot, learn about liberty before we cannot, and protest before we cannot.
Perhaps what I wrote was extreme, but, remember extreme defense of liberty will never result in any murder, any stolen property, or any coercion of any kind on our fellow humankind, and if it does we are not defending liberty; think of what the extreme of other ideologies preach and have in action done to humankind? Which choice is moral?
In Defense of Liberty,
Rejtan
AMERICAN COLONIST said:
I have to laugh…this sis a pure rEPUBLICAN WEBSITE…HWO DO i KNOW…BECAUSE i KEEP POSTING HERE…OBVIOUS;Y WITH ADIFFERING OPINION THAN THE THE WEBSITE SUPPORTS…AND i KEEP HAVING MY POSTS REMOVED…AMERICANS ARE TIRED OF BEING CENSORED…THAT’S WHY YOU HAVE MORE TAXATION…WITH LESS REPRESENTATION…YOU HAVE LOST YOUR VOICES BECAUSE OF YOUR WILLINGNESS TO REMOVE THOSE VOICES WHO DISAGREE WITH YOU…YOU HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO TO GET BACK INTO WASHINGTON…AMERICANS ARE TIRED OF YOUR CRIMES AND YOUR ABUSE TO THE CONSTITUTION…SEND YOUR TEA BAGS…YOU HAVE NO IDEAS OR VOICE IN WASHINGTON…JUST THEATER…
{The only posts that have been removed were done so because of the inappropriate and/or vulgar nature of the comments. Respectful and opposing views are welcome and exactly what is needed in this country right now; real respectful debate is encouraged. Please refer to our “TERMS” of use at the bottom of the website. Also note that this website is not affiliated with any political party. Please refer to our disclaimer at the bottom of the website.} -admin
March 1st, 2009 at 4:08 am
Lee said:
I would be inclined to believe that your posts are removed because they are barely intelligible. However, I hope this particular post will stay. Why? Because I am not a republican. Let it be known, that liberty does in fact span across “party lines”. Some Americans are having a “reap what you sow” mentality about this current situation. Perhaps they are right, you do reap what you sow. The people are the only ones to blame, we the people did allow this to happen. However, its time to stand up and take it back! It is a shame to make a mistake, but it is a crime to fail to correct it! If you disagree with the stance of these American views, stay home and have a cup of imported coffee and a Cuban cigar. I will have tea!
The great thing about this country is that you have the right to disagree. However, you assume you also have a right to private property (like a website). You are not being censored, you are being retroactive… and horribly difficult to read. Sure I have a conservative stance… but conservatives, REAL CONSERVATIVES, did not get us in this. Politicians, politics, and political parties did!
-L
March 1st, 2009 at 6:35 am
Barb_NC said:
We have to get back to the ORIGINAL design of the founders for the Federal Government. We MUST get rid of ALL these programs we are paying for with our tax dollars.
We should be funding the US Military, salaries of gov employees, foreign policy efforts(NOT including UN). I do not have a problem with Social Security but it should be mandated that the government MUST use that money for that program ONLY, nothing else.
Now, THROW OUT ALL THE OTHER GARBAGE AND WE ARE ON THE RIGHT TRACK! From this point on, I REFUSE to allow MY tax dollars fund ANYTHING ELSE. We have NO business funding ANY program that SHOULD be run strictly by DONATIONS generated by hard work and advertising. If you can’t get donations, your program is not worth the effort. If it’s a viable venture, the capitalist will help you and fund it themselves. I do not believe in abortion and I REFUSE to fund abortions with MY taxes!
Let the STATES take care of their own budgets and if they screw up, the people will either leave the state or get rid of the politician, whichever comes first.
So basically I’m saying, we need to throw out pretty much all of the wasteful spending programs and start fresh! Throw out the lobbyists and the pork for crying out loud!
March 1st, 2009 at 6:48 am
Joe said:
Lee, excellent post my friend !
jOE
March 1st, 2009 at 7:28 am
Melissa said:
I agree that we need to stop wasteful spending but the US Military is not one of them. IF it were not for the US Military you would not have the Freedoms that you now have…..
I did not vote for the man in the Office of the President nor do I support him…
March 1st, 2009 at 7:54 am
Sharon said:
To the “American colonist”: you do have a right to post your opposing views on this site, however if you are looking for someone to agree with your views, you have all the major networks on your side. I suggest you look there for a nod and a wink. This movement is a voice for those of us who take responsibility for our actions and our lives. We know that we are all in part responsible for where we are today because we have been silent for too long. We are NOT the ones who feel like the government owes us anything. WE carry on our shoulders the burden of those who feel entitled in our country and don’t carry their own load. WE are tired and need to be heard. WE have a right to be heard, just as you do. So if you don’t like to hear your opposition, please move along and show your disrespect elsewhere. For the record, I am a fan of the theatre.
March 1st, 2009 at 10:37 am
Kathy Scarnici said:
A Grass Roots Movement is what the country needs. Keep the information coming. More protests are needed everywhere. Let’s get this going.
March 1st, 2009 at 11:25 am
Lottie said:
Amer. Colonist……you sound to me as if you’ve not a clue what America is about….it’s not about Republican vs. Democrat. But it sure the heck is about freedom, and what this congress and the one before has done to us is take and take and take til folk should be plain angry. The whole crew needs to be thrown out. Period! And we’re mad enough to do it. Got it?!!!
March 1st, 2009 at 1:21 pm
MarkLeavenworth said:
I object to putting someone’s name on this thing, or at least I hope a whole bunch of other citizens start their ‘Bob Smith’s’ and ‘Suzy Q’s’ Tea Parties all over the web and country. This is obvoiusly the uprising of the American Spirit. Some of the things that tick me off:
1)Foreigners lobbying our congressmen. If they want to get a message through, they should God Damn well have to make friends with an American Citizen for Christ’s sake!!!Let’s kick foreigners out of Washington.
2)Foreign subsidiaries publishing all of our academic textbooks. Are the British going to edit and re-write our national history forever? Let’s throw all the foreign subsidiary textbooks out the f-n window!!! And while we’re at it, do we really need a Brit on every key seat at almost every University campus in the United States? And do they even have to register as foreign agents, I mean if there isn’t a retired British officer somewhere in your neighborhood, then you probably live in the slums.
