Recent comments

  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Guest
    This book is available as a free pdf download from the FreeKeene.com website here if you want to read it.
  • David Calderwood's picture
    David Calderwood 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Hi Suverans2, Just to clarify, I was using the word Utopia ironically, in the sense that no such place can exist on Earth, even if I were king (or fit the definition of a god). I used it in the sense that while I may think I know HOW all people should live, that knowledge is meaningful only in determining my actions, not those of others. I am non-religious, or so I think, but it is my understanding that during the Temptation of Christ it was Satan who offered Christ all the kingdoms of Earth, as they were all his to offer. From this I find it rather ironic (love that word today) that any self-described Christians are politically active. This informs me that the real, main religion of most humans is politics, AKA the worship of concentrations of power. Paradoxically then, all politics is of Satan...a view I believe comports with reality in all ways I observe. Politics (as I define it) equals evil. As you know, it is not what people SAY that informs us of their real thoughts. It is what they DO that reveals what really animates them. I find it endlessly entertaining to watch people DO what directly opposes what they SAY. As a person, of course, it is also a lifelong task to try to minimize this pervasive hypocrisy to the best of my limited ability. Just doing the best I can.... Best wishes.
  • David Calderwood's picture
    David Calderwood 4 years 16 weeks ago Page David Calderwood
    I agree with your comment, of course. We are clearly a society in decline, and only the "finger-in-the-dyke" of some innovators plus the illusion of vast debt assumption disguises this fact from the perception of most people. A theme I'm likely to visit in columns I submit here will be speculation on the path the future may take as people conditioned to obedience, steeped in the mythology of American Exceptionalism, slam face-first in the reality that underlies our current illusion of debt-based prosperity. I think the zombie genre of literature is so apt that I'm working on a second novel that uses a somewhat different take on the genre as a central plot device.
  • David Calderwood's picture
    David Calderwood 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    I do wonder about my fellow travelers who seem unbothered by the TSA (or the IRS). Have they no modesty? Does it not bother them to be pushed, pulled, groped, bullied, etc.? It surely does bother me. My last business trip required a flight from Chicago to San Diego and I opted out of the nudie scan both ways. On the return trip I got the feel-up as part of a training exercise. It was so thorough I can honestly say I've had less thorough massages. Obedience to authority. "They" are able to get it by placing a "normed" lifestyle on the other side of their little gauntlet. If we want to blend in, be like our neighbors, nestle in the safety of the herd, we have no choice but to bend to the will of those who arrogate power. Human beings are curious creatures, are we not?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    Must my child have a Social Security number? No. Getting a Social Security number for your newborn is voluntary. http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10023.html
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    I made a bad error there, S2; everyone earning "income" (not "money") has to surrender some. Mea Culpa. Corrected now. Income tax law is riddled with flaws and there are many reasons why it does not require payment - your suggestion is just one. However none of them are any use because the judiciary is corrupt, see the article's penultimate paragraph. That is all interesting, but is not the subject of "Two Pillars" so I'll not respond to more comments about it.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    "...everyone earning money has to surrender some of it to the IRS..." ~ Jim Davies Not "everyone", Jim, only those individuals who voluntarily use a chattel number. (Look at item number three on this "chattel number" search: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=chattel+number ) chattel NOUN: 1. Law An article of movable personal property. 2. A slave. ~ American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Page David Calderwood
