Tagged: commodity, commodity currency, economic, economy, fiat, fiat currency, fiat money, gold, gold standard, Government, governments, oil
This topic contains 285 replies, has 29 voices, and was last updated by 
LEO THE WISE 1 year, 8 months ago.
- AuthorPosts
No, the world isn’t making it impossible. In fact, it’s EASIER than at almost any time in human history.
It’s easier than ever guys! Just ask the Branch Dividians. Oh, wait, nevermind – all 80 of them were murdered by the U.S. government.
Really now? The Branch Davidians did a pretty good job of murdering themselves without the aid of the federal government in the siege, before the siege, and after the siege.
Vernon Howell, a.k.a. David Koresh, was their last fearless leader. Renamed himself ‘Koresh’ since he thought he was the Biblical Cyrus. And David, ya know, to be of Kind David’s lineage. Had a little gun battle with George Roden, cult leader at the time, to see who would be the Top Man back in 1988 — 5 years before the Wacko in Waco standoff. Top Man, as in most cults, got to have sex with all the underage girls, amongst other perks.
Unlike Koresh, Roden really was quite sane. Indeed, George exhumed a corpse with plans to resurrect it. No better way to show you’re top man in the cult, If I was a cult member, I would have sided with him, so long as he renamed himself ‘Lazarus’, as that, would have been really, really cool. No better way to show cred than a good resurrection. Smart. Before this, Vernon (Koresh) tried to f~~~ his way to the top by having sex with the 65-year old ‘prophetess’ of the cult, Lois Rodin. Cult leaders really will do anything to avoid getting a job. But I suppose that’s better than shooting the competition.
Roden later killed his roomate with an axe, and was declared insane, locked up where he should be, thus, clearing the way for David Koresh to become Top Cult Leader and have sex with the kiddies, and amass a large arsenal,. you know, like most cult leaders do..
Later on, in 2009, Koresh’s mother was stabbed to death by her sister. I love love love a good cult!
But, I’m sure, Roden was killed by a federal agent, and Koresh’s mother’s sister was hired by the government for a hit job, all part of Agenda 21.
That said, the Federal Government should have never gotten involved in Waco. They fed into the apocalyptic delusions of Koresh. It should have been left to the local sheriff, who did good work handling past altercations between these violent maniacs (that is, Roden and Koresh) without deadly force. Surrounding them was asanine; waiting ’till they came out and arresting them would have been preferred.
Seriously? Agenda 21 is about sustainable development. It’s non-binding. Even so, I favor getting the US out of the UN.
If you want to cite groups that want to live apart, who normal people can respect, let’s talk about the Amish, the Shakers, and other utopian societies, not a personality cult like Vernon.
No, the world isn’t making it impossible. In fact, it’s EASIER than at almost any time in human history
Frank, you need to take a step back, and look at the big picture. Some of these guys you are talking to think a smart phone is a necessity yet they are flapping their gums about going off the grid. LOL?
In the end the entire argument is if they had 0 tax burden and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of real estate and equipment they can’t afford to purchase(or they wouldn’t be bitching about the system f~~~ing them if they had that kind of cash floating around), let alone maintain, they would happily work the rest of their life just for food, but the concept of working at walmart stocking shelves for 12 dollars and hour which is more than enough to keep themselves fed and sheltered and have leftover for other things amounts to slavery.
they would happily work the rest of their life just for food, but the concept of working at walmart stocking shelves for 12 dollars and hour which is more than enough to keep themselves fed and sheltered and have leftover for other things amounts to slavery.
I love how you gurus sidestep the problem with unemployment. Jobs, jobs everywhere! What happens when that job runs out, brainiac? You must have a vagina, because you can’t think two steps ahead. I would f~~~ing destroy your ass in chess.
