The Libertarian Thread

[SuperFerret]

Paul has stated his economic plan all through his candidacy. Take care of America first, bring home the troops, stop nation building, stop borrowing from China to pay for an illegal war, stop aiding other countries when we are hurting right here. Get rid of the federal reserve, do away with taxes (which legally the gov't has no right to).Stop health care from being a monopoly and make it a free market. If that's lather ,rinse, repeat, please someone sign me up for the next wash.

Seriously? That's what his plan was for his candidacy? I mean, I'll go for a lot of that, but it's kind of clear right there why he lost.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Paul has stated his economic plan all through his candidacy. Take care of America first, bring home the troops, stop nation building, stop borrowing from China to pay for an illegal war, stop aiding other countries when we are hurting right here. Get rid of the federal reserve, do away with taxes (which legally the gov't has no right to).Stop health care from being a monopoly and make it a free market. If that's lather ,rinse, repeat, please someone sign me up for the next wash.

You might want to research that...

[Constitution] Section. 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

 

[AllThingsComic]

Thanks for the correction, I was under the impression that the gov't could not tax on the wages for services renedered.

 

[SuBe]

Thanks for the correction, I was under the impression that the gov't could not tax on the wages for services renedered.

Not since the 16th Amendment.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Paul has stated his economic plan all through his candidacy. Take care of America first, bring home the troops, stop nation building, stop borrowing from China to pay for an illegal war, stop aiding other countries when we are hurting right here. Get rid of the federal reserve, do away with taxes (which legally the gov't has no right to).Stop health care from being a monopoly and make it a free market. If that's lather ,rinse, repeat, please someone sign me up for the next wash.

Wow...that's great. Here's my plan for fixing America: get everyone puppies, make rainbows everyday, and only allow talented musicians to make music.

 

[AllThingsComic]

Awesome, learn something new everyday.

 

[SuBe]

You might want to research that...

[Constitution] Section. 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Too bad all Taxes are not uniform. Too many get away with supporting higher precent of taxes for the "rich".

 

[AllThingsComic]

Wow...that's great. Here's my plan for fixing America: get everyone puppies, make rainbows everyday, and only allow talented musicians to make music.

Condencending is not necessary. I talk to all with respect, it would be nice to have the same courtesy.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Too bad all Taxes are not uniform. Too many get away with supporting higher precent of taxes for the "rich".

It only says duties, imposts and excises must be uniform, doesn't say "taxes" to be fair.

 

[AllThingsComic]

Seriously? That's what his plan was for his candidacy? I mean, I'll go for a lot of that, but it's kind of clear right there why he lost.

Is it really? This country was founded on what alot of people thought were outrageous beliefs, and we survived thus far with those same beliefs. It's only now that we are straying from those beliefs that this country is in turmoil. Maybe, just maybe, what this country needs is a radical return back to the constitution to get out of the mess we are in.

 

[SuperFerret]

Is it really? This country was founded on what alot of people thought were outrageous beliefs, and we survived thus far with those same beliefs. It's only now that we are straying from those beliefs that this country is in turmoil. Maybe, just maybe, what this country needs is a radical turn back to the constitution to get out of the mess we are in.

Yes, you have a point, but here's the catch, it can't work. It takes more than one person, even if that person is in the highest office in the country, to enact change like that. Those types of changes will upset and hurt many who are in a position to put a stop to those changes, therefore it won't work. At this point, only a complete overhaul of the entire system of government will result in that type of reform.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Is it really? This country was founded on what alot of people thought were outrageous beliefs, and we survived thus far with those same beliefs. It's only now that we are straying from those beliefs that this country is in turmoil. Maybe, just maybe, what this country needs is a radical return back to the constitution to get out of the mess we are in.