    Very good, David Calderwood. This, "...in a place where everything can be stolen from you, why produce?", in a nutshell, is why production in all collectivist societies eventually declines.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    G'day David Calderwood, Thanks for the kind reply. Having been individual secessionists for about twelve years now, we know, better than most, the high cost of personal responsibility, i.e. life without parens patriae. And, as I have written here twice, "We ask no one to join us...". Generally speaking the word Utopia is associated with "perfect"; if that is the sense in which you used it, there's no such place, or condition, as Utopia. The only thing I am trying to do here is to let people know that it is their voluntary "membership in a group" known as STATE OF ___________________, and as a consequence of that membership, membership in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, that is the "root" cause of the problems, which they most generally describe here. If that is the case, then if we wish to STRIKE THE ROOT of the problem we must withdraw, individually, from membership in those groups (secession). But, as you wrote above, this brings with it a different set of problems, mainly because we have strayed so far from the path of self-reliance. The supreme task of the AGENTS of these states is to create total dependence upon the god called STATE...and I'd have to say, they've done quite a good job of that. It is not the "gun to the head" that most of us fear, as you pointed out, it is the "gun to our wallet", (the loss of wealth), that deters most of us, it would seem. "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God," because the fear of loss is greater than the love of gain. And, lest you think the "kingdom of God" is off in Never-Never-Land, I give you this, from the Gospel of Thomas. (113) His disciples said to him, “When will the Kingdom come?” Jesus said, “It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying ‘Here it is’ or ‘There it is.’ Rather, the Kingdom of the Father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it.” That is because all they can truly 'see' are the artificial kingdoms of (created by) men.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    And, it would seem that we are NOT the only ones to have gone in this direction. Declare Your Personal Independence: I Hereby Secede
  • brandonchristensen's picture
    brandonchristensen 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    Haha! Thanks for the thoughtful response, but I am not convinced that I know nothing about about "basic economics". What I am convinced of, however, is that this piece is nothing more than demagoguery wrapped in a nationalist flag. Wages have indeed been stagnant since the '70's, but this has nothing to do with the "Federal Reserve" (oh boy). Wages have been stagnant because the market is telling us that, since the seventies, the purchasing power parity of the average American citizen has increased so significantly that a rise in wages in unnecessary. In plain English: what this means is that the average American can buy more with less. This phenomena is largely due to the increase in world trade. China makes goods cheaper than we can, and these cheaper goods in turn make us richer. Here is my favorite whopper of yours, though: "American companies wouldn't be hemorrhaging jobs to foreign companies if it wasn't for this huge disparity in wages." Huh? Since you know much more about basic economics than I, could please explain this sentence to me (and others who may be reading this beneficial exchange)? Also, an explanation for my inability to "understand basic economics" in regards to how individuals living in China are not benefiting from world trade would also be useful... For anybody that wants a more in-depth but readable explanation in regards to how free trade works here is a concise article written by an expert, I would recommend this piece: The De-Industrialization of the U.S.: A String of Enlightening Fallacies
  • Robert Wallace's picture
    Robert Wallace 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    Am I missing something? Pretty much the ability to understand basic economics.
  • David Calderwood's picture
    David Calderwood 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Disconnection between "benefit" and "cost" is the hallmark of political system activity. Since no actor within the political system (from EPA consultant to a "scientist" on a government grant) reaps the downstream costs of his or her actions or proposals, there is no negative feedback loop to induce a degree of "if it isn't broke, don't fix it" common sense. I'm a lover of axiom, and for me, it is axiomatic that if the proposal originates within or is to be implemented by the political system, it will produce outcomes 180 degrees opposite those espoused by its proponents. Simple rules for my simple mind.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Also, if the planet is warming, and it is not caused by human activity, then it is natural, and trying to "fool Mother Nature" can, as we have seen all too many times, bring with it, "That Which is Not Seen". ...look to the end of an accomplished fact, and you will see that it has always produced the contrary of what was expected from it... ~ Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850), July 1850 Example: In eastern North America, Multiflora Rose is now generally considered an invasive species, though it was originally introduced [with the assistance of government] from Asia as a soil conservation measure, as a natural hedge to border grazing land, and to attract wildlife. ...Some places classify Multiflora rose as a "noxious weed". ~ Wikipedia Let me put it this way, it is so "noxious" (it is nearly impossible to kill it), and aggressive, that combating it, in the mountains of the place called North Carolina, kept a roof over our heads and food on the table for over ten years! "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature."