Frank:
Snake: I laid out a clear, devastating case that David Koresh was a dangerous maniac. Koresh’s demise was also the motivation for McVeigh & Nichols killing 168 people in the Oklahoma City Bombing. Koresh was not some innocent lamb separatist; he was a megalomaniac pedophile who tried to kill and f~~~ his way to the top of his cult to be head Witch Doctor/prophet/whatever. The federal government should have stayed out of it, but glorifying him is hardly the way to promote small government. He was NOT someone trying to live a peaceful life on his own. And the federal government’s escalation was the result of four agents being KILLED in the initial gun battle. Trying to act like the government attacked him because he wanted to live apart is RIDICULOUS. There are hundreds of thousands of Amish people in the US that live a very different life and the government leaves them alone. Posting ‘Didn’t read’ is a good choice compared to the alternative of trying to defend Koresh!
When the jobs run out, you rely on savings. When the savings run out, you rely on handouts until economies improve (e.g. 1930’s America). Or you move to where the jobs are (Dustbowl is worst real case in recent US history).
Beer: You nailed it. I’ve never considered myself ‘too good’ to work at menial jobs. We need to get past people whining ‘there are no jobs’. When I couldn’t get a job in my field out of school, I found a job as a technician until I could. That job, paid what I’d make at a supermarket or driving a forklift, but demonstrated I was responsible enough to hold a job, get my ass into work, and be productive. I didn’t cry in my soup ‘woe is me, the world is unfair, it’s all big gubbermint and the UN’s fault’. Even though I hate big government (you know I’m an anti-big-government zealot, hell I want to privatize roads and turn most of them into turnpikes), I realize the individual plays a greater role in their success or failure than government does, even with our super-sized State. As for the rest of it, I’d say Beer and I DO plan ahead, we save money so we’re ready for a disaster.
Veniversum: If people craved the subsistence lifestyle, they’d be buying mobile homes and moving to rural areas, cooking and eating at home, and live minimalist lifestyles. They don’t want this lifestyle. This is the reason for the Great Migration FROM rural areas into the Cities. Nobody is ‘criminalizing the subsistence lifestyle’.
That said, government as a percent of GDP has grown from under 10% of GDP in 1900, to close to 40% today
In the modern era, the positive check on population growth is PROSPERITY. Higher GDP, lower birth rates. Look at the statistics.Ok, I posted this once before, and then went to edit it, and then it disappeared. First off, whether the majority “crave” a subsistence lifestyle is irrelevant. My point is that it shouldn’t be criminalized. People should not be coerced to *pay* to exist. Period. I shouldn’t have to pay the government to go fishing. I shouldn’t have to pay the government to go hunting. I shouldn’t have to pay *anyone* to move to an uninhabited area, where no one lives, and build my own house out of the trees there, and then risk having my home demolished because a government that rules the area where no one lives decides it doesn’t conform to their standards. As for the GDP, I already mentioned the same fact and agree with you on that issue. The source of that issue is the fact that heavy artificial financial constraints are put on the populace to discourage people going into business for themselves, and the government businesses are funded by the printed money. If you watch the video I posted about the CAFR, the government businesses actually own controlling shares in a lot of major corporations. That in it’s self should be a huge red flag to you. When the government owns and controls the means of production, it’s called communism.
“In the modern era, the positive check on population growth is PROSPERITY. Higher GDP, lower birth rates. Look at the statistics.”
Firstly, let’s call a “positive check” on population growth, what it *actually* is. MASS MURDER. No trial, no jury, no justification. The ruling class simply arranges for the murder of their subjects. Secondly, it does NOT lead to prosperity. The statistics were manufactured by government intervention in the market, as a result of artificial costs and the use of legislation to create an advantage for their business, and a disadvantage for their competitors. It looks like prosperity on paper, but when you look at the actual effects, the debt weapon is doing massive damage, and war is only good for the ruling class. This is Keynesian economics. People who support fiat currency, war, depopulation, and the control of the means of production by the state, are communist. It doesn’t matter if they *think* they are capitalist, supporting these tactics and ideologies are the fundamentals of every communist/socialist/collectivist civilization in history. End of story.
Frank, you need to take a step back, and look at the big picture. Some of these guys you are talking to think a smart phone is a necessity yet they are flapping their gums about going off the grid. LOL?
In the end the entire argument is if they had 0 tax burden and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of real estate and equipment they can’t afford to purchase(or they wouldn’t be bitching about the system f~~~ing them if they had that kind of cash floating around), let alone maintain, they would happily work the rest of their life just for food, but the concept of working at walmart stocking shelves for 12 dollars and hour which is more than enough to keep themselves fed and sheltered and have leftover for other things amounts to slavery.
