Ten Tenets of Freedom

[concept]

You could spend some time in a third world country...then you might actually wake up one day and be happy that you were born an American.

Otherwise, you are free to immigrate elsewhere. I'm sure there are many countries that would love to have you.



And btw, having a moral right to what you earn? tff!

If you are so happy to be an American, why are supporting someone who is working to drastically change it into something unrecognizable?

Sorry, I don't buy into hysteria.

Hysteria? I'm not making anything up here. This is coming straight from the horse's mouth.

You know, it might be a good idea for you to do a little more research before hanging that chad.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Bullshit.

I was born here by no choice of mine, and the "social contract" you describe is known in the legal world as an adhesion contract.

Google it for yourself.

You could spend some time in a third world country...then you might actually wake up one day and be happy that you were born an American.

Otherwise, you are free to immigrate elsewhere. I'm sure there are many countries that would love to have you.



And btw, having a moral right to what you earn? tff!

If you are so happy to be an American, why are supporting someone who is working to drastically change it into something unrecognizable?

Liberals want to make America better. They always have, and have consistently succeeded over the decades once they got the conservatives' barriers out of the way.

 

[Darkwind]

You could spend some time in a third world country...then you might actually wake up one day and be happy that you were born an American.

Otherwise, you are free to immigrate elsewhere. I'm sure there are many countries that would love to have you.



And btw, having a moral right to what you earn? tff!

If you are so happy to be an American, why are supporting someone who is working to drastically change it into something unrecognizable?

Liberals want to make America better. They always have, and have consistently succeeded over the decades once they got the conservatives' barriers out of the way.

No they haven't.

Just ask Detroit.

 

[Ravi]

In this country, the constitution.

I could claim a "moral" right to be on welfare and it would be as valid as Dud claiming a "moral" right to keep what he is paid. Which is...not valid at all.

Again, you are saying that the constitiution should be this basis, yet you are drunk on koolaid from someone that thinks the constitution is outdated...

So does that mean our morals should change also?

Bush isn't president anymore.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

In this country, the constitution.

I could claim a "moral" right to be on welfare and it would be as valid as Dud claiming a "moral" right to keep what he is paid. Which is...not valid at all.

Well the Constitution would back up Dude's claim to his property, and not to the "right" to be on welfare. So I would say Dude's claim is perfectly valid.

Where does the constitution back up the claim that you don't have to pay tax?

No where. But it does back up his claim to his right to his own property, and anything the government uses his tax money on that is not constitutional is certainly a violation of his property.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Where does the constitution back up the claim that you don't have to pay tax?

he is referring to income tax not any tax. the constitution clearly states i have the right to my private property. my income that I earned would fall into that category. the federal goverment to come in and work 8 of the 40 hours i work a week.

I'm not sure I'd qualify earned income as private property. Now, if you dug up gold out of your back yard that would be fine.

Regardless, the OP is claiming it is a moral issue and therefore should be law. That's ridiculous, especially for someone that pretends to be a libertarian.

Your body is your property, therefore the labor you do is your property. If somebody agrees to pay you for your labor then that payment is your rightful property.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you are so happy to be an American, why are supporting someone who is working to drastically change it into something unrecognizable?

Liberals want to make America better. They always have, and have consistently succeeded over the decades once they got the conservatives' barriers out of the way.

No they haven't.

Just ask Detroit.

Ok, you're right. The corporatists, in alliance with the right, have done quite well in thwarting liberalism in some areas.

 

[nodoginnafight]

just goes to show - you can run a wad of nasty toilet paper up a flag pole and some idiots will salute.

 

[The T]

In this country, the constitution.

I could claim a "moral" right to be on welfare and it would be as valid as Dud claiming a "moral" right to keep what he is paid. Which is...not valid at all.

Well the Constitution would back up Dude's claim to his property, and not to the "right" to be on welfare. So I would say Dude's claim is perfectly valid.

What is Life? Liberty? Persuit of Happiness but welfare of the individual?

 

[The T]

just goes to show - you can run a wad of nasty toilet paper up a flag pole and some idiots will salute.

And? Didn't read the OP did you?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Repeal all taxes on income and, better yet, enact a constitutional bar to imposing income taxes. That includes taxes on wages, on capital gains, and on estates. People have the moral right to keep everything they earn and to do whatever they want with it, including saving their money and passing it on to their designated beneficiaries.

Right... and how do we fund the Army?

Freedom entails the unfettered right of people to enter into mutually beneficial exchanges with anyone anywhere in the world. When two people enter into an exchange, each benefits, from his own individual perspective. How do we know that? Because in every trade, both parties are giving up something they value less for something they value more. Otherwise, they would not enter into the trade.

Suppose John has 10 apples and George has 10 oranges. What would be a fair exchange? Five apples for five oranges? Not necessarily. Value is subjective. It lies in the eyes of the beholder. If John and George enter into a trade in which John gives 7 apples to George in return for 3 oranges, each side has raised his standard of living. The reason, again, is that they have both given up something they value less for something they value more.

Are you saying there are laws against barter?



