News & Analysis
Taxes vs. Fed – What's to Blame?
Ron Paul's analysis is correct ... There is an ongoing argument about higher income tax rates for the top 1 percent of us but that is just a diversion from the real problem. Since 9/11, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates to zero and started printing more money to keep our economy from collapsing. But a decade of free money caused a flurry of spending that caused the stock market and housing bubble to inflate and finally burst, leaving a mountain of new debt. – Des Moines Register
Dominant Social Theme: It's taxes, man!
Free-Market Analysis: The above article excerpt would seem to put the "fiscal versus monetary" argument into perspective. It is an argument that, in our view, defines the modern state and what's "gone off the rails."
Are taxes too high? Is that the reason for so much insolvency in Europe and the US?
Why is prosperity draining away? What's the REAL fix?
Our preference would be to explore monopoly central banking when it comes to determining the ills that afflict the modern world. There are 150 central banks now where before, at the beginning of the century, there was only a handful.
These central banks churn out money at an astonishing rate. And from what we can tell, making the mechanism purely public won't help, either. When given the opportunity, people will print as much money as they possible can. Power corrupts. Here's some more from the article:
Rather than tightening our belt to pay down some of this new debt, the government went all in with bailouts for private industries, forcing the Fed to print $3 trillion more worthless money over the past three years.
With this new glut of national debt and a mountain of new worthless money, the money in our pockets buys less every day as prices go up. If the dollar has lost 70 percent of its value since 1970, that's a 70 percent tax increase on all of us.
That is why Ron Paul wants to eliminate the Federal Reserve and that is why we need to listen to him. We need to cut the federal budget or milk and gas will both cost $8 a gallon.
When the Fed "prints" money it eventually circulates. At first it may be lodged in bank vaults (metaphorically speaking) but eventually these electronic digits – money from nothing – will be lent out and the price inflation will be aggravated.
That's a tax, of course, of the most insidious kind. It makes a regular tax look fairly inefficient because an inflationary tax attacks every part of the economy. No part is left untouched.
There are other issues when it comes to modern central banking economies that ought to be scrutinized closely. The Fed – and other central banks – distributes money via commercial banks. These banks are the distribution channel.
Because these banks are the distributors for central banks, they are usually not allowed to go out of business – which means that over time (decades and decades) the financial sector gradually expands like a balloon.
Today, the West's financial sector is surely the world's biggest bubble. Literally dozens, if not hundreds, of world-spanning financial firms should be out of business. But they remain in place, defiantly churning out trillions of dollars in lending over time – money that will further inflate the larger economy.
It is the misalignment of assets and real productivity that is at the heart of this bubble. The whole system foundered and failed in 2008 and the central banks around the world have printed and lent something like an impossible-to-comprehend US$ 50 trillion since then, all in.
The entire system is simply propped up by funny money – money from nothing – that flows from monopoly central banks to designated commercial banks and thence to certain targeted corporations, also controlled by the same elites that control the central banks.
The amount of money that is designated by a handful of powerful people to flow to the Western military-industrial complex, Intel-industrial complex and the prison-industrial complex – not to mention Big Pharma, etc – is truly staggering. It would seem to be in the tens of trillions.
And one needs to remember that taxes are paid out of the same mechanism, printing money-from-nothing. Tax money is formally designated by the bureaucracy. Central banking fiat money is informally directed by a power elite that evidently and obviously is trying to build world government.
At its root, then, the fiscal versus monetary debate resolves itself into a relatively simple paradigm. The same people who control central banks control governments via what is called mercantilism.
The money all comes from private/public monopoly central banks and much of it is formally or informally controlled by the same powers-that-be. Within this larger context, then, it seems a bit naïve to speak of fiscal elements as what needs to be fixed.
One can cut taxes forever. But so long as the larger money mechanism remains in place, Western economies will remain tremendously distorted.
Any job gains will then prove ephemeral because they are being generated within the context of this larger distorted economy and will be subject to the infinitely destructive boom-bust cycle that monopoly central banking always creates over time.
"Fixing" taxes is not nearly as important as re-introducing competition into the larger monetary system. It ought to be privatized and people ought to be able to use the money they choose within their own communities and regions.