More Ad Hominem, what a shocker. All you have are insults and criticism. Why am I not surprised? Cell phones are a necessity *if* you are to participate in the economy. A smart phone gives a person the option to use the internet so that they can apply for jobs. First you said they were expensive (false), then you said people could get them for free (true). Granted, if you bought the top model out there, of course it’s expensive, but I already mentioned to you that there are ways now to get cheaper service by unlocking the phone and purchasing a new sim from Wal-Mart, and so owning a smart phone is *not* frivoulous spending. Working at Wal-Mart does not constitute slavery. What constitutes slavery, is the use of coercion on people to force them to pay to acquire food, even by their own efforts, in the form of hunting license, fishing license, land tax, etc. You claim to be capitalist but you support the all 10 planks of communism vehemently and call anyone who doesn’t, a variety of names, with a variety of criticisms. You are quite obviously not *for* freedom. I’ve already replied to you about homesteading, as was done by the Oklahoma “Boomer”, “Sooners”, and you replied with nothing, because you have nothing. You are 100% against capitalism. So, at least admit it. You believe people should pay for land that they own, and you do not believe people should claim land that is uninhabited, and those two elements were the primary foundation of capitalism in the first place, besides conquest and the genocide of the Native Americans, among others. You have no argument. Insults and criticisms are all you have, and it shows. I challenge you not to use them anymore. No one respects people that do that.
When the jobs run out, you rely on savings. When the savings run out, you rely on handouts until economies improve (e.g. 1930’s America). Or you move to where the jobs are (Dustbowl is worst real case in recent US history).
Beer: You nailed it. I’ve never considered myself ‘too good’ to work at menial jobs. We need to get past people whining ‘there are no jobs’. When I couldn’t get a job in my field out of school, I found a job as a technician until I could. That job, paid what I’d make at a supermarket or driving a forklift, but demonstrated I was responsible enough to hold a job, get my ass into work, and be productive. I didn’t cry in my soup ‘woe is me, the world is unfair, it’s all big gubbermint and the UN’s fault’. Even though I hate big government (you know I’m an anti-big-government zealot, hell I want to privatize roads and turn most of them into turnpikes), I realize the individual plays a greater role in their success or failure than government does, even with our super-sized State. As for the rest of it, I’d say Beer and I DO plan ahead, we save money so we’re ready for a disaster.
I’ve never been “too good” to work menial jobs either, which is why I never made good money, because let’s face the fact, menial jobs don’t pay well. I wanted to do music so I took whatever I could get in the area I had to live in, in order to do that. I had the chance to get good paying jobs, and I passed several of them up because they required me to move away from my band. I held a job as an oyster fisherman for 8 years. No one is going to tell me I didn’t work. What we have here, is that people have legitimate claims about unjust laws, and the complainers are being framed as irresponsible and 100% to blame. It simply isn’t true. Firstly, I have integrity, so I will come straight out and say that I was irresponsible. This was one issue I actually agreed with Beer on about people spending too much money and consumerism. My vice was, that I spent $400 a month eating out. *However*, that has absolutely no relevance to the fact that the 10 planks of communism are in effect and that we should abolish those. I would respectfully ask for all of you, if we have any sense of brotherhood and freedom at all, to please discontinue the framing of people who have legitimate complaints about laws that do not represent the original ideals of a country, as just “whiny losers” seeking the redistribution of wealth. That doesn’t benefit us in any way, and it simply isn’t true in this specific case, because everyone you are arguing with all agree that we shouldn’t live on welfare, and I can’t speak for everyone, but I’m not on welfare or food stamps. What would benefit us, is to focus on what we actually *do* agree on, and collaborate to abolish those laws because we all know that communism is detrimental to society (us), not society (the ruling class). I’ve already said once before that I respect people who built their businesses from the ground up with honest labor. I am not seeking the redistribution of wealth. If these laws continue, and they implement further ones, those people who *have* built a fortune for themselves in the middle class and upper middle, will lose it. If it comes to there being only the top 1% and the rest reduced to wage slaves, we are done for and YOU KNOW IT. If the majority of you continue justifying those laws and railing against anyone who opposes them, the blood of our people is on your hands, as well as the destruction of the country and economic system. Are you willing to take this responsibility, or will you continue to do battle with your own people in favor of the side of empire, OVER the side of the republic? It is weak to side with the winning team just because they are winning, and history never forgets traitors.