3)Foreign companies writing almost all tests for our licensing exams. Do you know that Foreign companies decide how to pass students for almost all of our professional licensing exams? They have curves that determine who survives and who dies based on their (foreign) ‘desirable’ attributes!
4)Foreign companies and foreign subsidiaries owning our national media outlets. What a terrible waste of american minds, to have them debased from the earliest ages onward by foreign interests.
4)Foreign exchange of our currency. This exchange of our currency overseas entices our politicians to act for foreigners, and puts our national interests in jeapordy. We should make all foreign exchanges of our curency unlawful and allow barter transactions and barter for foreign currencies for travelers to be a diplomatic function.
5)Foreigners on our strategic military bases. If the British weren’t crawling all over our strategic military bases, do you think the trouble in Mexico would have missed our Radar?
6)Foreigners deciding our banking and lending policies. How many of our financial instruments pass through London. Is it a coincidence that my wife and I were denied our first home because we refused to sign a paper claiming that we planned on getting divorced? How many foreign interests are out to destroy the American family? Yet we let them walk right into our institutions because they have nice sounding accents? Go tell your nice sounding academic friends that America rules, and watch them turn up their noses and change the subject. We have anger and honor for a reason, because we KNOW the difference between right and wrong. Too much foreign influence on our foreign and domestic policies is WRONG.
March 1st, 2009 at 1:55 pm
MarkLeavenworth said:
Oh, and another terrible tactic used by the British in particular, they gobble up all original intellectual and artistic American achievments that they can get their grubby hands on through academia, media company subsidiaries, and publishing houses acquisitions. These spoils they divide up, a small portion to Ivy leagues, the lion’s share to Oxford, Cambridge and private european libraries. In return, they hunt for all of our little companies with their government subsidised parent companies. Every book that is pumped out of those presses must pass the academic test of being a licensed (PhD) repetition of the same academic bull. Decades later, Oxford and Cambridge show up with a new line of ideas, miraculously resurrecting the British ‘leadership’ in academia, government, and culture, with their own stategic twist. For one example, they bought up all the best episodes of the ‘Nature’ series 20 years ago (they left a dozen or so of the worst ones), only to regurgitate ‘planet earth’ which depicts an unending line of preditory situations for debasing the minds of their ‘peasant warrior class’ (i.e. US).
March 1st, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Brian Carter said:
Responsibility? How dare someone who has never once had a job, never run a small business, never had to make payroll or (legally) employ someone, never once had any responsibility of any kind lecture ME about taking responsibility. I have taken the responsibility to do all of the above. (and paid the price)
How dare Eric Holder condemn America as a “nation of cowards.” Republicans are responsible for the first black justice of the supreme court, the first black secretary of state, the first black national security advisor.
This is what makes me mad.
March 1st, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Rk said:
To echo what has already been said: this is not partisan. This is about truth, about natural rights, and if you think we are going to dissapear you are mistaken. The right to liberty is a concept that trancends particular presidencies and even entire nations. As Americans we believe individual rights and FREEDOM. No man or group of men can supress our natural rights forever. Truth is eternal and we will not be coerced into submission to government.
March 1st, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Ben OBrien said:
Where to begin,
We have been on the system for the last 7 months. I have been down in the back for almost 4 years. It was in February of 2005 that my job sent me home with a note saying do not return until this has been looked at. And 10 months later when they gave me a letter that said we do not have anything within our company you can do with you’re restrictions. In 7 months we have received $3283 in food. That is almost as much as we spent off the system in the previous 3 years.
What is the point of this story, I have been on the system. It punishes you for trying to stay off it. Once on it it punishes you for trying to get off of it. It pays out way to much money for services that people do not need or deserve.
Things that need to be fixed:
If the Government is going to offer a system like Social Security Disability they need to stream line it. Cut the fat our of it. If you, a parent or spouse, have not paid for the coverage it offers, you do not get it. There should be no agreements with foreign countries to let them pay into it and take payments from it.
If you go to Jail you’re work credits are reset to zero for the social security system. You loose all ties to any coverage until you go out and earn it back.
Medicare/Medicaid will be set aside for only those people that are on Social Security or due to medical history are unable to get private insurance at a reasonable rate. Reasonable rate is determined by the Federal Government and adjusted over time.( Unhealthy obesity, alcohol, cigarette or drug usage, while these are physical problems and grounds for the minimal insurance plan to be refused they are a personal problem that is continuing by a persons choice.) The Medicare/Medicaid insurance will be handled like a regular insurance company negotiating its rates and premiums with private doctors. If a person has two insurances, Medicaid/Medicare will always be the secondary insurance.
Make the monthly payout from Social Security be based not only on your income over time but also on the number of kids you have had/Raised that entered the workforce or married someone in the workforce. If you have raised/had one child you are only allowed to claim 1/3 the maximum Social Security payout. If you have 2 it becomes 2/3, and 3 of course opens you to the possibility of earning the full amount. The biggest problem facing the social security system is not just the government’s free borrowing practices, but is also the fact that many people have chosen to have no children or 1 child. They have not replaced themselves in the system.
It is compounded further by the number of people that are on the Social Security system that have never paid into it and are content to stay on it, or have paid very little into it. We need to give people incentive to get off the System.(best incentive here is if you don’t do your part you can live in abstract poverty of your own free will.) Add a statute that the disabled on Social Security Disability that have a chance to get the problem fixed keeping them from the workforce must do so or lose the right to draw from social security.
Stream line the SSDI application process, requiring that every applicant see a physical and psychological therapist that specializes in getting people back into the workforce. The specialist must give a time frame that they estimate the applicants symptoms can/will improve in or alternative training be obtained to get them into the workforce again. Than authorize Social Security as long as they are making progress with the therapist and working towards being back in the workforce. If barring no other complications arise they will have a set time frame to sink or float on their own. If the specialist does not see a possibility of them getting back into the work force based on current medical knowledge they will authorize them for SSDI on a yearly review basis.
Everyone on SSI/SSDI can and must submit to a random drug test yearly. If they fail the drug test and are not on prescription medications that justify the failure they lose benefits until they come back clean. They will than submit to a randomized weekly drug test for 2 full years. The cost of this drug test will be taken from the monthly benefits of the person that failed the test. If within the two years they fail another drug test they will lose administration rights and will become Wards of the State with the state determining what to do with their money.