Conclusion: Only when money is freed will people be free and prosperous once more.
l 
|
You must be a site member to submit suggested edits or post feedback. In addition to submitting edit suggestions and posting feedback, your Free Membership to The Daily Bell gives you access to our Member Zone where you will discover a plethora of other member benefits. Want to learn more? click here |
|||||
|
|
||||
 |
Posted by tobias on 10/10/12 10:03 AM
Dear Herr Memehunter,
your anti-semetic smears are simply outrageous. I am one who knows that you are not who you appear to be, and neither are your associates. Arguing issues is one thing, but disgusting smears are another, professor. Given your continued malicious attacks on the libertarian community, it would probably be a public service to attach your real name to your anti-semetic writings.
Further more, perhaps a dozen or so strategically addressed couriers containing your 'writings' should be delivered to the senior administration of the university that employs you. Surely your peers should benefit from reading your fine work too! Ironic, coming from what most consider to be the backyard of Austrian 'classical liberal' economics!
Let us know, Herr Memehunter, how you would prefer this matter handled: a digital outing and email blitzkrieg to the faculty members, hard copy delivered via courier, or both. Hope you aren't using university computers for your 'side car hobby.' That could look even worse for the institution involved. Perhaps this is a newsworthy story as well: Major European University and Anti-Semetic Blogging Professors. All may be arranged and forthcoming shortly Herr Memehunter.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Here is an unusual feedback addressed to ... Memehunter. It brings back memories. This person begged to write for DB but has lately made a career out of furtively libeling them. Correct. He once wrote for DB. But he never bothered to explain to readers his articles were not further utilized by DB because there was not adequate backup for the historical lack of facts and anti-Semitism he regularly presented. It is the same in his current writings. Unable to counteract DB's arguments about money and central banking, he simply relies on accusations and innuendo. It is a symptom of a weak mind - the oldest kind of rhetoric. He wants to appear as someone motivated by a desire for truth. But he is not or he would have revealed his own affiliation.
 |
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 04/25/12 11:27 AM
@ Bischoff
Gee, maybe I'm on to something here - I just bumped into this:
"I was speaking with some people on Capitol Hill who are becoming alarmed at what is starting to appear to be a hidden oligarchy behind eliminating all constitutional rights and converting the United States into the new East Germany. The authority to indefinitely detain American citizens without any trial, lawyers, charges, or anything as they did to me until the Supreme Court told the government to respond, passed with flying colors"
Click to view link
|
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 04/25/12 06:57 AM
TO CLARIFY:
B: "Well, and I was an East German who graduated from highschool in the DDR. I have first hand knowledge of the Wilhelm Piek, Otto Grotewohl, Walter Ulbricht government under which I grew up. You may have listened to the radio in the West, or may even have glimpsed some East German propaganda news on TV, but I lived under the regime"
AA: Huh? The DDR ceased to exist more than 20 years ago. So, plenty of time to listen to ACTUAL East German SED-dinosaurs - IN PERSON. As I wrote, one could/can not really escape it at times. And, matter of fact, in most cases they blame(d) the people in general, for not living up to the grand concept or for not understanding it - to explain how their precious concept could have crashed ...
JUST LIKE YOU DO NOW
... with statements like, 'he Constitution is only as good as the understanding of it purpose by the people'
It's all about power, Bischoff. Always. Humans cannot help it, obviously. When you give people the power to govern others, they will expand and abuse it, no matter how benign and ambitious the overture.
In the case of the US, the Constitution, the checks and balances established - with the best of intentions, if you will - merely prolonged the agony at the end of the day.
B: "In comparison to all other nations, with exception of the Swiss Federation, the Federal Government installed with U.S. Constitution is the oldest continuous constitutional republic in the world."
AA: It WAS, Bischoff. The US ceased to be a constitutional republic long since - as it had to - due to the corrupting nature of power.
|
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 04/25/12 06:10 AM
MH: "But who or what hijacked these governments? The plutarchy a.k.a the dynastic banking families a.k.a Money Power. Governments are merely enforcers and it was Money Power who was behind most, if not all, of these mass murders. I seem to remember that you agreed with this.
There is nothing wrong with the idea of reforming or shrinking government, but first we should take care of Money Power and ensure that governments are not controlled by banking dynasties. Otherwise, you are wasting your time."
--------------------------
When there's no government and no monopoly of force, there are no levers of control to pull for NO ONE.
You suggest to 'change the driver' instead, attesting that THIS TIME would be different, more benign, and with a 'minimum of coercion' only, and power would not corrupt the ones who are given power, or so your story goes.