  • David Calderwood's picture
    David Calderwood 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Perhaps another way to put Paul's statement is, "Might makes for success (at least in the present term)." If given the choice between surrendering my wallet to the thief and the thief killing me, I'll do the former. My value judgement would be that I was unjustly robbed, but as Paul would say, I'm still poorer (in purchasing power, if I was headed to the grocery store) by the amount stolen. Is this not the condition most of us face? I pay my taxes because, on balance, I consider it "pro life" (MY life) to do so. I could stop participating in the political system's racket (wage income, real estate ownership that entails tax payments, etc.) but doing so would involve a phenomenal decline in my living standards. Should I develop a medical problem, unless I wish to self-diagnose and self-treat I'd still be stuck with the monopoly political system's "answer," and being poor (in that scheme) I'd be pretty much screwed if my health depended upon expensive treatment (e.g. surgery). I believe I know the path that, if all trod it, would lead to Utopia. Debating the bricks in that path may be intellectually interesting, but I doubt it will lead to a mass adoption of the map.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    "Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it." ~ Abraham Lincoln, Cooper Union Address (c.1860) I do, sincerely, enjoy, and agree with, many things that you write, Paul. Peace.
  • David Calderwood's picture
    David Calderwood 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Douglas Herman
    You wrote, As our foremost canary in the coal mine observed: “Believe me, the next step is a currency crisis because there will be a rejection of the dollar, the rejection of the dollar is a big, big event, and then your personal liberties are going to be severely threatened.” I wish I believed things were this simple. My experience is that even those who appear a dozen times smarter than I am often get the details wrong in their forecasts. Sadly, it is the details that matter when it comes to prudent planning. Today we are awash in IOU's. Private IOU's, corporate IOU's, and (above all, now) political system IOU's (e.g., Japan and Greece on opposite poles of the continuum). Paradoxically, even in a fiat money environment where credit-money far, far, far outnumbers physical money (i.e. printed currency), social psychology is all that backs the galaxy of IOU's. If social psychology changes, and the trust that underpins the VALUE associated with those IOU's falls (as it has in Greece), then IOU's denominated in that currency regime evaporate. This is the THE question to be answered, and answered soon (I'd think). If the only "money" being created is credit-money, and people collectively change their minds about the likelihood they'll be PAID when those IOU's mature, the money supply should shrink unless the PTB resort to printing ever-higher denominations of currency to replace the IOU's. This seems very unlikely until a full-blown economic crisis, an Asteroid-Strike level banking catastrophe, has already occurred. This view argues in favor of, first we see hyper-deflation (in a credit revulsion process of relatively brief duration) and only after the financial landscape is figuratively bombed to dust will we finally see the remaining PTB turn to the Wiemar Solution. The question thus revolves around social psychology, in my opinion. My view is that there remains no honor among thieves, and eventually our current untenable situation will result in an every-man-for-himself in the Halls of Power.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    It's not about victory. It's about money for the cronies.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Well there, you see, we are not so different after all. So you can get off your high horse... As to government having a "just claim", there you go again, bringing value judgements into it, when all I am doing is describing what IS, not what SHOULD BE. You keep ignoring what I wrote; go back to that wikipedia article "might makes right" and read it again, this time more carefully. If you can't get the point, let's just end the discussion, eh? Or have the last word if you want, but that will be all.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Douglas Herman
    First, the so-called Declaration of Independence is a document and therefor cannot "produce" anything. And, second, I am under the impression that the "charter for a new government" was designed to undo the 'damage' done by the so-called Declaration of Independence. Then I went and read The Source of Evil and found this: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Followed, closely, by this: "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed . . . ." Oops! A total non sequitur, riddled with contradictions. Frédéric Bastiat wrote (c.1848): "...nothing can be more evident than this: The law [government] is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect individuals, liberties, and properties, to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all." Is this not precisely what the so-called Declaration of Independence sought to do? From all that I have read, here at STR, you call it a non sequitur based solely on the fact that "no government had ever been created having only the delegated authority of its members[1], therefor it can never be done". It would have to be called something else if it were restricted to that one lawful function. Fine, call it something else then, but you will have the same problem restricting a "private protection agency", because an "agent" that has enough raw power to protect your un-alien-able rights, has enough raw power to take them. _____________________________________________________________ [1] "...every man has the right to defend - even by force – his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right - its reason for existing, its lawfulness - is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use [initiate] force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force - for the same reason - cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups. Such a perversion of force would be, in both cases, contrary to our premise." ~ Excerpted from The Law by Frédéric Bastiat
  • David Calderwood's picture
    David Calderwood 4 years 16 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    One thing we don't see is that the Fed is anti-capitalist. It seems to me that capital has a hard time existing in a system where money is unstable, i.e. where a central bank consistently enables (credit) inflation. I, as a saver (capital accumulator) must pay taxes on illusory nominal gains under an inflationary regime. In this regard my frugality is actually punished by central bank (and fractional reserve banking) activity. If this is not anti-capitalist, I'm not sure what is. While Karl Denninger's blog is often far from doctrinaire libertarian, his graph of GDP Q/Q growth after backing out debt growth is quite instructive. He frequently republishes it in his blog and it clearly shows that the USA's economy has not grown one bit in 30-plus years. I know economic aggregates like GDP are highly suspect, but the picture remains worth all thousand words.