…First off, whether the majority “crave” a subsistence lifestyle is irrelevant. My point is that it shouldn’t be criminalized. People should not be coerced to *pay* to exist. Period. I shouldn’t have to pay the government to go fishing. I shouldn’t have to pay the government to go hunting. I shouldn’t have to pay *anyone* to move to an uninhabited area, where no one lives, and build my own house out of the trees there, and then risk having my home demolished because a government that rules the area where no one lives decides it doesn’t conform to their standards.
I agree with this in principle, and it worked well in an age where the fastest means of physical transport was a horse – you could do 30 miles a day average, maybe 50 at a push, but you’d have to be rich to afford to change horses each day. This physical limitation, along with subsistence living meant that you had to stay pretty close to where you grew your vegetables, and mass migration wasn’t possible. Today the opposite is true. We can travel at 500mph, cover the globe in a day, and mass migration is not just possible, but a reality. We are divorced from living near where our vegetables grow, as you can see every time you go to the supermarket – fresh green beans from Venezuela, mangos from Brazil, bok choi from Thailand. This presents new challenges to eco-systems that can only support a given number of animals (including humans). If you want to live off the land, yes, you should be able to do so at no extra cost, but nature just can’t support 1000s of people per acre of productive land. At what point do we step in and put restrictions on it, to mimic the physical restrictions that naturally existed centuries ago? And who does this? And how?
Here in the UK laws were passed in 1994 essentially making it illegal for more than 2 people to gather in a public place (I’m not kidding). This has been used to round up and criminalize those people wanting to live in subsistence communities, as was its intention (although not explicitly stated like that, of course!). Now, it is impossible to live in a community living off the land, unless you vacate for 2 months of the year (there’s a loophole for seasonal farm workers/fruit pickers). And in any case, we come back to the taxing of the land by local rates, so you can’t get away from the fiat system.
…What constitutes slavery, is the use of coercion on people to force them to pay to acquire food, even by their own efforts, in the form of hunting license, fishing license, land tax, etc…
Slavery is only slavery if done against someone’s will. This brings into the forum the idea of “tacit consent”, which is to say, if you dont’ say NO, then it is assumed that you have said YES. This principle is how we are railroaded into legislation we don’t want. Not enough people say NO, and the system is rigged to enable that. When was the last time that you had the opportunity to vote NO for a politician?? You only have the option to vote YES. As Bush Jnr. showed, if enough people refrain from saying YES (71%), you can still get in to office on a vote of 29% YES. If a “not-YES” vote was counted as a NO, Bush would never have got in, but it’s not counted that way, it’s counted as a blank.
Thus “tacitly-consented-to-slavery” is what we have now. We haven’t said NO, we only didn’t say YES.
Sir, those are excellent points. On an individual basis, technically you don’t need acres and acres of land to grow your own food. I know people who have aquaponic fish/ garden systems in their barn, and it produces enough for them to eat. Also, might I point out, as well as others have already pointed out, that the majority of people do not wish to have this lifestyle. Therefore it is highly unlikely that it would become a problem. I do not claim to have all the answers, but I seriously see no reason why on an individual basis that we shouldn’t be allowed to support ourselves, independent of the use of currency. Thank you for bringing up that specific law, that is very interesting. It just goes to show how easily legislation can get out of hand. Your take on consent of the governed is a brutal reality. I never thought of it from that perspective before, but for the most part it’s true. However, my take on the slavery of it still stands, because if a person gets fined enough times for refusing to pay to exist, they will be jailed and then put to work anyway. Kidnapping someone and forcing them to work is slavery by *anyone’s* definition. What you say otherwise is true. The people should say “NO!”. If they ever do, perhaps there is hope for humanity, but as long as the majority continues to try to manipulate, shame, or punish the people who are saying “NO”, it isn’t going to change. This is why I will never back down when it comes to pointing out reality. My greatest hope is that one day the majority of law enforcement officers will refuse to enforce unjust laws, and that military will disobey orders to be the catalyst for war. Who will protect us from legislators?