I THINK you're wrong, and if history is any guide, YOU ARE.
|
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 04/25/12 06:00 AM
B: "Well, and I was an East German who graduated from highschool in the DDR. I have first hand knowledge of the Wilhelm Piek, Otto Grotewohl, Walter Ulbricht government under which I grew up. You may have listened to the radio in the West, or may even have glimpsed some East German propaganda news on TV, but I lived under the regime"
AA: Huh? The DDR ceased to exist more than 20 years ago. So, plenty of time to listen to ACTUAL East German SED-dinosaurs - IN PERSON. As I wrote, one could/can not really escape it at times. And, matter of fact, in most cases they blame(d) the people in general, for not living up to the grand concept or for not understanding it - to explain how their precious concept could have crashed.
B: "Let me tell you there wasn't anything that you could equate with government under the U.S. Constitution."
AA: Come to think of equating life in the DDR with life in the country where the U.S. Constitution ONCE was established, before, inevitably, power corrupted the ones who where doing the governing ...
"The Caging Of America - Mass incarceration on a scale almost unexampled in human history is a fundamental fact of our country today-perhaps the fundamental fact, as slavery was the fundamental fact of 1850. In truth, there are more black men in the grip of the criminal-justice system-in prison, on probation, or on parole-than were in slavery then. Over all, there are now more people under 'correctional supervision' in America-more than six million-than were in the Gulag Archipelago under Stalin at its height.
Click to view link
"The NSA Is Building the Country's Biggest Spy Center - Under construction by contractors with top-secret clearances, the blandly named Utah Data Center is being built for the National Security Agency. A project of immense secrecy, it is the final piece in a complex puzzle assembled over the past decade. Its purpose: to intercept, decipher, analyze, and store vast swaths of the world's communications as they zap down from satellites and zip through the underground and undersea cables of international, foreign, and domestic networks. The heavily fortified $2 billion center should be up and running in September 2013. Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails-parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital 'pocket litter.' It is, in some measure, the realization of the 'total information awareness' program created during the first term of the Bush administration-an effort that was killed by Congress in 2003 after it caused an outcry over its potential for invading Americans' privacy."
Click to view link
"A hidden world, growing beyond control - * Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States.
* An estimated 854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington, D.C., hold top-secret security clearances.
* In Washington and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings - about 17 million square feet of space.
(... )
Every day, collection systems at the National Security Agency intercept and store 1.7 billion e-mails, phone calls and other types of communications."
Click to view link
"WILLIAM BINNEY: Actually, I think the surveillance has increased. In fact, I would suggest that they've assembled on the order of 20 trillion transactions about U.S. citizens with other U.S. citizens.
AMY GOODMAN: How many?
WILLIAM BINNEY: Twenty trillion."
Click to view link
"Surprise! TSA Is Searching Your Car, Subway, Ferry, Bus, AND Plane"
Click to view link
And on it goes like this, and worse. While it took some time, to be sure, for the US to fall this deep because the project started from a very high altitude in terms of freedom and 'limited government' - IT HAPPENED, as it HAD TO, since power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
And then there's this:
B: "That is where you are completely wrong. It was exactly those spear-hunting, throat-slitting, anarcho-capitalistic 'neanderthals' who murdered some 150 million humans during the last century. It was those neanderthals who took over governments. It was people like you let them exercise the force you are so concerned about."
AA: Apart from my impression that this has to be your most outlandish, contradictory and self-defeating statement so far, I wonder why you would expect Newt Gingrich, of all people, to change ANYTHING for the 'better'.
Incredible.
|
Posted by memehunter on 04/25/12 02:03 AM
AA: Again, it wasn't a mob of spear-hunting, throat-slitting, anarcho-capitalistic 'neanderthals', as you phrased it, who murdered some 150 million humans during the last century, but governments with a monopoly of force.
But who or what hijacked these governments? The plutarchy a.k.a the dynastic banking families a.k.a Money Power. Governments are merely enforcers and it was Money Power who was behind most, if not all, of these mass murders. I seem to remember that you agreed with this.
There is nothing wrong with the idea of reforming or shrinking government, but first we should take care of Money Power and ensure that governments are not controlled by banking dynasties. Otherwise, you are wasting your time.