  • David Calderwood's picture
    David Calderwood 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    AGW bears all the signs of a sect of the statist religion. Its adherents claim both perfect knowledge (it's "settled science") and the ability to apply simple physics (policy input A will lead to outcome B) to a problems that are defined by complexity. To even answer the question, "is the planet warming" is exceedingly complex and, using currently available methods, probably impossible. As a belief system it is therefore impervious to reasoned argumentation, and as a foundation on which to apply the coercion of the state, pervasively pernicious.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 16 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    An amazing piece of work by one D.B. Robins. We have a well written and researched scholarly paper here speculating about the application of theories of retributive justice to be applied in a future legal system operating in a non-state social entity which also doesn't exist either. It confirms my finding that the principal purpose of academic philosophers, both professional and dilettante, seems to be to find nits to pick with each other.
  • brandonchristensen's picture
    brandonchristensen 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Douglas Herman
    Great stuff. My only worry is that canaries are often put into cages before they are taken into the coal mines! Hahah!
  • brandonchristensen's picture
    brandonchristensen 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    "Fortunately, Allen Edmonds is still an American company. And thank God for that. They haven't fled to China, where the workers make a dollar day, work 12 hour shifts, and live in dormitories." I'm curious about this statement for two reasons (the points about the debasement of our currency are well-taken): 1) Does it really matter if a company is American or Chinese or Brazilian, so long as they produce good, cheap stuff (like Malverns)? 2) Haven't standards of living in China been skyrocketing because of the 12 hour shifts and factory work? I know that many workers (everywhere) get the short shrift these days, don't get me wrong, but if Chinese workers didn't like the relatively low wages they get, then they would probably have stayed back on the collective farms, right? Am I missing something?
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Douglas Herman
    That link might be http://www.rense.com/general93/ampres.htm The EE will end only when no grunts will work for it; and that won't be many more years. See http://takelifeback.com/oto/p1.htm
  • Douglas Herman's picture
    Douglas Herman 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Douglas Herman
    Hi Jim, Thanks for the compliments. I rarely make predictions but when I do I hope I'm wrong. I have been following the candidacy of Ron Paul vs the Evil Empire (EE) for some time now. It's almost like a bad reality TV show. And while one part of me wants Ron to do well, and thus my country and the world to do well, another part of me wants Ron to fade to footnote status and Obromney to win. I do NOT want Ron to die like Paul Wellstone, in a mysterious fiery plane crash with his entire family, simply because he spoke truth to power. I would rather Ron just fade away, and our empire either face her problems or fade away, as all empires do eventually, when morally and economically bankrupt. As for the POTUS, what can he do? As I outlined in my column, "The American President - Actor, Chauffeur, Salesman, Puppet," (tried to hyper-link but failed), the US prez can only do what he is told to do, by the PTB. All the best Jim, keep up the good work. D
  • Douglas Herman's picture
    Douglas Herman 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Douglas Herman
    Hi John, Thanks for your remarks re BS vs CITCM. All of your insights are valid. I wish I knew how to hyper-link correctly when I write these columns on Word. Since I was born in the 19th century and my mind never completely grasped 20th century tech, I often epic fail myself when confronted with the simplest tech tasks. As for my mistake re Constitution, it could be argued that our erosion of rights and freedoms failed with the Mayflower Compact. Just kidding of course, but I stand corrected. BTW, I always enjoy your works here. D