Sir, those are excellent points. On an individual basis, technically you don’t need acres and acres of land to grow your own food. I know people who have aquaponic fish/ garden systems in their barn, and it produces enough for them to eat. Also, might I point out, as well as others have already pointed out, that the majority of people do not wish to have this lifestyle. Therefore it is highly unlikely that it would become a problem. I do not claim to have all the answers, but I seriously see no reason why on an individual basis that we shouldn’t be allowed to support ourselves, independent of the use of currency. Thank you for bringing up that specific law, that is very interesting. It just goes to show how easily legislation can get out of hand. Your take on consent of the governed is a brutal reality. I never thought of it from that perspective before, but for the most part it’s true. However, my take on the slavery of it still stands, because if a person gets fined enough times for refusing to pay to exist, they will be jailed and then put to work anyway. Kidnapping someone and forcing them to work is slavery by *anyone’s* definition. What you say otherwise is true. The people should say “NO!”. If they ever do, perhaps there is hope for humanity, but as long as the majority continues to try to manipulate, shame, or punish the people who are saying “NO”, it isn’t going to change. This is why I will never back down when it comes to pointing out reality. My greatest hope is that one day the majority of law enforcement officers will refuse to enforce unjust laws, and that military will disobey orders to be the catalyst for war. Who will protect us from legislators?
Yes, actually the amount of land needed to support a family isn’t all that large, and I have also see backyard aquaponics that are successful.
I agree, our freedoms are being eroded little by little, every year, with our consent. This is classic problem-reaction-solution management by government. Want to disarm the US population? Don’t go for the NRA, go for the people. Engineer false-flag events that scare everyone into giving up their guns “for the greater good”. Do it often enough, in seemingly random places, and the effect is guaranteed. Just have to look at campuses now – freedom of speech is gone, and the majority support the redacting of the 1st amendment.
I will play devil’s advocate here: is it slavery to force someone to do something they have tacitly agreed to? This is an area that I am very interested in, and it is personal manipulation. We manipulate people all the time, sometimes for good reasons, sometimes bad, and they have complete freedom to participate in that manipulation or not. Women are masters of manipulation!
1. Oh Pleeeeeeeez honey!
2. I’ll be mad if you don’t…….[x]!
3. [silent treatment],
4. “All my friends think you’re a s~~~ for [xx]”,
5. “I’ll be so HURT if you {xxx}”
6. “I’ll give you a blowjob if you [y]”
7. “It’s for your own good”
(and there are many more)Manipulation is part and parcel of everyday life. We agree to do something for someone else. The manipulation comes when we offer something unrealistic, we know we will renege on the agreement, we change the terms mid-race, we never had any intention of doing it, or we offer something of no value. Essentially, we are asking the other person to do something for us by creating an emotional reaction (either good or bad), and holding that emotion as ransom for doing that thing.
And in former blue-pill days, we all went along with it. Translating the above sentences:
1. Begging (appeal to generosity)
2. Threatening dire consequences (appeal to fear)
3. Threatening cutting off love (appeal to abandonment)
4. Consensus (appeal to conform)
5. Victim (appeal to white knight)
6. Praise (appeal to vanity)
7. Guilt (appeal to [contrived] wisdom)Is that slavery? If we agree to it, no, for precisely the reason that we agree to it. But by agreeing with it, playing our separate parts in manipulation, we enslave ourselves, by choice.
Governments are just the same. Once you spot these (and other) ways of manipulation, it is easy to see how we are all railroaded into bad legislation.
The ONLY way out is for a large percentage of the population to individually renounce personal manipulation, and start saying NO to those closest to them, and it will have the ripple effect into larger, societal matters. This is why MGTOW is SO important!! MGTOW is one of a few ways to unplug, and by doing so, usher in an age of more accountability.
Off-topic, I realise, but necessary to point out.
. End of story.
OH f~~~ing great..