As for your anarcho-capitalism, if the only rule is "do what you want as long as it doesn't harm others", then the definition of harming others should include more diffuse concepts such as charging interest using a currency shared by other users who explicitly agreed not to charge interest and other behaviors that may harm a community at large without necessarily harming specific individuals. This definition should also take into account involuntary or forced choices, to avoid situations like the baby who can legally not be fed in Rothbard's anarcho-capitalist system (tell me, how is the decision not to feed a baby - legally or not - not harming him/her by the way?).
As well, your system of private justice can be summarized by "might makes right". I think that Bischoff gave a realistic description of what it is likely to lead to.
 |
Posted by Bischoff on 04/24/12 09:55 PM
AA: "I'm a West German and have seen a couple of dozen summers ... and listened, more than I was willing to suffer, to some East German SED-dinosaurs for that matter. However, one could not escape it when one lived in Germany for some time during the last decades."
B: Well, and I was an East German who graduated from highschool in the DDR. I have first hand knowledge of the Wilhelm Piek, Otto Grotewohl, Walter Ulbricht government under which I grew up.
You may have listened to the radio in the West, or may even have glimpsed some East German propaganda news on TV, but I lived under the regime. Let me tell you there wasn't anything that you could equate with government under the U.S. Constitution.
AA: "I noted that YOU SOUND exactly like some East German SED-dinosaurs who are - to this day - desperately trying to explain away the failure of their precious Communist Manifesto by blaming the disaster on the 'inability' of the population to live up to the precious 'guideline that demanded habituation ... "
B: Yes, I understand that you said "I SOUNDED LIKE", but what kind of a stupid comments is that... ??? I made the point that man is obliged to overcome certain genetic instincts which are not suited for existence in a terrestrial environment in order to live free and prosperous, and you come back and compare my comment to Hoenecker or Mielke complaining that "communist" man never had a change to properly develop. That's pretty silly, don't you think... ??? Are you telling me the arboreal nature of man of which I spoke is Lenin's "communist" man... ??? I hope you are not serious.
AA: "Again, it wasn't a mob of spear-hunting, throat-slitting, anarcho-capitalistic 'neanderthals', as you phrased it, who murdered some 150 million humans during the last century, but governments with a monopoly of force."
B: That is where you are completely wrong. It was exactly those spear-hunting, throat-slitting, anarcho-capitalistic 'neanderthals' who murdered some 150 million humans during the last century. It was those neanderthals who took over governments. It was people like you let them exercise the force you are so concerned about. What are you going to asked the bunch that is in power now... ??? Pretty, please... stop the war in Afghanistan... ??? Is that what you are going to do... ??? Or, are you going to say... "Hey, I am a anarcho-capitalist you better watch out. Nio more force... ???"
Why don't you try for once to get it into your head, that it is your babble about anarcho-capitalism which diverts you from focusing on the need for government, but one that is closely controlled and watched at all times.
Otherwise, you might just wake up some morning with your throat slid, still mumbling this anarcho-capitalist crap.
|
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 04/24/12 07:56 PM
B: "First, what would you know about the East German SED Regime and their sycophant admirers... ???"
AA: I'm a West German and have seen a couple of dozen summers ... and listened, more than I was willing to suffer, to some East German SED-dinosaurs for that matter. However, one could not escape it when one lived in Germany for some time during the last decades.
B: "Second, you want to equate the U.S. Constitution with the Communist Manifesto and life in East Germany... ???
AA: I didn't equate the U.S. Constitution to the Communist Manifesto, so please spare me the straw man argument. Instead, I noted that YOU SOUND exactly like some East German SED-dinosaurs who are - to this day - desperately trying to explain away the failure of their precious Communist Manifesto by blaming the disaster on the 'inability' of the population to live up to the precious 'guideline that demanded habituation ... '
'The people never learned to understand this', the old commies moaned.
B: "You like life without government, good. I don't think you could survive a day under your "anarcho-capitalism" system. You'd have your throat slid in no time, and you'd be somebodies evening meal. Well, there'd go another anarcho-capitalist hanging on to his stupid ideas... "
AA: Again, it wasn't a mob of spear-hunting, throat-slitting, anarcho-capitalistic 'neanderthals', as you phrased it, who murdered some 150 million humans during the last century, but governments with a monopoly of force.
Why don't you try, for once, to wrap your mind around that simple fact, Bischoff?
|
Posted by Bischoff on 04/24/12 07:04 PM
AA: "You're kidding, right? You sound exactly like some East German SED-dinosaurs who are - to this day - desperately trying to explain away the failure of their precious Communist Manifesto by blaming the disaster on the bulk of the population instead of realizing that it was the proliferating collectivist government bureaucracy and totalitarianism that brought down the system."