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    And, yes, Paul, I would bow to most commands while there is a gun to my head, but I do not live in perpetual fear of the gun to my head; I don't use that as my excuse for not living my life the way I desire.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Douglas Herman
    Thank you Doug, a good one. I hope you're wrong, of course. The psychopaths are certainly preparing the public for an attack on Iran, but I'm not sure the decision maker will pick that option in this election year. After two failed wars and an ongoing economic crisis, he may prefer to go to voters with "Look! I said I'd get us out of the Middle East, and I'm on track!" I agree with your choice of 1776. The Declaration of Independence is badly flawed, riddled with inside-the-box absurdities (see my http://www.strike-the-root.com/4/davies/davies6.html) which later produced the even more flawed charter for a new government.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    If these "orthodox purist idiots" try to force their convictions on someone else, they are no better than statists; but name-calling does not strengthen your argument, painkilleraz, it weakens it. I'm curious, although I understand how the truth can be a fearful thing, how does a "person threaten [you] with "truth" in regards to [your] currently disabled state"? I know that you weren't referring to me with your above comment, since you don't know me, plus, I've already written, on this same thread, "We ask no one to join us, and, "[w]e ask not your counsels or your arms"", but I will say that you are falsely accusing some people, albeit ignorantly, when you make the blanket statement that "these orthodox purist idiots actually have the balls online to make comments without any position other than an untested and unrealistic philosophy". I can't vouch for anyone else, painkilleraz, but the "position", that we, (my natural law wife and I), have taken, which is that of individual secessionist, is both realistic and tested, with testing still going on. What we get tired of hearing, and reading, is, "it can't be done, no one can secede from the political association". "Can't never could!" We've already done it! And, we could care less if those individuals, and/or their master, say they don't "legally recognize" our withdrawal from membership in their political association. We've got some bad news for those folks, we don't "recognize" their "position" that we are subject to them and/or their master with or without our consent, so the lack of recognition is mutual. And, please, spare me the gun to the head rhetoric; thank you very much.
  • John deLaubenfels's picture
    John deLaubenfels 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Douglas Herman
    Good points, but I was frustrated by the lack of links to the people and events you're referring to. I may be very ignorant, but the term "Black Swan Event" was not familiar to me. Here's an explanation for other ignoramuses: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory Similarly, I haven't followed William Cooper, apparently a famous conspiracy theorist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_William_Cooper), or James Turk or Jim Sinclair. A link to your favorite site featuring each of these men would be appreciated. Also am a little baffled by your statement: The erosion of the Constitution began far earlier. Few can agree on an exact date. I’m tempted to say the erosion began July 4, 1776. The erosion of the Constitution began 11 years before the Constitution was written?
  • rita's picture
    rita 4 years 17 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    Shocking.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    I'm not certain how this answered my so-called challenge, unless it is your way of saying that the "criminal", whom we shall call Big G, has put a gun to your head and FORCED you to be a TAXPAYER (a numbered member) and continues to keep a gun to your head thus FORCING you to take his benefits and privileges, (such as DRIVING LICENSE and BANK ACCOUNT), and that, in your opinion, Big G has a "just claim" to authority over you and your "stuff", because he has the "might". Is that correct?
