The Four Freedoms plus One

[Hum Dinger]

In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression--everywhere in the world.

The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way--everywhere in the world.

The third is freedom from want--which, translated into universal terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants--everywhere in the world.

The fourth is freedom from fear--which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor--anywhere in the world.

That is no vision of a distant millennium. It is a definite basis for a kind of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind of world is the very antithesis of the so-called new order of tyranny which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb.
”
— Franklin D. Roosevelt, excerpted from the Annual Message to the Congress, January 6, 1941

5. Freedom to defend [by any means necessary] the first four freedoms

 

[Skull Pilot]

I see there is no provision for economic freedom in your world view.

How about freedom from corrupt governments and confiscatory taxes?

 

[editec]

Everybody wants complete freedom but nobody want anyone else to have it.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Everybody wants complete freedom but nobody want anyone else to have it.

You're wrong Ed.

I want you and everyone to enjoy every liberty, especially economic liberty

 

[editec]

I think understand what you want and what you want is sensible.

But "liberty" is not complete freedom.

No person living in a civil society has complete freedom.

We are all enslaved by the law or at least we are all subject to the law.

That's not pure freedom, that's rather highly limited freedom within the framework of our society's laws and regs.

A small point, but one that needs to be clarified, I think.

People who support laws and government are often characterized by the hyperbolic libertarian leaning among us as people who oppose freedom.

That's why I continue pointing out that almost nobody on this board is REALLY advocating pure freedom. We all want a fuctional government which limits our freedoms only as much as is ABSOLUTELY necessary to keep this society thriving.

I don't mean to be dick about it, but precision in stating what one means is important if we are seeking to actually discuss these issues.

But inprecision of language inevitable leads to nothing but these bitchfests which scuttle the discussion.

 

[Hum Dinger]

I see there is no provision for economic freedom in your world view.

How about freedom from corrupt governments and confiscatory taxes?

As Ed poinded out, all freedoms are limited. You may have freedom of speech, but you can't scream 'FIRE' in a theater. Unless of course, there really is a fire.

Furthermore, there is the universal principle that with freedom comes RESPONSIBILITY. Those who want economic freedom, must exercise that freedom responsibly or they deserve to lose it.

Since any government is comprised of the people who work for that government, corruption is a product of human nature. No government is corrupt, it's the people in the government that are corrupt. We can only create an environment of low tolerance for corruption. Maybe computerized governement would work better. (As long as I get to write the program!)

Finally, taxes are NOT government confiscating your income. Your income is a recognition of your wealth by the government. It is the government that sets the rules on how you obtain your wealth and it is the government that creates and protects the environment that makes it possible for you to obtain that wealth.

Taxes are just the government taking it's fair share in return for the services that they are providing to you. Without taxes, the government could not maintain the environment that allows you to obtain wealth, without which you would have no wealth whatsoever.

If the wealthy people of the world weren't so single mindedly greedy and self centered, they above all would be happy to pay and promote taxation - they are the ones who benefit the most from it.

In short, without taxes YOU WOULD HAVE NO ECONOMIC FREEDOM WHATSOEVER!

 

[mash107]

That is the most bullshit justification of income taxes ever.

I'd rather you have said some poor people benefit from us being deemed slaves of the government and forced to fork over a portion of our labor to them.

It is certainly not through the government's good graces that we accumulate wealth. Wealth is generated by production, and production happens despite government, not because of it. They are simply an obstacle to our wealth. The only legitimate roles for government is to enforce contracts, ensure no fraud happens, and ensure private property is maintained. As it stands today, they invalidate mortgage contracts, allow banks to leverage up fraudulently, and confiscate private property through taxes.

Economic freedom is as basic of a right as civil freedom. In fact, they're the same thing. You can't be a free person if you can't dictate what you want to do for a living, and how you want to spend your money.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I see there is no provision for economic freedom in your world view.

How about freedom from corrupt governments and confiscatory taxes?

As Ed poinded out, all freedoms are limited. You may have freedom of speech, but you can't scream 'FIRE' in a theater. Unless of course, there really is a fire.

So keeping the fruits of your labor, or reaping the rewards for your risk is now akin to yelling fire in a crowded theater?

Furthermore, there is the universal principle that with freedom comes RESPONSIBILITY. Those who want economic freedom, must exercise that freedom responsibly or they deserve to lose it.

You mean the responsibility to take care of your own affairs and not expecting anyone else to pay your way? Those responsibilities?

Since any government is comprised of the people who work for that government, corruption is a product of human nature. No government is corrupt, it's the people in the government that are corrupt. We can only create an environment of low tolerance for corruption. Maybe computerized governement would work better. (As long as I get to write the program!)

The way to minimize government corruption is to minimize government.

Finally, taxes are NOT government confiscating your income. Your income is a recognition of your wealth by the government. It is the government that sets the rules on how you obtain your wealth and it is the government that creates and protects the environment that makes it possible for you to obtain that wealth.

So 15% for the social security ponzi scheme, 28% for income tax, 5% for state income tax, sales tax, gas tax, taxes on utility bills, etc etc etc. Totaling nearly 50% or more of one's income is not confiscatory?

Having to turn over to the government nearly 5 months income is not confiscatory?

Taxes are just the government taking it's fair share in return for the services that they are providing to you. Without taxes, the government could not maintain the environment that allows you to obtain wealth, without which you would have no wealth whatsoever.

Don't put words in my mouth. You never heard me say I want no taxes. And what services exactly are you talking about?

The roads that my state and federal gas taxes are supposed to pay for?
The power grid that my taxes on utilities are supposed to pay for?

I have no problem paying taxes but what you consider fair and what I consider fair are obviously two different things.

If the wealthy people of the world weren't so single mindedly greedy and self centered, they above all would be happy to pay and promote taxation - they are the ones who benefit the most from it.

Oh the green headed liberal monster of class envy rears its ugly head yet again.

I am not wealthy...yet and it's being made very difficult by the government and its ever increasing size and cost getting in the way. So you consider it selfish of me to want nothing more than to secure my own retirement so I am not a burden on anyone else? It's selfish of me to expect that everyone else do the same?

In short, without taxes YOU WOULD HAVE NO ECONOMIC FREEDOM WHATSOEVER!

I NEVER SAID I WANTED TAXES ABOLISHED DID I?

The federal government should only be responsible for those actions with the sole function of protecting our constitutional rights that cannot be managed on a local level.

National defense and the entering and enforcement of international treaties, for example.

State and local government should only be responsible for those things that cannot be managed at an individual level.

Roads, sewers, police and fire departments for example.

Everything and I do mean everything else should be the sole responsibility of the individual.

I daresay the government would be able to do those things on a much smaller budget than the ever increasing budgets we will be seeing in perpetuity.