B: First, what would you know about the East German SED Regime and their sycophant admirers... ???
Second, you want to equate the U.S. Constitution with the Communist Manifesto and life in East Germany... ??? On the basis of human nature, something you haven't got a clue about. You've got to be kidding me...
Third, where did you learn your political economy... ??? Anybody who can with a straight face peddle "anarcho-capitalism", and equate the U.S. Constitution to the Communist Manifesto, must have had one hell of an economic education.
AA: "Power corrupts and every class is unfit to govern."
B: You can't seem to get away from those asinine quotes, can you... ???
You like life without government, good. I don't think you could survive a day under your "anarcho-capitalism" system. You'd have your throat slid in no time, and you'd be somebodies evening meal. Well, there'd go another anarcho-capitalist hanging on to his stupid ideas...
|
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 04/24/12 06:13 PM
Bischoff: "Human nature is such that unless knowledge is passed on by parents and society to the younger generations, and humans are habituated to life in an terrestrial environment, the basic arboreal instincts, genetically bread into man over millions upon millions of years, take over in behavior. The younger generation must be taught about the intent of the Constitution.
(... )
Unlike your perception, the founders knew that the Constitution had to be received and embraced by each and every generation, again and again.
(... )
The Constitution was supposed to be the guideline that demanded habituation whether times were good or not so good. The people never learned to understand this. When times were good, people reverted to follow basic human instincts, which played havoc with the intent of the Constitution to require a definite behavior for the benefit of people at large."
-----------------------
You're kidding, right? You sound exactly like some East German SED-dinosaurs who are - to this day - desperately trying to explain away the failure of their precious Communist Manifesto by blaming the disaster on the bulk of the population instead of realizing that it was the proliferating collectivist government bureaucracy and totalitarianism that brought down the system.
Incredible.
Now, since the United States had a try at establishing the single most freedom-oriented way of government in modern history, it took some time by comparison to reach the grim level of decay that we see today.
Indeed, while it takes longer to hit the ground when one jumps from a higher altitude - hit the ground one must.
Power corrupts and every class is unfit to govern.
|
Posted by Bischoff on 04/24/12 04:06 PM
AA: "Well, then, please explain how the US Constitution could have been 'perverted' by humans, when it was the 'perfect blueprint' - as you claim - to deal with human nature."
B: You speak to my point. Human nature is such that unless knowledge is passed on by parents and society to the younger generations, and humans are habituated to life in an terrestrial environment, the basic arboreal instincts, genetically bread into man over millions upon millions of years, take over in behavior. The younger generation must be taught about the intent of the Constitution. If you were taught anything about the Constitution, you must ask yourself by whom and from what standpoint? I am sure, it was not from the standpoint of human nature and natural law.
Religions in general, and for Western culture, it is the Judeo-Christian bible, provide guidelines for behavior and habituation to live a peaceful and harmonous life on terra firma. (The religion which advocates killing of apostates is excepted from this statement)
Unlike your perception, the founders knew that the Constitution had to be received and embraced by each and every generation, again and again. The ideas incorporated in the Constitution cannot be passed on in the blood stream. Those Anglo-Saxon principles in the Constitution must be taught and lived to experience the liberty and security of property which the Constitution by its provisions means to guarantee.
The Constitution is only as good as the understanding of it purpose by the people. In comparison to all other nations, with exception of the Swiss Federation, the Federal Government installed with U.S. Constitution is the oldest continuous constitutional republic in the world. That's how good the Constitution has been so far. Now, we have to battle people with your cynicism about the value of the U.S. Constitution as guide to prosperous and harmonious living.
You would think there'd be no contest, if the U.S. Constitution is compared to the insane concept of "anarcho-capitalism". But, I am sorry to say, your generation is no different than previous generations in neglecting to understand the U.S. Constitution. If people sit on their behind, act according to natural instincts, and find the Constitution isn't working for them, who do they blame... ??? Of course, the stupid document that couldn't stop them for being lazy and unmindful, and fail to do what was needed to be free and prosperous. People seem all too happy to fall for the simple and stupid ideas of charlatans and special interest promoters of which the idea of anarcho-capitalism is one.
It's human nature, though. Thinking is hard. Thinking is work. It's just so much easier to let other people do the thinking for you. Just suck up the propaganda, and then defend your sycophant behavior against people who ask you to reconsider.