Yes... **** the old, the sick, and wounded veterans. They should ahve been born nobels if they didn't want to live in the gutter. Back to 1845!

Ditch them. Get rid of them all, including minimum-wage laws, price controls, rent controls, antitrust legislation, licensing laws, insider-trading laws, banking regulations, product-safety regulations, and stock regulations. In fact, the best thing would be to enact a constitutional amendment stating, “No law shall be passed respecting the regulation of commerce or abridging the free exercise thereof.”

Yes! **** transparency! Bring back the trusts! More monopolies 1845, here we come! Put the children back in the coal mines!

Every American living today takes it for granted that Americans are, by and large, free to cross borders from one state to another without governmental interference. The reason I say “by and large” is that in the Southwest and West, Americans traveling east and west are now required to submit to document checks and vehicular searches at the hands of the U.S. Border Patrol, an agency charged with stopping the flow of people illegally crossing the international border into the United States.

!

wait... so.. open the border?


Moron...
.

The OP wants to return to The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844

 

[kyzr]

Your idiotic OP overlooks things like Hitler, Communism, Terrorism, Globalism, and all other sorts of things that can "conquer" the world. How do you stop things like Sharia Law with your list? You can't there is no self-determination, nationalism, sovereignty, etc.

 

[jillian]

False analogies. The goal of running a business is for it to grow, whereas the goal with government is to keep it limited.

no... the object of government is for it to be SUCCESSFUL....not some Dickensian nightmare.

 

[elvis]

False analogies. The goal of running a business is for it to grow, whereas the goal with government is to keep it limited.

no... the object of government is for it to be SUCCESSFUL....not some Dickensian nightmare.

Is he trying to say income tax is unconstitutional again?

 

[Oddball]

You could spend some time in a third world country...then you might actually wake up one day and be happy that you were born an American.

Otherwise, you are free to immigrate elsewhere. I'm sure there are many countries that would love to have you.



And btw, having a moral right to what you earn? tff!

If you are so happy to be an American, why are supporting someone who is working to drastically change it into something unrecognizable?

Liberals want to make America better. They always have, and have consistently succeeded over the decades once they got the conservatives' barriers out of the way.

There you have it....Constitutionally constrained de jure government is a "barrier" to the Fabian socialists.

Like we didn't already know.

 

[Toronado3800]

I'll bite and say the goal of government is to best support the general welfare.

Sometimes that is accomplished by getting out of the way of private enterprise and letting companies expand space travel.
Sometimes its accomplished by instituting a draft to go beat the Nazi's.
Sometimes it may be best to forcibly take lands from the Native Americans.
Sometimes its best accomplished by using the Military Industrial Complex to give that Native American land to the Railroads to connect the eastern and western ends of the continent.
Sometimes you have to use the threat of violence to force immunization on folks to get rid of small pox.
Sometimes you gotta throw out the Articles of Confederation and start all over.

 

[Toronado3800]

Ideally we don't need an income tax, or a FCC to use the threat of force to regulate the FM airwaves. Both seem necessary though.

 

[Oddball]

I'll bite and say the goal of government is to best support the general welfare.

Sometimes that is accomplished by getting out of the way of private enterprise and letting companies expand space travel.
Sometimes its accomplished by instituting a draft to go beat the Nazi's.
Sometimes it may be best to forcibly take lands from the Native Americans.
Sometimes its best accomplished by using the Military Industrial Complex to give that Native American land to the Railroads to connect the eastern and western ends of the continent.
Sometimes you have to use the threat of violence to force immunization on folks to get rid of small pox.
Sometimes you gotta throw out the Articles of Confederation and start all over.

The goal of the federal gubmint is to protect people from external aggressive force and fraud...That's it.

Its role was never intended to be an aggressor against those it was chartered to serve.

 

[Toronado3800]

Dude, I believe the Constitution leaves the states way more power than they exercise now, and give Washington considerably less. There probably should have been 15 more Amendments to transfer the Feds as much power as they exercise or snuck in.

As previously stated I support Federal power so I'm not all up in arms fighting against it just for the sake of Constitutional issues. This is because of my intense distrust of small groups of folk who think of themselves as Croatians or Georgians, Virginians, Scottish, Germans, or whatever and my love of economics of scale. The "we need a standard gauge railroad" type issue.

 

[Ravi]

I'll bite and say the goal of government is to best support the general welfare.

Sometimes that is accomplished by getting out of the way of private enterprise and letting companies expand space travel.
Sometimes its accomplished by instituting a draft to go beat the Nazi's.
Sometimes it may be best to forcibly take lands from the Native Americans.
Sometimes its best accomplished by using the Military Industrial Complex to give that Native American land to the Railroads to connect the eastern and western ends of the continent.
Sometimes you have to use the threat of violence to force immunization on folks to get rid of small pox.
Sometimes you gotta throw out the Articles of Confederation and start all over.

Yep...there is no point in having a government if it doesn't fulfill its one and only duty...which is basically to keep the country thriving.

Though it is quite possible for individuals to have ulterior motives and overstep their authority.