"One problem however. Who would fund that treasury?"
Why bother offering a competitive viewpoint?
"... inevitable..."
"...would not exist..."
"...an impossibility..."
"...
you are sadly mistaken."
"We have no idea..."
"That is madness..."
Apparently you are the absolute source of all knowledge as you can speak for everyone and you know everyone's thoughts.
Back to this:
"One problem however. Who would fund that treasury?"
Those who volunteer as investors in mutual defense are those who are responsible and accountable for mutual defense. Those who turn a voluntary association into an involuntary one are accurately identifiable as criminals, if anyone cares to know the facts in any case where individuals alone, or individuals in groups, turn a voluntary association into an involuntary one, at any level, any place, or any time.
If that is not true, then someone can tell me the process by which any dispute concerning what is, or is not true, is acknowledge as the process due everyone according to true law.
In the case of the working federation that turned into a tyranny in 1789, with the fraudulent effort to criminally cover-up that working federation with a counterfeit replacement, the obvious, confessed, reason for doing so had to do with ensuring the maintenance of funding flowing from the victims to the criminals.
Reclaiming the American Revolution The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy William Watkins 9781403963031 Amazon.com Books
Here is an explanation of the turning from voluntary association (people in states can join, and pay for, or secede from, and not pay for, voluntary mutual defense) into involuntary association, and the lies told in order to reach that goal:
"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "
In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.
"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
Those are not my words, citation is offered, I even checked the available on-line copies of the words attributed to Mr. Hamilton.
Same source offers an very well written explanation as to why a federation (voluntary association) is one, why people maintain the voluntary nature, why it works the way it works:
Second, federalism permits the states to operate as laboratories of democracy-to experiment with various policies and Programs. For example, if Tennessee wanted to provide a state-run health system for its citizens, the other 49 states could observe the effects of this venture on Tennessee's economy, the quality of care provided, and the overall cost of health care. If the plan proved to be efficacious other states might choose to emulate it, or adopt a plan taking into account any problems surfacing in Tennessee. If the plan proved to be a disastrous intervention, the other 49 could decide to leave the provision of medical care to the private sector. With national plans and programs, the national officials simply roll the dice for all 284 million people of the United States and hope they get things right.
Experimentation in policymaking also encourages a healthy competition among units of government and allows the people to vote with their feet should they find a law of policy detrimental to their interests. Using again the state-run health system as an example, if a citizen of Tennessee was unhappy with Tennessee's meddling with the provisions of health care, the citizen could move to a neighboring state. Reallocation to a state like North Carolina, with a similar culture and climate, would not be a dramatic shift and would be a viable option. Moreover, if enough citizens exercised this option, Tennessee would be pressured to abandon its foray into socialized medicine, or else lose much of its tax base. To escape a national health system, a citizen would have to emigrate to a foreign country, an option far less appealing and less likely to be exercised than moving to a neighboring state. Without competition from other units of government, the national government would have much less incentive than Tennessee would to modify the objectionable policy. Clearly, the absence of experimentation and competition hampers the creation of effective programs and makes the modification of failed national programs less likely.
So your question again:
"One problem however. Who would fund that treasury?"
Competitive answers were offered. The method chosen by the criminals was to extract value from each individual alive in each formerly independent state and to demand from each individual a portion of their earnings that must be paid without question. That was then called DIRECT TAX and it was understood as a sure fire way to destroy liberty, destroy federation, and if those who destroy liberty and federation also destroy rule of law, known as trial by jury according to the common law, then people would no longer have a peaceful means of defense against tyrant criminals running their despotism.
You parrot the standard lies used to sway the MOB when the criminals covered up the working federation. Your absolute authority to tell me how it was is weak when compared to the opinions offered by George Mason, Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, Robert Yates, Luther Martin, and many others then, and since, who have looked closely into the matter and found those standardized lies unfounded in demonstrable fact. The voluntary federation was formed by necessity as a voluntary federation and it was written during that forming of that voluntary federation that the federation was perpetual. The founders of the voluntary federation founded a perpetually voluntary mutual defense association; wholly dependent upon volunteers willing to invest in maintaining it against all enemies foreign (the British Red Coats at the time) and domestic (Hamilton and Washington for example) as criminals always work to TURN voluntary association into involuntary, criminal, association.
"I suppose you feel each confederated state would freely give funding to it. Nonsense!"
Your claim of nonsense is noted. A counter claim is that your viewpoint is criminally negligent given the consequences of collective ignorance concerning this subject matter. The federation worked well enough to defeat the largest Nationalized army of aggression then perpetrating the crime of war of aggression then on the planet, and it did so with voluntary contributions by people in States because all those people in all those states had a mutual enemy. Voluntary associations are maintained by free people in free places, which can be called homes, churches, farms, businesses, corps, towns, cities, counties, states, all federated voluntarily, and even federations, even federations of federations, all voluntary, and the common, obvious, invasive, tyrannical, despotic, criminal, common enemy are always those, like you, who insist that the connection between people must be involuntary: for reasons they claim are absolutely true because they say so.