AA: "As a side note, don't get me wrong, Bischoff. I think that the US Constitution was indeed one of the more (most?) ambitious efforts to deal with human nature, and to achieve a maximum of overall liberty. However, over time, it failed spectacularly."
B: It failed spectacularly, because as we approach a more "secure" living standard on terra firma to match the security of arboreal living, the habituation for terrestrial living breaks down and the basic arboreal instincts take over.
The Constitution was supposed to be the guideline that demanded habituation whether times were good or not so good. The people never learned to understand this. When times were good, people reverted to follow basic human instincts, which played havoc with the intent of the Constitution to require a definite behavior for the benefit of people at large.
AA: "And I think IT HAD TO, because 'the idea that some people can acquire the right to forcibly control everyone else - is provably self-contradictory and logically bogus' (Larken Rose) and will trigger the inevitable consequences at the end of the day - that's were we are now, actually."
B: You are so hang up on your perception that all government exist to force people to do things. Yet, the U.S. Constitution is full of provisons telling the government what it can't do.
You simply do not understand that there cannot be liberty without government, even so government is the greatest thread to liberty. It takes people to make the Constitution work. The Constitution is a guideline and a set of rules by which people are to act and behave. It was accepted by the people, and it has provisions to amend and revise it.
However, it is not an document which in and of itself can do the job of keeping you free and prosperous. All you indicate with your comments is that the Constitution itself is at fault. In your mind, there doesn't seem any participation on your part required to make it work. Instead, you latch on to this clearly stupid idea of "anarcho-capitalism".
Think about it, it's an idea which is being peddled to keep you misinformed and in the dark. "Anarcho-capitalism" is nothing, but an "ice age" hunting and killing system. It is a "hand-to-mouth" economy, as primitive as can be.
Instead of Larken Rose, let me quote Thomas Jefferson to you: "For a society to be ignorant and to be free, is something that never was and never will be."
Hosea 4:6 "My people are doomed for lack of knowledge."
|
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 04/24/12 02:38 PM
B: "Oh, yeah... really... ??? It is very clear "HOW" it happend. As to "WHY" it happend, you would not have a clue, because you are clueless as to human nature. "
AA: Well, then, please explain how the US Constitution could have been 'perverted' by humans, when it was the 'perfect blueprint' - as you claim - to deal with human nature.
As a side note, don't get me wrong, Bischoff. I think that the US Constitution was indeed one of the more (most?) ambitious efforts to deal with human nature, and to achieve a maximum of overall liberty. However, over time, it failed spectacularly.
And I think IT HAD TO, because 'the idea that some people can acquire the right to forcibly control everyone else - is provably self-contradictory and logically bogus' (Larken Rose) and will trigger the inevitable consequences at the end of the day - that's were we are now, actually.
Larken Rose, again: 'We're all taught that obedience to authority and obeying the law is what makes civilization possible. We were all told that lie, but it's still a lie. The belief that some people have the right to forcibly dominate others, even in a limited way, is the opposite of being civilized. It's an attempt to legitimize theft, murder and other violent aggression, by way of pseudo-religious political rituals - constitutions, elections, legislation, and so on. In short, the belief in authority has led to more death and destruction than anything else in history'
Click to view link
 |
Posted by dave jr on 04/24/12 02:27 PM
B: "You really have been infested with this anti-Constitution crap."
D: Hmmm, I thought I said, "I would rather see the Federal Government trimmed back to within the confines of the Constitution and let the States compete in their power lust over the people."
B: "... just as there is a reason to let you think that the original Federal Reserve is the same Federal Reserve System we have today."
D: What? When did I say that?
B: "No, you wouldn't. Anarch-capitalism is running around with a spear hunting and killing to survive."
D: Stop speaking for me. I WOULD rather have that, or die, than be a slave under tyranny.
B: Wrong. The socialist/communist emigrants and refugees from the 1848 labor revolutions in Europe were the ones who insisted that wealth distribution was unfair (16th Amendment) and that the system of selecting U.S. Senators (17th Amendment) was corrupt.
D: I guess you make the point. It wasn't the People nor the States of America. These emigrants were a minority. Why do we trust centralized power?
B: "It's the stupid electorate, Dave."
D: And that is the meat of the subject. Both stupid AND electorate.