Now I have to re-read this topic line in forum, and other economic topics similar or not, in order to find where you found the distinction to permit the ruling of “end of story”.
I get the “Keynesian economics” statement, however I am more inclined to believe the “Packard Bell school of economics” as I have paid $1400.00 for 1mb of ram, and $250.00 for an s~~~ty ink cartridge for a $150.00 printer.
I have been to countries where women sold for the price of 2 pieces of bread, top end was a jar of f~~~ing peanut butter, and people were more than willing to sell anything for food.
If I remember correctly it is the “charge as much as the market will bear” mantra. Which has led to a crash of each market that mantra was preached and applied to. (probably the wrong verbage)
I am actually not that old, however I do remember Family Doctors making house calls for the payment of a chicken, in what would be called a major metropolitan area, an a f~~~ing major western country. (during my early life time 1965-1975) the f~~~ing country is CANADA ( you know, that great big f~~~ing white place that is above the USA on all the WORLD maps), province was Manitoba.
As well as entertainers being paid to entertain, if they didn’t entertain the didn’t get paid/eat.
I kind of get where Doc is coming from, I can see where you are coming from Ven, in a right wing sort of fashion (if that makes sense?)
Frank’s comments (as well as several others) give me a USA centrist image, and pretty much alienate/invalidate my view or input. Which if it is a USA only representation/discussion, is pretty much consistent and fair, and out of my scope.
Now, for me, the only way to wrap this up neatly is to call this USA specific, or not to be overly dismissive, a rather flippant issue which someone deems relevant enough to throw onto the world’s economic stage, which is a far cry from playing fair economically with your neighbours.
Hopefully I did not detract from the discussion of FIAT Currencies,
Which in my ever so simple mind equates to 1×10 lb chicken = x.
x = the set standard of currency agreed upon in negotiation.
As a member of the British Commonwealth, that would indicate a FIAT currency of the pound sterling = 2.25 USD minimum opening value point.
1 lb of chicken = 1 pound sterling, which in turn= 2.25 USD per pound of chicken.
Or..
hey George, I have this chicken that I’ll trade you for that gallon of milk, we’ll just call is a square gallon, despite the fact that the IMP gallon is much larger than the US gal.
S~~~…
now I really have to re-read thisThere was a time in my life when I gave a fuck. Now you have to pay ME for it
I’m impressed! Most people do not have a general understanding of psychology! I have always been able to spot (individual) manipulators and have avoided them at all costs. I think this is why I’m fortunate enough to have not ever gotten married, or been the victim of a con. Have you ever heard of “Gas Lighting”? It was a form of manipulation referred to in the movie titled “Gaslight” (1944). Technically, you were not off topic because none of this is possible without manipulation, namely deception.
Most people do not have a general understanding of psychology
clever, clever’ little deceptive creature V ,
Well done little round about
Perhaps, as I am such a simple person. Is a ploy of connecting purse strings to heart?There was a time in my life when I gave a fuck. Now you have to pay ME for it
Most people do not have a general understanding of psychology
clever, clever’ little deceptive creature V ,
Well done little round about
Perhaps, as I am such a simple person. Is a ploy of connecting purse strings to heart?I’m not understanding what you are saying/asking here. Could you elaborate please sir? My post about psychology was a response to Mr. “Quietlyquietly”, not to you.
Disregard V.
I took waaaaay to long to write my response to the intended post.
I went back to read the thread and see where your response is supposed to sit.
My apologies, despite the curious and seemingly appropriate position of my response, it is actually out of sequence.There was a time in my life when I gave a fuck. Now you have to pay ME for it
Sometimes messages don’t post. 90% of my problems with this, are when I include a URL. So I’d recommend copying and pasting your message into Notepad or Word before posting, then you can try again if it fails to post. I did figure out, if I eliminate the ‘protocol’ prefix in front of the URL, it lets me post ANY URL.