The Constitution is a fatally vague document (hence the amendment process), so much so Jefferson wanted it overturned and rewritten every twenty years. Even the founding fathers don't agree on what it means or how it should be implemented. The Federalist Papers are essentially a thousand page argument over what the hell the document means. They don't come to any particular conclusion. I know Ron Paul is this strict constructionalist, but he should know our founders generally opposed standing armies, voting rights for anyone except wealthy landowners and didn't have a "one man, one vote" election process for Presidents. I agree some of their ideas are good, but Ron Paul always fails to realize we need new ideas, no monday morning quarterbacking, and certain not arguments that start with "well, if you had only stuck to what the founders wanted...". That kind of logic doesn't help at all. Unless he can invent a time machine, or fly so fast he reverses Earth's spin a la Superman I'd say he needs to take a powder and let the rational sane people figure this out...

 

[AllThingsComic]

The Constitution is a fatally vague document (hence the amendment process), so much so Jefferson wanted it overturned and rewritten every twenty years. Even the founding fathers don't agree on what it means or how it should be implemented. The Federalist Papers are essentially a thousand page argument over what the hell the document means. They don't come to any particular conclusion. I know Ron Paul is this strict constructionalist, but he should know our founders generally opposed standing armies, voting rights for anyone except wealthy landowners and didn't have a "one man, one vote" election process for Presidents. I agree some of their ideas are good, but Ron Paul always fails to realize we need new ideas, no monday morning quarterbacking, and certain not arguments that start with "well, if you had only stuck to what the founders wanted...". That kind of logic doesn't help at all. Unless he can invent a time machine, or fly so fast he reverses Earth's spin a la Superman I'd say he needs to take a powder and let the rational sane people figure this out...

First, thank you for conversing with me, I am always up to having my mind open and learning from those with more knowledge than myself. I am not one of those crazy Paul-nuts that refuse to hear anything else but what he has to say. I do believe that he is the only candidate (former anyway) who has a true grasp on what it takes to rebuild this country financially. I like Obama, but I hear no plan from him, only the chant of change change change, McCain is 4 more years of the same. I truly pray that the next man in charge will lead us to a new age of self reliance, self respect and the motto that America comes first.

 

[SuperMonkey]

so did Glenn Beck

Looooooonnng time ago.

 

[Paradoxium]

He did offer a solution - do nothing and let the market correct itself. And yes, it won't be pleasant; no one is going to dispute that. There is no solution at this point (too late), but the choice of a lesser evil.

But this is not entirely his prediction, he said (or wrote I forget) the government would probably attempt a bailout with an assortment of spending and regulations which will prolong the recession to a decade or more. I am not entirely sure about his "one year before signs of recovery" prediction (sans bailout), I think it will be a bit longer. But the jist of the current bailout won't improve but vitiate it. What is important is both McFail and Ofailma plans to do this bailout (or variants of it) anyways . Instead of arguing amongst ourselves, just watch one of these two fail and become one of the biggest scapegoats in recorded history. To be honest the Demopublicans are the most culpable, they sow the seeds, both these chaps don't deserve the excessive burn they will eventually get. Whoever wins, it is going to suck to be them.

Most of this is not new, most of the literature, predictions and solutions have been cited the by the Austrian school of economics. However, the dominant economists today are the Keynesians. What we have now analogously, are two operating systems with their respective "experts". The current system is Windows (Keynesians), which is really not that capitalistic to begin with, and the lesser known Linux (Austrians). This is a very rough way of getting the idea down of course. But when it comes to fundamental flaws to the system, the Keynesians can't do **** about it - they can't go outside the box. An example is maturity transformation. The problem is in the structure of it, and the Federal Reserve contribute a lot. Collapsing the Federal Reserve won't solve it entirely, but it is a major contributor. They are limited to the parameters of what they are taught. The Austrians recognize these flaws but this is not their operating system, so at most they can mitigate some problems. Since Keynesian dominates both parties, whatever their solutions are, it will ultimately delay the inevitable and/or multiply the problem (to some eventual collapse).