Look, I feel I am trying to defend a ground between You and Abu. If the nature of all men were nonviolent, there would be no need of government. I believe the majority of men in the 21st century would rather be nonviolent. Maybe that is my mistake. So we hire the intellectual gorillas to defend us and then wonder why our environment is even more violent. WE have to defend ourselves either way. So why feed those who we would otherwise have to defend against? If we still need the animals for deterrence, better to keep them on a short chain. Thats all I am saying.
|
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 04/24/12 02:14 PM
AA: "Everyone is free to do things as one sees fit, as long as one doesn't harm others in the process. Very simple, in fact."
B: "Yeah, very simplistic."
AA: You may call it 'simplistic'. And yet you seem unable to refute it. Again: If you don't have a right to coerce others, why would you think you could delegate a right you don't have in the first place to a 'government'?
B: "What if someone does things that do harm others... ??? What do you do then... ??? You can't coerce them"
AA: Short answer: Private justice. Besides, why would you trust a bunch of humans with badges and guns, vested with a monopoly of force, more than you would trust humans without badges and no monopoly of force?
By the way, it wasn't a mob of spear-hunting, anarcho-capitalistic 'neanderthals', as you phrased it, who murdered some 150 million humans during the last century, but governments with a monopoly of force.
|
Posted by Bischoff on 04/24/12 01:47 PM
AA: "Everyone is free to do things as one sees fit, as long as one doesn't harm others in the process. Very simple, in fact."
B: Yeah, very simplistic. What if someone does things that do harm others... ??? What do you do then... ??? You can't coerce them.
AA: "As to your other points: I covered all of them on 04/24/12 10:05 AM
You didn't answer, though ... "
B: Frankly, I did... . However, somehow I hit a wrong key and everything went into cyberspace... . I'll see, if I get time to rewrite... .
|
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 04/24/12 12:58 PM
Bischoff: "Your anarcho-capitalism idea doesn't require a written piece of paper, or any rules. That is clear. Your anarcho-capitalist consists of a "stone age man" and his spear (capital) existing by hunting and killing, and living from hand-to-mouth. People must be stupid not to realize that it is the idea of anarcho-capitalism which you peddle."
-------------
Not at all. As I wrote ealier: My definition of freedom reads as follows: Everyone is free to do things as one sees fit, as long as one doesn't harm others in the process. Very simple, in fact.
As to your other points: I covered all of them on 04/24/12 10:05 AM
You didn't answer, though ...
|
Posted by Bischoff on 04/24/12 12:57 PM
D: "And the Founders did not represent the People nor the States, but were diplomats with commercial operations and foreign relations. They only wanted to protect their interests."
B: You really have been infested with this anti-Constitution crap. You have absolutely know idea who these founders were. They were people from all across the spectrum. There were more anti-federalists as there were federalists. To understand the Constitution, you have to understand Anglo-Saxon principles. Always Madison is mentioned as the father of the Constitution, but the pivotal figure in shaping the U.S. Constitution was Roger Sherman of Connecticut. There is a reason why he isn't mentioned as the most important delegate of the Constitutional Convention, just as there is a reason to let you think that the original Federal Reserve is the same Federal Reserve System we have today.
D: "That being said, I am not an anarcho-capitalist, although I would rather have that than tyranny."
B: No, you wouldn't. Anarch-capitalism is running around with a spear hunting and killing to survive. Somebody just gave it that stupid name "anarcho-capitalism" to make you think it is anything else but "stone age" living.
You would be quite happy to accept a little bit of tyranny, i.e. a little bit of Obamacare, a little bit of this and that from the government in return not to riot or revolt, as long as you could live in a warm home and have enough food to eat. That hunting with a spear really would seem very inviting. I am sure of it.
D: "And the People nor the States did not organize or ask for the 16th and 17th Ammendments."
B: Wrong. The socialist/communist emigrants and refugees from the 1848 labor revolutions in Europe were the ones who insisted that wealth distribution was unfair (16th Amendment) and that the system of selecting U.S. Senators (17th Amendment) was corrupt. All they needed was the money from the bankers, just like the OWS movement needs the money from Soros & Co. to pull the wool over your eyes now. It's the stupid electorate, Dave.
|
Posted by Bischoff on 04/24/12 12:37 PM
AA: "Gee, one wonders just HOW and WHY that happened?"
B: Oh, yeah... really... ??? It is very clear "HOW" it happend. As to "WHY" it happend, you would not have a clue, because you are clueless as to human nature.