If there is a surplus in the system after we have made these changes build up to a ten year reserve and start lowering the SSI tax until it hits a break even point.
Since there is such a division in this country currently about the medical crisis, how about we offer a new plan. We will discontinue all state based medical coverage except the revised Medicaid/Medicare program. We will implement an Insurance premium subsidy. It will be a flat amount that will be paid out on a yearly basis to all citizens that file taxes of $150/month/ member of household.(This amount is set and adjusted by the Federal Government.) Every state will be asked to administer the premium by paying it to each citizen. In order to operate as an insurance company each insurance company will need to create a plan that will afford at minimum basic doctor coverage and up to two prescriptions a month with a co pay of $10 a prescription initially (Co pay requirements adjusted over time by the Federal Government), and emergency coverage for $150/month initially and adjusted by each State over time. This insurance will be available to every healthy citizen. (Mental illness will not be grounds for barring people from this basic coverage. But physical problems would be grounds for determining someone is unhealthy and that is where Medicaid/Medicare steps in.) This amount will be set by the individual state and not the federal government. This is the minimum amount of coverage each insurance must provide. They can continue to operate as they have previously from there on in. People decide what they do with the $150. If they choose to spend it on something other than insurance that is a personal choice. They are responsible for themselves. The coverage is available and provided if they want it. The employers can still use insurance coverage as a work incentive and this is not being overly modified. It just adds answers a cry to provide insurance to every American Citizen.
For wards of the state the state will file for the insurance money and will administer it on behalf of the child to provide insurance.
The beauty of this plan is the fact that we will be able to eliminate many costly government positions and will shift the burden to the private sector to administer it.
Next we will address schools, Voucher system. Money follows the student. Get rid of No child left behind. Let the school system run itself like a business. If they want the business they need to provide the service. Real simple concept, the strong survive and weak die. It is a system that has worked for trillions of years. If a school is weak and cannot keep the students coming in it will die. Parents deserve a choice. Surprised so many educated people that are staunch believers in Darwinism would fail to realize this…. Yet the teachers union says competition is bad for making something strong…..
While we are delving into education require that all higher institutions have 100% transfer policy in order to get certification. Make all classes 100% transferable. If one certified institution calls it an art credit it transfers as an art credit. Further in order to get certification in a certain area you must offer a bachelors degree that follows certain basic guidelines as the core requirements for that area. If you want a specialized degree in the field that is fine. But you have to offer that basic degree which requirements are the same for every institution and nothing can be changed if you are certified. Further for every degree/certificate at every program it will require as a first class Consumer Protection 101: How to live thriftily and not get screwed.
Vocational Rehab will be canceled and closed. All its funding will be sent to the SSI/SSDI rehabilitation program. It is bloat ware that serves a redundant position.
For Pell grants and subsidized Stafford loans there will be a restructuring to represent the fact that bad things happen. If you are on the SSI/SSDI rehabilitation program you will be counted as having an EFC rating of 0. That is all the help up you need. Hundreds of other Americans are getting a lot less help than that and doing it.
Food stamps. Cancel the program. Run a city warehouse that is funded by donations and grants. The grants are applied for. Each city is responsible for setting it up and has the option to work with local companies or charities for the administration thereof.
Section 8 housing will be overhauled. I haven’t figured out how to do this. But it will include randomized K-9 units entering the premises of anyone participating in Section 8 housing to do a drug screen. If drugs are found on the premise and the culprit is easily identified the culprit shall be removed an not allowed to return. Further there will be different kinds of Section 8 housing. Where you stay in section 8 housing will be determined by how long you have been on section 8 housing. There will be nice section 8 housing if you have only been on it for less than 6 years over the span of your adult life. Medium for 7-12 years of your adult life and slummy for 12-26. If you are still on it after 26 years you are a draw to society and can go live with a child or friend. If you are disabled and on SSDI/SSI different rules will apply.
Instead of payments from section 8 to private party’s, there will be 1% financing made available to rental operators that agree to participate on the grounds that they provide affordable rent to any qualified renter. The rent will be determined at the time the loan is set up and payment time frames will be administered accordingly. Loan terms will be extremely flexible to provide rent rates that maintain the property and some compensation for the administration of the property but no more. There will be strict maintenance standards. There will be limited funding of this nature based on the need for more affordable rents in an area. This a check against gouging and over inflation. The Private party participating in this kind of program will only be required to participate until the loan is paid off and all leases have expired that were established while under this program.
No elected official will receive life long retirement benefits for serving in said office. They will not receive any retirement benefit for serving. You chose to run for the position. You will pay into Social Security and that will be your retirement benefit for your time in office.
Lobbying will be made illegal and a distinction will entered into law that clarifies seeking restitution cannot involve any kind of increase to the elected official being courted for restitution.
Jails will be stripped of all luxury items. Prisoners will be made to work to earn luxury items. Food will be strictly rationed. The basic requirements to survive is what they will be given. No A/C, Thermostats set at 65 degrees in general occupied rooms. The higher temperature is a luxury. It must be earned.
Let the Punishment fit the crime. Cruel and unusual means torturing a man for robbing a store. If a man tortures others he finds that to be normal and can be tortured as punishment, even if it kills him. Pedophiles and rapists will be treated worse than those that torture and thus treated harsher.
If a criminal is viewed as needing maximum security to protect society from them they will be executed with 30 days of being transferred. The only way off this list is proof of innocence.
All rooms in prisons except guard bathrooms.changing rooms will be monitored and recorded via Cameras and mikes at all times. This is done for the protection of the prisoners.
Knowingly affiliating with a terrorist organization is grounds for incarceration. Being a terrorist is grounds for execution in any way they see fit. Terrorists will be counted as worse than Rapist/Pedophiles. If a country has dealings with a terrorist organization we will count them as an enemy and will respond appropriately. We will not do business with them. We will not do business with any country that does business with them.
Foreign Aid payments will stop. Grant money will be made available to Private organizations that would like to pursue the betterment of foreign countries. Payments must go to US companies to provide infrastructure improvements and training.
Teach a man to feed himself and he is a man. Feed a man and he is a pet.
The Goverment Flop MUST STOP!!!