The reason why voluntary association works best is explained very well by actual facts. People free to shop for a better mutual defense association, like shopping for car insurance, or like shopping for a new computer, or shopping for a new phone, have competitive options. The force of all those free decisions seeking better from worse forces those who work at supplying whatever is demanded to increase quality and lower cost. That is a natural economic law KNOWN to those (if you care to read their writing) who were against the so called Constitution of 1787, which you claim is such an inevitable, and good thing.
If your words indicate that you are personally, as an individual, thinking two opposite things can be true, then why would anyone, other than someone else with a duplicitous mind, trust what you have to say?
"The confederated states themselves would have long ago self destructed."
"We have no idea how things would be today, thankfully, as steps were taken to insure the stability of central government."
Voluntary association works to defend people against involuntary association, also known as freedom, also known as free markets, also known as Liberty, also knowable as fair competition without fraud, threat of aggressive violence, and without aggressive violence rising some people unfairly above other people, and crushing some people unfairly under people.
Involuntary association is formed through deception as some people deceive other people into a false belief that a criminal involuntary association is, in any way, good for anyone, which is false, involuntary association is not good for criminals nor victims, as criminals grow dependent upon the productive capacity of their victims, which prevents the criminals who cause involuntary association from learning economic productivity themselves. Involuntary association is also formed through threat of violence visited upon the targeted victims who dare to question the order to pay the involuntary fee, which can be a part of deception, if there is no power to inflict the violence that is within the threat. Involuntary association is also acted out when those who are aggressively violent do what they do best to the targeted victims.
A part of the deception routine is to claim that involuntary association is inevitable, and necessary, for...timing...maintaining voluntary (read: involuntary) association.
In other words, the lie goes...in order to save them we had to enslave them.
"Like it or not, thieves and gangsters aside, we as a nation would not be at this point."
Not only is the false federation not liked, it is self destructing, all lies, and all things based upon lies, all Tyrannies, all Nation States, all Despotisms, all Imperial Empires, destroy themselves because that is the natural law applied to criminals who organize for their criminal profits at the expense of their targeted victims, with or without, the false claims of absolute authority over the truth, the law, as if these criminals actually thought they are Gods.
When the criminals took over they made sure that every living soul capable of producing anything worth stealing would be targeted and exploited to the fullest extent possible.
If you care to know how they did that, then it stands to reason that you would have figured it out by now. Since your "side" is the side of the criminals, expressed in your words, it states to reason that you care not to know the facts. So why challenge me at this point, and why offer up these regurgitated lies as your authority over these matters?
U.S. National Debt Clock Real Time
"Like it or not, thieves and gangsters aside, we as a nation would not be at this point."
Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New York, and certainly Vermont all but outlawed the heinous crime of African Slavery before the criminals took over in 1789. From that point in 1789 onward the crime of African Slavery accelerated to the destruction of many poor souls including regular farmers whose fruits of their labor then had to compete with subsidized slave labor farmers WHICH NOW is exemplified in what Ross Perot called The Giant Sucking Sound, as false federal tax (extortion) payments are stolen from free market competitors in America, sent to China to help enslave Chinese people (subsidy goes to the slave masters not to the slaves) so as to then ship slave made products back to America which forces entrepreneurial competitors here, out of business.
That does not even begin to quantify the total losses to Liberty concerning the genocide of the Indian population because the criminals took over in 1789. Ages of ancient wisdom was wiped out first by disease, and then by "executive order" as a final solution to someone's Indian problem.
That does not even begin to quantify the total losses to Liberty concerning the cover-up, and counterfeiting, of due process from common law trial by jury into what can be understood as plea bargaining, or the booming business of profiting from subsidized crime, as the very people claiming to be offering security are those funding the criminal drug trade. That is an old trick in the criminal hand book, a trick used by the East India Company when confronted with Nation of Chinese people who refused to trade: becoming so called Opium Wars. Where do you think the current batch of criminals get their false advertisement slogan "War on Drugs"?
"The faith you display, in confederation is nothing short of wish in one hand and crap in the other, to see which one fills first."
Speaking of false advertisement slogans?
Before the so called Civil War (which was predicted by those against the Constitution of 1789) the President of a counterfeit federation ended the Second Criminal Bank of the United States, and there was a time called the Wildcat Banking era.
Now, at this time, there are a number of competitors working to offer people something other than a criminal Central Bank Ponzi scheme. A number of competitive states, including Utah and Arizona, are returning to Gold and Silver backed State currencies. I went to a Conference on this subject and I spoke to one of the advisors hired to help write the statutes concerning the state bank in Utah. We both agreed that the end of the criminal National (not federal) Central Bank would be the result of this higher quality and lower cost competitor in that market, were this to be allowed to exist.
"Under a confederation of the size you want, you would have them, as a cluster of gangs and would resemble a huge Mafia spread over a huge landmass."
You volunteer to be my ventriloquist? I think that tactic is a mixture of the age old Man of Straw and hyperbole.
I'm done with this for now.