AA: "... human nature took it's course and corrupted the ones who were put in the position to GET CORRUPTED in the first place. In short: They governed."
B: As I remarked, you are clueless as to human nature. Government under the U.S. Constitution is not inherently corrupt. It did as much to check and balance the powers of government to reign in power grabs and corruption without limiting individual liberty as possible. In other words it checked the detruimental aspects of basic human instincts.
It was lack of vigilence and lack of understanding human knowledge, especially by clueless people such as you, who let the Constitution be perverted.
People like me are now in opposition to people like you in order to save what is left of the Constitution. Hopefully we have a chance to restore it to its original intent.
Under no circumstance would I want to live in your asinine idea of anarcho-capitalism, a term which is as stupid as the idea. The term itself plays on the concept of capitalism, but capitalism has little to do with the kind of economics you promote.
AA: "You can write on papers all you want and call it 'Constitution' or 'Never To Be Changed Holy Piece Of Paper' or whatever."
B: Spare me your sanctimony. Your anarcho-capitalism idea doesn't require a written piece of paper, or any rules. That is clear. Your anarcho-capitalist consists of a "stone age man" and his spear (capital) existing by hunting and killing, and living from hand-to-mouth. People must be stupid not to realize that it is the idea of anarcho-capitalism which you peddle.
AA: "A way out of this might be to acknowledge that NO ONE has any right whatsoever to coerce others."
B: You speak of a right, "NOT" to coerce or to be coerced... ??? How are you going to enforce that "right"... ??? Have you ever thought about that... ???
So when I come for your property or for your life, you have no right to coerce me to stop. Whether I have the right to take it from you is immaterial. Nobody has the "right" to coerce. However, if I don't give two-bits about the right you claim not be be coerced, you are just up a creek, aren't you... ???
So, when I don't acknowledge your "right" not to be coerced, but clubbing you over the head, regardless whether that right is put on a piece of paper, it is the same as when people don't care what is written in the Constitution.
AA: "Consequently, one cannot delegate a right one does not have in the first place to a 'government'."
B: That's right. You are the 800 pound gorilla that makes sure nobody ever takes your stuff or snuffs you out. Get real... ... .
|
Posted by dave jr on 04/24/12 12:24 PM
The States delegated a portion of their authority (government) equally (central) to a "central governing body", a central government, a Federal Government of the United States. It was an act of centralizing power, which was supposed to be very limited.
But human nature does not like to live within limits, will decieve and break rules, become corrupt; with that I agree with you. So knowing human nature, giving authority over to any organized structure is to plant a seed that will eventually grow into tyranny.
And the Founders did not represent the People nor the States, but were diplomats with commercial operations and foreign relations. They only wanted to protect their interests.
That being said, I am not an anarcho-capitalist, although I would rather have that than tyranny. I would rather see the Federal Government trimmed back to within the confines of the Constitution and let the States compete in their power lust over the people.
I think we agree that allowing the centralizing, monopolizing of anything is the biggest danger.
And the People nor the States did not organize or ask for the 16th and 17th Ammendments. As usual, a crises is created and the very ones creating it design the proposed solution which always serves to centralize more power. We the People fall for it time and time again.
|
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 04/24/12 11:34 AM
Bischoff: "What corrupted the federal politicians to do install an unconstitutional central bank... ??? It was the UNCONSTITUTIONAL constitutional 16th and 17th Amendments which transferred power from the local government level to Washington, DC against the intent of the original U.S. Constitution."
AA: Gee, one wonders just HOW and WHY that happened?
Bischoff: "Human nature is what it is. Even knowledge of human nature is kept out of education curriculum. However, the framers understood the foibles of human nature well. They incorporate checks and balances into the Constitution at every turn."
AA: It may very well be true that 'the framers understood the foibles of human nature well'. And yet the(ir) republic was turned into an empire as, over time, human nature took it's course and corrupted the ones who were put in the position to GET CORRUPTED in the first place. In short: They governed.
As you wrote, 'human nature is what it is.' You can write on papers all you want and call it 'Constitution' or 'Never To Be Changed Holy Piece Of Paper' or whatever. At the end of the day, the powers given/delegated will get abused and expanded, and the executives of power will get corrupted and thirsty for MORE POWER.
A way out of this might be to acknowledge that NO ONE has any right whatsoever to coerce others.
Consequently, one cannot delegate a right one does not have in the first place to a 'government'.
|
|