I could go on this is my RANT. I AM MAD AS HELL!!!!
March 1st, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Joe F said:
The country is in such a mess simply because those gangsters in the political class in DC led by the gangsters in New York and those running the Federal Reserve (one and the same) decided long ago to totally and completely disregard our Constitution. So, the question becomes one of: are we a nation of law or not? Do we have a legitimate government (based on the founding father’s Principles as outlined in the Constitution) or not? I am 72 years old and I have been reading newspapers since I was 13 years old (June 25th, the day the Korean war broke out). I have seen a lot in my time. And one observation I have made over the years, especially in the past 25-30 years, is that no matter what party is in power, nothing changes. Things get worse. The reason for this is simple. The educated gangsters who have been running this country for the past quarter century or so have almost completely disregarded the Constitution. They have decided that what our founding fathers put together is no longer applicable, and so they have gone their own way, with their own agenda, for their own purposes. The question now is: what do the American people do about this? Well, the people in New Hampshire have come up with an answer. The bill before the New Hampshire legislature has told the US government in no uncertain terms that this country is made up of the United States NOT the US government. That it was the United STATES that created the US government and not the other way around (read your history–read the Constitution). It is made up of WE THE PEOPLE not a ruling political class. That the President does NOT have authority to declare marshal law without the consent of the people (as the existing Presidential executive order signed by Bush does). But make no mistake about it: all the branches of the US government are guilty: the executive, the legislative AND the judicial. All have way overstepped their bounds. And it is way past time that the American people start waking up to this nightmare before it is too late. They have succeeded in dividing the American people with this Democrat/Republican, liberal/conservative BS. Look back at th record of the past 30 years, Republican or Democrat in the White House or in control of the Congress, whether they be liberals or conservatives it made no difference (look at Bush’s “conservative” record when it came to spending money the government does not have–taking the country broke and putting future generations in debt). These people who write into this website and others with their complaints of “the Republicans this…” or the “Democrats that…” better wake up and realize we are Americans FIRST or we will all be in a lot more trouble than we are now. We the people need to get together! Wake up before its too late! We need to take OUR country back from the gangsters in DC and New York. They are in the process of taking the country from us! Look at the power Paulson had during last summer’s banking crisis. For
God’s sakes, the man was not even elected! Yet he was calling the shots! We have a change of administration, change of party in power, and who heads up the Treasury Dept.? Another Wall St gangster from Goldman Sachs! The country is being run by Geithner and Bernanke, neither of whom have been elected or are answerable to the people.Yet we all go on our way as though everything is just honky-donky. WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE ITS TOO LATE!
March 1st, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Ben OBrien said:
I agree Joe F. We need to wake up. Democrats or Republican. The issues have moved well beyond Abortion, Capitol Punishment or Gun Control. Those are all things that have worked well to divide us and keep us from looking at what has been done to make the federal government stronger. Note not the people stronger but the government.
It is time to kill both the democratic party and the republican party. It is time to make America think before it votes.
March 1st, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Take OUR Country Back! « Rick Santelli’s Chicago Tea Party said:
[...] response to a recent blog, Joe F. unleashes some wisdom on the political elite and the need for us as Americans to take our [...]
March 1st, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Lisa Webb said:
Joe F: I am glad to read that someone else is paying attention to the atrocities of the FED…it seems like they just fly below the radar of scrutiny! They are a corrupt entity, established in 1913, by the very powerful international bankers, PURELY FOR THEIR OWN POWER AND BENEFIT. The FED has been crippling and distorting our free market for almost a century now. I think people don’t know much about the FED, the Treasury, the IMF, and the Council on Foreign Relations. Their agenda is to move us towards a globalized government and economy, sacrificing America’s sovereignity.
Everyone should read “MELTDOWN” by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. It is a fabulous explanation of how we got into this crisis. I am a 44 yr. old mother of three who bakes professionally, but I thought it was about time to arm myself with knowledge about economics and socialism, so that I could better interpret the massive amount of news coming out of this administration and the world.
Let’s all educate ourselves and then ACT!!!
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:46 am
Lisa Webb said:
Ben O’Brien:
Kudos re: your take on education. We can fight socialism as much as we can, but if we don’t fix our primary, secondary, and higher education, it is all for naught!
The quality of education in this country is abysmal. Revisionist and dumbed-down, globalist instead of patriotic. My youngest is a 6th grader in public school, and I am starting to think about homeschooling him! He has to learn the truth somewhere!
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:51 am
Amanda Carlson said:
An excellent post on natural rights! It does my spirit good to see others fighting as well for those principles I so love and defend. I would only add that the reason man as such has the inherent right to life and its corollaries, liberty and property, is because he is an individual. By the command of nature men think their own thoughts, move their own limbs, digest their own food, and pump their own blood. You can’t think with another person’s mind or live with their body, we are individuals. It is therefore the obligation of an individual to think and to act on those thoughts in order to survive. There are no collective rights because there are no collective humans. We form communities only by consent and without undoing our nature. No puny bureaucrat, in the name of ’social justice’ over the justice of the individual, can erase the fact of what man is, an individual.
Furthermore, I’d like to point out that not all government programs except the ones that I feel are worthy, are immoral [ie. against human nature]. ALL government programs are immoral, and that includes Social Security! ANY instance of enforced charity, of stealing money from some people to grant to others is immoral. The purpose of government being to protect individual rights against internal criminals and external aggressors, the only proper functions of government are police [at state level], military [at national level], and courts [in both]. All we need for that is the legislature to determine policy, the executive to implement them, and the judicial to pronounce justice. The reason the government is so big now, has so expanded its powers and responsibilities, is because people have made a career out of it. People go into government work expecting to make lots of money, and being the government they have the authority to grant themselves that power/responsibility. In addition to limiting the government to its proper functions, the role of the government official, elected or otherwise, needs to be that of a volunteer serving a cause they believe in [the defense of their nation and liberty], not an employee seeking a raise. To fund the limited powers of government and the livelihood of its servants private donations by individuals will more than suffice.
And to those who don’t believe that anyone, or enough people, would voluntarily support the government or its servants with the money they needed to perform those limited functions, remember that charities are a multi-billion dollar business in an economy that is already heavily taxed. By committing the people to support their own government we make the people responsible for the oversight of that government.