Ok, I posted this once before, and then went to edit it, and then it disappeared. First off, whether the majority “crave” a subsistence lifestyle is irrelevant. My point is that it shouldn’t be criminalized. People should not be coerced to *pay* to exist. Period. I shouldn’t have to pay the government to go fishing. I shouldn’t have to pay the government to go hunting. I shouldn’t have to pay *anyone* to move to an uninhabited area, where no one lives, and build my own house out of the trees there, and then risk having my home demolished because a government that rules the area where no one lives decides it doesn’t conform to their standards. As for the GDP, I already mentioned the same fact and agree with you on that issue. The source of that issue is the fact that heavy artificial financial constraints are put on the populace to discourage people going into business for themselves, and the government businesses are funded by the printed money. If you watch the video I posted about the CAFR, the government businesses actually own controlling shares in a lot of major corporations. That in it’s self should be a huge red flag to you. When the government owns and controls the means of production, it’s called communism.
I agree with you on some of this; I believe property rights should be near sacrosanct. Where I reside (suburb of a large city in Rustbelt, USA), you can’t put a mobile home on your lot, size of signs is limited, you require all sorts of building permits for which fees must be paid, and you must pay property taxes to support the schools and fire and police services. The police continuously write speeding tickets for going slightly above posted limits (town is a speed trap), discouraging local businesses. I view some of the services as essential (police and fire), and don’t object to paying for them, but I would prefer it be financed other ways. Ultimately, I’d like to see the greatest cost, the schools, completely privatized. Subsidizing anything, just gives you higher costs. If you don’t believe it, just look at what is spent per pupil in inflation adjusted dollars for primary + secondary over the last 30-40 years. In my case, if you don’t like this s~~~, you can move one county over to a rural area, where property taxes are low, zoning minimal, cost of land low, etc. Jobs are tough to find in those rural counties, but you can commute with others to the Big City. Indeed, many of my colleagues live in said hinterlands. Said men, have to pay outrageous income taxes in the city where they WORK when they aren’t consuming any services from it, except perhaps the roads to their workplace. Even so, my property taxes are nothing compared to my income taxes, and in my view they aren’t a huge obstacle to subsistence living, ESPECIALLY in rural areas where they are much lower than ever the ‘burbs. Property taxes have existed since colonial times, though they’ve gone WAY up, primarily due to out-of-control spending on schools + local government.
I disagree about allowing ‘homesteading’ on somebody else’s property, even if unoccupied. Individuals may own forests or other land, while they don’t live on it, it’s theirs to do what they want with, not yours. Maybe they want to preserve it in its natural state, use it for hunting, etc. Similarly, National and State parks and forests, are meant to preserve natural spaces and wildlife. That said, I still believe the federal government owns too much land (primarily in the West) and should sell some of it, which would reduce debt.
The government owns way too many companies, especially the commuter railroads & postal service. And of course, it owned Government Motors (GM) until a couple years ago. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government-owned_companies — though I’d argue it results in poor service & inefficiency rather than an unfair advantage. UPS + Fedex (private) have kicked the postal service in the arse, for instance. There are too many barriers to entry created by the government, which discourages entrepreneurship (labor laws, family + medical leave act, permitting, etc). Even so, if you look at the total value of all the companies in this list, it’s still a TINY fraction of the total value of all companies in the US — so in my view, state-owned enterprises, have not yet been a huge problem or market distortion, in the US, but I’d still like to get rid of all those we do have!
“In the modern era, the positive check on population growth is PROSPERITY. Higher GDP, lower birth rates. Look at the statistics.”
Firstly, let’s call a “positive check” on population growth, what it *actually* is. MASS MURDER. No trial, no jury, no justification. The ruling class simply arranges for the murder of their subjects. Secondly, it does NOT lead to prosperity. The statistics were manufactured by government intervention in the market, as a result of artificial costs and the use of legislation to create an advantage for their business, and a disadvantage for their competitors. It looks like prosperity on paper, but when you look at the actual effects, the debt weapon is doing massive damage, and war is only good for the ruling class. This is Keynesian economics. People who support fiat currency, war, depopulation, and the control of the means of production by the state, are communist. It doesn’t matter if they *think* they are capitalist, supporting these tactics and ideologies are the fundamentals of every communist/socialist/collectivist civilization in history. End of story.