There are a few (complex) solutions, but they are going to be so radical people will have a hard time stomaching it, one of them includes changing the "operating system" - like from Windows to say OSX, Linux etc... In other words, changing it to something along the lines of an actual free market (despite the deregulation of Reagan it is NOT really) or to something really authoritarian. Changing the operating system won’t be enough; the role of the government needs to be changed to make it "software compatible". Some regulation will be necessary and the stronger enforcement of fraud and business laws are necessary; i.e. anti-trust laws, don’t let companies get big enough to fail really hard, been done for ages without problems. Substance will be more important then say "more laws, more intervention!" At this point, you can’t really regulate yourself out of the current problem of inflation; it would be futile and counterproductive.

I think what matters now is NOT what the Demopublicans are going to do (i.e. both will fail in their own comedic ways); it will be approximately the same. What is more important is what you should do now. Do your homework on the issue and you will be able to alleviate some of the pain. Gold and Silver looks really attractive. Look around Europe and Asia as well. Learning to live below your means and cutting excess will be important.

On the bright side, if you’re concerned with abortion, racism or Iraq, fear not, cause that will become the least of your problems now. Iraq is going to be a lost cause, it doesn’t matter what moral imperatives or malicious conspiratorial reasons it was for (**** whatever the reason is), America is too broke ass poor to keep it up. Yes it will be worse than ever post pullout, but like they say, every choice has a consequence. You have to weigh the pro and cons and make the hard choices.

 

[Dark Vigilante]

Interesting letter from Dr. Ron Paul:

Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Dear Friends,
Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike.
The events of the past week are no exception.
The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters."
That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we're being told it's unavoidable.
The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!
• The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us.
• Financial institutions are "designated as financial agents of the Government." This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.
• Then there's this: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.
There goes your country.
Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? Don't make me laugh.
Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are. A sad display, really.
Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you! Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.
The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?
When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media?
Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be.
In liberty,
Ron Paul

How is it that when sense like this is made in an incrediblly troubling time the author is automatically discredited with mere off-topic quibbling and ego-satisfying "point making"? Do the chains of society really run that deep? We're not that mentally enslaved are we?

"Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

In a truly free society, this type of scammed and sinister ultra-authority is denied anytime it is requested by any one. In a truly free society, criminal and parasitic organizations like the Federal Reserve do not exist, and those with ambitions for the creation of such are brought to trial in the public's judgement and opinion and will most likely not be allowed to any position of power. In a society that adheres always to the natural rights of man, a nation governed by law and the people's will, a government plan to socialize the free markets would bring revolution. This would be an issure where most Congressman or Senators would certainly not be re-elected if they enable with their vote such a usurption of power. In fact, they would most likely be charged with treason.

I ask you now, do we live in a society that regards the auspices of liberty in such a way that it is truly free?

 

[dnno1]

This is what would happen if Libertarians had their way:

 

[SuBe]

Wow, this is an old thread. And, you were able to prove you don't understand what Libertarianism is all in one post. Congratulations.

 

[StorminNorman]

Bell110 made this thread?!

 

[SuBe]

Wow, there was some great stuff posted back then.

 

[VampElvis]

Wow, this is an old thread. And, you were able to prove you don't understand what Libertarianism is all in one post. Congratulations.

That may be true - but still the video was funny.

"Now you've got cholera!"

 

[SuBe]

Libertarianism is not the Absence of Government, that would be Anarchy.

 

[dnno1]

Wow, this is an old thread. And, you were able to prove you don't understand what Libertarianism is all in one post. Congratulations.

That may be true - but still the video was funny.

"Now you've got cholera!"

And if I have to think that hard to understand what Libertarianism is, I don't want to be one.

 

[StorminNorman]

And if I have to think that hard to understand what Libertarianism is, I don't want to be one.

You are opening yourself up for jokes.

 

[C.F. Kane]

This is what would happen if Libertarians had their way:

Damn. I just posted that in the Satire thread.