March 2nd, 2009 at 6:46 am
Ben OBrien said:
Amanda,
I agree with a lot of what you say. But we are also compassionate in nature. Unfortunately this would delve too much into the philosophy of Ethics and Human Nature, which is just where we have been stuck as a culture and as a nation for the too long. So without going any deeper down that path, what we need is a balanced position that allows for some programs, yet does not overly reward laziness. Without this same balance we cannot achieve a united front to put a stop to the free happy unethical spending that has been happening.
Bottom line, we have been spending so much time worrying/arguing/thinking about being ethical that we have stood back and let those without ethics do that which is without ethics in the name of ethics…. If we stopped just thinking about it, but found a balance between thought and feeling we could act together to stop this mess.
Lets stand together against that which is destroying our Very Being while stand back trying to figure out what our being is.
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Amanda Carlson said:
Ben~
Hmmm, you seem to misunderstand me. I’m not against compassion and charity, quite the opposite actually. But I do believe in the separation of charity and state, in the same manner and for exactly the same reason as the separation of church and state.
Neither am I saying that laziness could never be rewarded in a purely Capitalist system. It could happen, easily, but individuals will be gambling with their own money, their own effort, their own life rather than a arrogant career politician making that gamble on behalf of the entire nation.
You say that we should have room for some programs. Which programs? Who decides? And how much should we take in taxes to fund these programs? Once you start with these questions you’ve already granted the principle that taking from some people to give to others is a good thing. It’s only a matter of time before Socialists will hold you to that, as is happening now. There’s nothing a government program can do that a private charity can’t do better, and without violating the right of citizens to dispense with their own property.
In any “balance” between right and wrong, wrong will always come out ahead. This is obvious from our current predicament. We had a mixed economy [part Capitalist, part Socialist regulation], but since we granted the principle we had no leg to stand on when they got out of control. Now the government owns the banking industry, and the only way to stop it is to say “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!”. You can’t win against the self-righteous but telling them you agree in essence, but could they please scale it back a bit.
Did you ever read the children’s book If You Give A Mouse A Cookie? It’s not okay to give the government even one cookie because they won’t ever stop.
March 2nd, 2009 at 4:15 pm
J said:
Blah blah blah more complaining anyone can point at the problem and I haven’t seen one solution….write your congressman?! right. Write the people who on your own page you sasy is the problem and you think thats it…woo hoo problem solved. Morons
{J, please be respectful and we look forward to your solutions - admin}
March 2nd, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Ben OBrien said:
Amanda,
What about education? Should that be 100% private? It is a government program currently…
Problem with “Charities” is that most of those are a scam. How much of that “Donated” money goes to make someone not in need wealthier…. What new laws do we pass to regulate this? Are the laws passed by the federal government or left to the state? What about charities doing business across state lines? Is that negotiated between states or in the congress or the senate?
What powers do you give the Federal government?
The power of Policing the state is left to the state. Ok, that is a given. What about the FBI? CIA? What about policing across state borders? Protecting against Terrorism?
Who decides what will be laws that are enforceable? Who settles disputes arising between states. According to the constitution what is done in one state needs to be honored in another. Last truly great test we had of this was the ending of slavery. Granted that was not what started the Civil War, but it is what kept the North in the Civil War.
We have a new great test brewing in the form of Homosexual Marriage. What happens when the states decide not to agree on this topic? Will the Federal Government have the authority to dictate a resolution under your idea?
What about consumer protection laws? Should those be laws at all? They are designed to not only make consumers less tense and protect them, but also to help protect business and make transactions faster and easier.
As to the book about giving a mouse a cookie. Well I can make all sorts of fictional stories that would counteract that book. It teaches concept and ignores others. Instead of a mouse we will use my Son.I give him a glass of milk and he asks for a cookie. I give him the cookie and tell him that is it than off to bed. He asks for a straw, I tell him no. He asks for a napkin, I tell him to get it himself. Well when he gets done he asks for more and I tell him no. He goes to bed. Cycle broken. New concept introduced.
It is called Moderation and knowing when and how to say no. I like to give my son a cookie. But I also no what his limits are. I work to teach him what his limits are. I also teach him that if he wants more cookies he can get them himself. I am teaching him to get his own napkin. I help him until he is able to get his own. I reward him for doing it himself. Eventually I quit rewarding for what I expect him to do.
We the people decide when enough is enough. We implement more referendum based voting. We the people vote what the Salary of elected officials should be. We put into place a law that requires all laws to be Succinct and that the entirety of the bill be limited to dealing with just the items listed in the front page. No more ear marking.
In our current era we make an Amendment to the constitution that mandates we the general public vote on any new bills or laws that are being proposed after the Senate and Congress have voted, and after the President has signed it. With rare exception they will not become law until approved by the general public. This will shift the power more fully back to the people. The Congress and Senate will primarily serve to propose new laws or bills. No other changes needed. As to worries on how to achieve this, well we do a mandated electric voting stations. They are set up at the edges of Military bases and can be transferred to select poling spots by military personnel. The vote will be entered electronically and will be transmitted over the military’s Networks. The computers will be maintained by a combination of State employees overseen/co-working with military personnel. In order to vote you must go with your Social Security card in hand and a form of state issued ID. No preregistration. If you do not have these two things you do not vote. I am sorry for Shut ins, but hard line is this, if you cant get out to vote it is too bad. If the day of the vote is too inconvenient for you, well it must not matter enough. We can always run the vote for a week to give people the opportunity to come out and vote.
Another thing I propose and support is eliminating all parties. On the ballot will be a name of a candidate and the sport he is running for. Nothing else. To make it easier for people to research candidates there will be a Website created and managed by each state that will tell people about each candidate. The Candidates will answer questions and type in a small bio about themselves and what they stand for.
Did I mention that somewhere in there it will be mandated that we vote on what they get paid. It will vary each year. There will be no retirement benefits for elected officials?
Now my entire point to this anything but succinct post is that water in moderation is a good thing. But if you get too much of it too quickly or in the wrong manner it becomes a very bad thing. The same is true with everything in life.
We need Moderation in all our government dealings. We need moderation in our spending, but we also need moderation in our lack of spending. We need regulation in the right places and of the right kind. When we find a balance that works, we quit playing with it. We quit experimenting.