I don’t understand most of what you’re saying here. As people get wealthier, they choose to have fewer children — that’s all I was saying. This is a real trend we see across the world. reason.com/archives/2008/02/26/why-are-people-having-fewer-ki is a good libertarian explanation. Children no longer produce income as they did on a farm. Women work outside the home. As their educational attainment and participation in the workforce increases, the total fertility rate declines. Nobody is being murdered as this has unfolded in the West. Individuals have agency and are electing to have fewer kids. I would agree about the trend NOT leading to prosperity; indeed, because of bubble economics and ponzi schemes like social security that are ‘baked in’ to the US economy, a reduction in younger workers will ultimately lead to austerity or a collapse; the same debts across a smaller population of taxpayers are harder to finance. This trend has been offset by immigration in the US. The trend doesn’t present a problem if budgets are balanced. I’m not a Keynesian, I don’t understand what you’re getting at in the above at all.
I don’t think we should have participated in any of our recent wars (Gulf War, Iraq invasion, Afghanistan, etc) and believe the military should only defend our territory. In the case of WWI, the soldiers of the Christmas armistice should have established a protocol for a peace treaty amongst themselves, and imprisoned any civilian ‘leaders’ that got in their way of ending the killing in the trenches.
QuietlyQuietly: One of the provisions of an obscure political party in America which I support, the Libertarian Party, is that ‘NOTA’ or None of the Above, should be on every ballot. And if they win, that’s what you get! I thought you’d get a kick out of that. Many ways to implement NOTA. It would also be great if you got a 2nd vote to put each candidates in prison rather than in office in every major election, and if anyone ‘won’ 50% saying they should go to prison, they’d end up there. That would be a great provision for many kleptocracies.
Proportional Voting as you do in many parts of Europe (but not in UK since AVR failed), would also benefit us in the US, in my opinion. The two-party hegemony here sustains the status quo and the growth of government.
You made some great points on tacit consent. And manipulation. Gun control is the perfect example. The left-leaning mainstream media gives out-size coverage to mass shootings. This, in turn, encourages other maniacs to engage in more mass shootings. The general public is convinced that all Solutions come from Daddy Government instead of civil society or individuals, so the ‘solution’ is ‘There oughta be a law’. Thus, the solution to poverty must be government handouts, rather than private charities. The solution to gun violence, must be gun control. This is the narrative we are fed by much of our mass media AND importantly, by our public school system. What percent of your public school teachers favored small government? In my case, almost none. The general public, do not consider actual probabilities — are they more likely to be shot in a mass shooting, or die driving to work in a traffic accident. The public doesn’t weigh the right to protect themselves against government abuse. The law is passed, creating more problems (unintended consequences), and again ‘there oughta be a law’ prevails, and more laws are passed. Eventually you have a failed ‘war’ — ‘war on Drugs’, ‘war on poverty’, ‘war on crime’, etc in US parlance. Now, in my view, what we’ve had is a ‘war’ on freedom for decades.
You also reach a point where a significant fraction of the population benefits from big government, being direct or indirect employees of same, after which, it is very difficult to pass small government measures or for small-government candidates to be elected.
Veniversum: As for what we have in America, it’s not capitalism, socialism, or communism. When I was in school it was called a ‘mixed economy’, a ‘mix’ between socialism and capitalism. Since then it’s gone more towards the socialism end of the spectrum. Given the low % ownership in private businesses, calling it ‘communism’ is a stretch to me. I think ‘corporatism’ or ‘croneyism’ is also an apt description.
An important, but under-utilized feature of US law is jury nullification. If a Jury feels a law is unjust, they should refuse to vote to convict; this happened ROUTINELY during American [Alcohol] Prohibition, where the jury said, the law is unjust, we will not convict. It’s also what I’d do in victimless crime cases if on a jury.
I agree with you about property taxes and zoning rules being excessive, but I’m just not seeing huge barriers to subsistence independence in rural counties. The property tax is probably the greatest. As I’ve said, there are a couple hundred thousand Amish that live apart, and government isn’t persecuting them excessively. At the same time, you are seeing very few English JOINING Amish sects or any sort of communitarian/Utopian living arrangements. That is one reason I keep arguing people don’t seem to desire this lifestyle, in general.
- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