As to Socialist types of programs, we can have them. But they will be will be limited to the State level. (Let the States compete for Citizens through programs and taxation levels.)
As to taxation, it will be the State government that decides taxation levels for the state. Federal Government will get .25% of what the state brings in in Taxes. There will be a separate system where people can donate money to the federal government if they wish. The Federal Government will no longer be allowed to take out loans or to sell bonds. IF it is not in the budget we don’t need it.
( Sorry but I am experimenting in open mindedness here and trying to use these conversations to lead to something that would be more beneficial to Society. Kind of a giant brainstorm. AKA I think as I go.)
Enough of this it is late and I feel like I am usurping this thread to type out my ideas. Good night.
March 2nd, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Ben OBrien said:
J,
There are lots of solutions. Take the time to read before you start calling people morons. Also we seem to be saying the congressmen are the problem. But if you would take the time to read instead of simply insulting you might learn something.
Actually, I have another possible solution, it just happens that this solution will be a little violent and bloody; not congenial to moderation.
We take everyone that is like you and execute them for being a traitor to this country….
A good solution and a lot of stupidity eliminated.
March 2nd, 2009 at 7:31 pm
Jeffrey Reuter said:
First time on this site. Followed a link here from a financial page where many people are upset over Washington’s budgetary shenanigans. Think I’ll read your opinions for awhile, as they largely square with my own. I hope this and other sites like it eventually contribute the formation of a third political party, popular and powerful enough to influence Washington to get back and stick to the Constitution. Obviously neither of the other two parties will do it.
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:11 pm
MarkLeavenworth said:
Has anyone noticed that from highschool to college to almost every work schedule in the country there is one theme that has taken over…almost no individual is allowed to settle much time on a predictable routine. Every animal, and every human being naturally looks for a secure environment with a predictable routine. The reason is that the body and the mind are in much better health and lifestyles can be greatly improved when routines are predictable. Anyone with children knows that a constant routine is key to a child’s sanity and health. The unpredictable routines in so many ‘organized’ aspects of American life are nothing less than an assault on our physical health and mental well-being. This is how intelligent people make war, in ways that do not fit the model of aggression that we have been trained to think is war. Someone has been making war on the people of the United States for some time, and my guess is that it is those who are most trusted and given the most say-so in our institutions without being suspected. It’s time we start suspecting and forge our alliances intelligently, making friends without letting our guard disappear from our own national institutions. Having the knowledge that any nation in the world, as much as they are willing to work with us, will also quickly take advantage of us, if we let them.
March 2nd, 2009 at 9:37 pm
Amanda Carlson said:
Ben~
Your post is long and complicated [not a compliment] so I’ll try to address the essential ideas you’ve expressed.
Yes, schools should be private. The government has no business in education as with any other industry. Governmental regulation as a means of standardization and protecting citizens from bad choices, ie the Nanny State, is arrogant and foolish. Standardization in itself is a good thing, you’re right that it helps both businesses and consumers. It would take a lot of time and effort for a consumer or businessman to fully research every decision they had to make in a marketplace, whether it were buying an education, an apple, a factory, a share of stock, or donating to a charity. Which is why trusted sources of market research are of value. A few current examples from even our highly regulated markets: http://www.donorschoose.org , http://www.charitywatch.org/ , http://www.bbb.org/ , http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/product-testing/seal-holders/ . They all have a vested interest in maintaining a spotless reputation. I don’t understand what makes you think governments can do this better than citizens themselves. I’m not claiming that private markets would be an omniscient perfection but neither are governments, far from it, but in a free market an individual’s decisions affect only himself.
Secondly, I understand how your system is designed to be as democratic as possible and how, like your son with the cookie, you mean to use the force of Democracy to coax the government to do right, to use ‘moderation’. In this manner, the government would be the servant of the people in a true Democracy. But replacing one appointed regulatory tyrant with millions of smaller regulatory tyrants doesn’t change the nature of the beast. You’re still using the force of law to make people do as they ’should’. However you define what people ’should’ do and by whatever means you come to that definition, you are still circumcising their liberty causelessly. The only reason to use the force of law, the only proper function of a government, is to protect individuals from violence, fraud, or theft by other individuals or foreign aggressors. Deviating a single step beyond those bounds ultimately comes down to forcing someone else to do what you think they ’should’ do. And neither you, nor Timothy Geithner, nor the million voters standing behind you are America’s father.
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:11 pm
MarkLeavenworth said:
How can I say ‘almost no individual is allowed’ as if that alone is not cause for alarm? Let’s face the facts, through finance our liberty is taken from us at each step of the way, from 50K college loans that you need to get out of the McDonald’s job, then to the 30K car that you need to get to work to pay the student loans, to the housing loan for which Americans are pitted against Americans to bid the price past the extreme limits of finance. If you really want to know what the founding father’s would say, they would say that foreign interests and monied interests have taken our liberty. The solution is to kick foreign nationals out of our national institutions, and re-base a currency on a pegged, widely available real good, like dry feed corn. The rest is faith in God and eachother. There is no alternative anymore. Enslavement is not an option and our resources for exploitation are running thin.
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:33 pm
MarkLeavenworth said:
The reality is, America is too lazy for liberty. Instead of pegging our currency to a base commodity like dry feed corn, we would likely choose to let other nations continue to provide our labor and our fire. The problem with that now is, since there is no longer an increasing supply of labor or fire, we can no longer use a money system based on increasing future returns. So, the fight for other’s resources will become increasingly bitter, and also political, since there will be no just way to distribute the goods. Barter is always an option, and will probably increase significantly from now on over the next half century as these realities start to become even more evident, but barter will cripple through innefficiency. We should launch a new currency while we still have the resources, stability, and military strength to do so.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:43 am
MarkLeavenworth said:
Not that we should get rid of the dollar. There is still a lot of value in our trading system, but that it will almost certainly continue to diminish over time. But to launch a parallel currency that the government will guarantee an exchange for a given amount of dry feed corn will create a system base for economic stability, as well as a parallel untaxed system for domestic labor and fuel prices that we can move in and out of as we see fit. Farmers can sell their corn to the government in the dollar or through subsidies. That puts the landed interest(farmers) at risk for the monied interest(value of the government’s currency), and the monied interest at risk for the people at liberty (those using the corn-based currency, who have an automatic check on the integrity of the government through demand of the corn). The individuals at liberty are then held accountable to themselves (naturally), as the exchange of corn-based currency for other goods or the production of corn will always be the question of the day. What will become of the government farmers who derive the value of their crops from a currency that grows more and more dependant on the policies of foreign labor and oil producers? The answer is, as these foreign goods become more costly, domestic farmers become more plentiful. This transition taking place not through barter, but efficiently. And not all at once, but only as individuals choose liberty over enslavement. And not when it is a bad choice, but as soon as it is most advantageous to the individual. Any small state could try this system. One of the keys is that, since the corn-based currency couldn’t be taxable, it couldn’t be recollected after the corn was consumed. The corn-based currency should expire in some time period being the time that the government is willing to store the corn before it is purchased and consumed. The starting point for the corn-based currency to be issued would still have to be through welfare distributions, state contracts, etc. The additional issue point would be that an individual could carry their corn to the state exchange house for non-taxable currency.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:27 am
Rejtan said:
This forum has really taken the spirit I had hoped for. Please continue debating.
In Liberty,
Rejtan
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:55 am
Rejtan said:
Ben: Be careful with your argument for “moderation,” moderation is a relative term and may be subject to the logical fallacy of moderation (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/middle-ground.html). What is moderation? Doesn’t it depend on the individual(s) involved? Amanda observes this fallacy by saying “In any “balance” between right and wrong, wrong will always come out ahead.”
Why will bad always win in this case? Through default, because once one admits a balance between right and wrong, wrong wins. To better understand this read further:
Amanda is not arguing that because the private sector has the ability to do charity more efficiently the State should not, she is saying the State, or at least the federal government, should not establish State run charities because it is no the role of government because it is immoral to force one person to give money to another.
Amanda also argues that if we allow the State to have any legitimate authority other than military, police, and justice; we concede that man has no individual rights. The collectivists (whether fascist, socialist, or religious**)have won because by conceding that the State should be responsible for charity, we concede that my property is not my own and society should do with it as it believes right. She is against what you are proposing due to philosophical beliefs and an incredible observation made by Milton Friedman, F.A. Hayek, M. Rothbard, Ayn Rand etc, that once one admits that one’s side is not morally correct the other side wins by default…liberty in this case, and individual rights, decides no longer to debate with the other side and says: yes capitalism is immoral, but it works better, so we should keep parts of it; socialists/fascists announce that they are moral, because capitalism gives up, and that they just need time to figure out how to run an economy and that we should trust them. This is what happened in the 20th century. Capitalism, even by most of its believers, was believed to be immoral (therefore liberty is immoral), and the collectivists had free reign through default, but because not everyone was convinced that collectivist economies work capitalism has barely gotten by, while the laws of supply and demand of surpassed even the wisest central bankers and bureaucrats.
Ben I think you have made wise observations, I encourage you to read Hayek’s Road to Serfdom. Many of those who fought the intellectual battle for freedom have, in the midst of hopelessness, have reached for this work.
Mark: corn is not a good commodity to back money, metals,like gold and silver, work better because they do not decay. Maybe we should get rid of central banking, and let banks issue currency or use other banks currency, and let the banks that issue currency decide how to back it? That would solve your problem.
** for the record I am religious, though I am no means a mystic, I have found reasons to practice my religion.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Rejtan said:
** Not all religions are collectivists, and, remember we have a choice to practice a religion.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Pat Barrett said:
To J. and American Colonist:Good God ,go to some school and re-learn how to spell,use sentence structure,and take a class in Logic.Maybe American history as well.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:10 pm
MarkLeavenworth said:
Rejtan, Thank you very much for some feedback. The reason gold cannot be used today, is that the size of typical transactions is too small to make gold a practical measure. On depreciation, I say feed-corn because the value of depreciation for animal feed is not much over the course of, say, a year. The time-stamped notes would need to be exchanged by the end user before that, as there is no other way to recollect a non-taxable currency.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:34 pm
MarkLeavenworth said:
Also, banks of taxable currency have no reason to back what the treasury issues for free. The treasury’s backing is the constitution and whatever government results from it and us. The goods-based system is to provide a measure of real value for individual domestic decision-making, to provide a stability for the taxable system, and to provide a transition over the course of the time that foreign labor and oil become more costly in real terms.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Rejtan said:
Gold has been used for centuries before, the american dollar was backed by Gold until Roosevelt and then Nixon got rid of any link to Gold. Gold can be used very easily, as it was in the past. Rothbard has a book on this, I would encourage you to take a look at it. Yet how about we legalize the counterfeiting of money from other sources than the fed? Banks would decide how to back their currency, maybe corn feed may end up working for them. There is really no backing to money that is perfect, maybe even fiat money would be fine if someone other than a central bank printed it.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:47 pm
MarkLeavenworth said:
REjtan, There is no law against printing a new currency, it is the management of it that is difficult. I intend to launch a storehouse on this grains/firewoods principle in my county within a few years. On gold, consider that in the past, a product that has the labor and fire value of a grit of sand could never have been a product. Today, with low-temp plastics, dyes, and designs, people will give a high value to something that is intrinically worthless. How could you account for the micro-micro-micro speck of gold that a ‘consumer’ used to buy a greeting card at Wal-Mart? Maybe a kernel of corn or two would be accurate, though.
The other reasons gold and silver were withdrawn was that the good was never put into use, and also, there was no way to get the currency back. Also, banks could draw notes on interest only (the PonziScheme of almost ALL banking). Al of these issues are addressed witht the system I have outlined (albeit neither clearly nor orderly).
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:56 pm
MarkLeavenworth said:
Thank you again for any feedback.
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:02 pm
MarkLeavenworth said:
Oh, sorry Rejtan, I thought this was the site homepage. I’ll go see if there’s a better place on here to post this discussion. Thanks. -Mark
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Ben OBrien said:
Rejtan: Sorry for the late reply. I have spent the last week moving across the country from Wisconsin to Utah. If the reply is wordy or barely coherent it is because I am tired and just barely got my computer set back up. But felt you had waited long enough for a reply..
As to the concept of moderation. I am sorry but the argument felt too much like a straw-man argument. In theory we could change the wording on the concept to include any ground in between the points A and B to represent C. That means in a theoretical approach C could represent 1.01-799.99. It would stand to reason than that C could very easily be the correct position since the middle ground has such a wide range of values it covers.. But taking it a step further who determines the current market value? If the man trying to sale the computer for $800 is in desperate need of money the current market value for that particular computer has in fact changed substantially and $400.50 could very easily be a fair price. Heck one dollar could have been the fair price if the mans need was desperate enough. The need to sell the computer needs to enter the equation. (PS I hate Philosophical concepts because there is no way to prove it one way or another and in the end it becomes a battle of long winded people with nothing better to do.) Now as to the middle ground. I am going to take reality instead of the realm of philosophy. In reality too little water will kill you. Too much water will kill you. The middle ground is the right place to be in order to survive. No philosophical debate about that it is reality.
As to the next step in your and Amanda’s argument, what is evil. Is the government providing aid for the poor evil if we the people vote to have it happen and set the level. What is the difference between that and charity except we set a precedent that says if you want to benefit from what we the community has to offer you need to participate by doing this thing. We technically all agree to be a part of this community/government. If we have a problem with what it provides I am sure we can find somewhere in the world where we could live as an anarchist, communist, serf, or any other random combination of government/community. It does not mean that we would have the same opportunity or comforts that we have here. We participate in the community to gain something. It is only fair that if we want to participate in the community we provide what the community asks. This is where moderation comes into play because it goes both ways. It means that the poor need to do they’re part and get to a point where they are no longer a burden on the community but contribute to society in a meaningful way.
Would we have anywhere near the technical wonders we have today if we took any of a number of extreme approaches we could take? On the first evil extreme we could go to the socialists level of thought. Research and development would cease to exist. Mansions would cease to exist. Jobs would decrease over time as the extreme burden placed by the mandated need to contribute everything to take care of those too lazy to work.
Now we could take the opposite extreme and eliminate all government and introduce a state of anarchy. Everyone would be too busy fighting to protect what they have to make any meaningful gains.
It is often said that a lone wolf in the wilderness does not survive very long.
Now to these extremes we have chosen a moderate course. We are not anarchist, but at the same time we are not socialists. We have a balancing of the two.(Now at this stage in the game we can start word games. But I am not dealing in word games but in concepts. The concept is that any form of community is a socialistic organization because in order to function it requires a social commitment.) In order to have Liberty you need rules. You need something that protects you from everyone and everyone from you. You need these social agreements. Heck I could take the extreme ethical approach by using you’re own approach it is wrong to tax anyone for anything. Now Milton Friedman, F.A. Hayek, M. Rothbard, Ayn Rand etc, have made one major mistake in the observations that they have made. That is a simply one…. They fail to understand that as long as there is a disagreement as to what someone is entitled to someone will always claim that the other has treated them wrongly or immorally.
I will admit that full fledged Capitalism is morally wrong if the community has chosen to set a limit on how far it goes. It does not mean that extreme socialistic views are morally superior. It means that I recognize a need for controls in the right place of the right kind to protect the community from anarchy. It also means the need for controls in the right place and of the right kind to protect the community from extreme bureaucracy(AKA Modern socialism). Capitalism is the middle ground in a theoretical sense to those two extremes. If A is Anarchy and B is Over Bureaucracy than C is everything in between and that includes every form of Capitalism. We are trying to decide how much of it is acceptable to our Community.
Now I am bored and need to tweak you just a little bit. “because it is immoral to force one person to give money to another.” So it is immoral to force someone to pay for anything? NO taxes ever. WOOHOOOO. I can take what I want. The moral extreme you have just pointed out is that it is wrong to force a man to give money to another…. But isn’t the moral extreme in the other direction called stealing? According to “Milton Friedman, F.A. Hayek, M. Rothbard, Ayn Rand etc, that once one admits that one’s side is not morally correct the other side wins by default…” I win. J/K( I understand the concept you are getting at with this statement. But I am not going to let emotion run my mind into agreeing with it. Instead I am going to come to an understanding of what my statement could imply and all that is involved with the situation..)
“but because not everyone was convinced that collectivist economies work capitalism has barely gotten by, while the laws of supply and demand of surpassed even the wisest central bankers and bureaucrats.”
I am sorry but if they were so “wise” they would understand that reality trumps philosophical questions any day of the week. And would know the reality of supply and demand and not worry about price setting. Free market of what you want and talk has not been had in a very long time. The moment a politician decided to subsidize farmer income so they would not grow a certain crop the concept of a “free” market was killed. The American dream began its decay and the founding fathers started spinning in they’re graves. But alas we are now getting into a new philosophical venue and I am tired.
I enjoyed the Road to Serfdom. http://mises.org/books/TRTS/
I read it after I typed everything proceeding the link BTW. It shows the wrongs with going to an extreme in planning. I agree with it whole heartedly.
Mark: I agree with Rejtan. Corn, wheat or anything else like that is not a good opption. It can be mass produced and flood the market thus creating unsustainable inflation. That is one of the tricks that the Europeans used on some of the American Indians. They used a certain fish bone or something like that.
The problems with currency is the fact that we have found good uses for precious metals which we did not previously have during the era preceding our current technological era. Jewelry is not a use but a way of showing off wealth.
Now Rejtan the problem with letting banks issue they’re own currency is the fact that it was done and let to all sorts of problems.
Hey I am religious also. I simply applied a trial system to religion. I followed the steps it asked me to and I got an answer. Not just once but on multiple occasions.
Now as to currency. In the US we do have a law on who can issue currency. I seem to recall it being outlined in the constitution.
I want to dig in on the currency issue and the fact that inflation is a artificial. Where is that discussion being held at now?
March 14th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Ben OBrien said:
Oh by the way. I hope I did not give offense or sound rude/cocky in that post. It is late as I said and my good judgment in social situations is out to pasture.
March 14th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Ben OBrien said:
PatBarret: Send them to school where? In the socialized education system that is broken? Or at the University’s where I have been told by 5 different professor’s that they were going to teach me to “think logically”.
Funny thing is I tied them in knots from day one and delighted in questioning they’re superior educated and flawed logic. BTW as it happens they were all liberal professor’s…..
Logic is not learned from a professor in a classroom, but from observing and participating in reality.
March 14th, 2009 at 9:09 pm