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 17 weeks ago
    A Modest Proposal
    Page Paul Hein
    I understand the gist of your parody, Paul -- it's a fun thing. But in seriousness, I believe it is important to recognize and understand that every resource of yours or mine that gets pilfered by parasites and predators of state is in fact stolen property (oops -- somebody's gonna want me to define "property" again). If you can steal some of it back without standing outside with your hat in your hand and mumbling something about "rights" I support you. Steal what you can from those bloodsuckers and don't apologize that you're denying poorer folks their "rightful share". You're not: "the poor" are bait to those barbarians -- they sing mournful songs about the poor to attract "voluntary compliance" (the ultimate oxymoron) from the so-called "middle class" so they can be raped and pillaged more conveniently. I have no doubt your proposal is in the planning stage of not a few of those leeches. Avoid helping them along. Refrain from joining the throngs of vassals voluntarily submitting personal information and/or signing documents "under penalty of perjury". Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 17 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Over 60 years ago an aunt, long deceased now, gave me a silver dollar. I still have that 1921 Morgan in a special purse to keep it from wearing out. I carry it every day. In the early 50's in Texas I could buy around 10 gallons of gasoline with a silver dollar. In fact the very first "self-service" gas station I remember was a Momma/Poppa station on Old Hwy 90 (long before Interstate 10) outside San Antonio -- Pop repaired and serviced cars & trucks, Mom exchanged paper "money" (still "silver certificates" before predators of state ended that) for silver dollars. Drop a silver dollar into the pump, you got around 10 gallons of gas. Today spot silver is a little over 35 government notes of debt ("frn"), you can still get almost 10 gallons (some days more, some days less) for the value of a silver dollar. Sam
  • rita's picture
    rita 4 years 17 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Thank you. I've been saying this for years. The reason to end the drug war isn't that it has failed. The reason to end it is that it has succeeded, far beyonbd anyone's wildest expectations. (The Prescott, Arizona, Daily Courier's front page story today is the local heroes' latest outrage, raids on stores selling bath salts.)
  • rita's picture
    rita 4 years 17 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Too bad my car don't run on gold.
  • painkilleraz's picture
    painkilleraz 4 years 17 weeks ago
    One Small Step For Man
    Web link Westernerd
    The generation of alternative methods of income should be a primary goal for people. After all, the largest percentage of jobs is held by or reliant on, drumroll...state employees. Mechanics in metro areas are employed along with hundreds of others in the car industry to support state subsidized populations. (direct and indirect employees) This applies to much of the united states, and much of the workforce regardless ability or training. Over the past few years my goal has been singular in the creation of new means of income that will keep my family alive and well when things reach a head.
  • painkilleraz's picture
    painkilleraz 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    A perfectly reasonable article Paul and well written! Thank you!
  • painkilleraz's picture
    painkilleraz 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Just remember, these wonderful people with no children in the house and legs that work have no concept of life. As you said, they love their orthodox purity but cannot for a second think outside their narrow minded boxes of perfection. I have recently had more than one person threaten me with "truth" in regards to my currently disabled state. Sad, that these orthodox purist idiots actually have the balls online to make comments without any position other than an untested and unrealistic philosophy. Hence my caveats and my regular and public admittance to them. :) Good luck moving forward,
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 17 weeks ago
    A Modest Proposal
    Page Paul Hein
    I doubt anyone would like your plan, not even government, because it exposes what is really going on. Government needs to obfuscate everything otherwise it would cease to exist. Yeah, I get it, your proposal was tongue-in-cheek.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Sorry, I've been out a bit. As to Suverans' challenge, if a criminal puts a gun to my head and demands my wallet, I give it to him. I suspect Suverans would do the same; after all, "might makes right". But I congratulate him on having evaded the criminal so far. Anyway this conversation has got off on a side track. I was only making a point about recovery. It makes no sense if you think about it, thinking in terms of recovering your stuff from a thief in exactly the same way it makes no sense for some old farts to think in terms of recovering what they "contributed" into Socialist Security. It's not your stuff any more. It belongs to whomever has it at the moment. Maybe that old saying, "possession is nine-tenths of the law," actually makes sense. Actually the term "recovery" is misleading in that sense. What you are really doing is stealing the criminal's stuff in retaliation for stealing yours. Typically you try to steal what he stole, but that is not necessary. You could even steal some extra for the trouble he put you through. The difference between you and the thief is not your actions, which are the same, but what other people think of it. Other people disapprove of the thief taking what is yours. They approve of you getting it back from him, or some reasonable substitute, including perhaps some reasonable extra amount for your trouble. But if he took a dollar from you, and you took $1 million from him in response, they'd probably not approve of your response, and start thinking of you as the thief.
  • JGVibes's picture
    JGVibes 4 years 17 weeks ago Web link Guest
    reading the comments on this is so irritating lol
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 17 weeks ago Web link Guest
    Oh the horror! Just imagine a society like this! From the HuffPo article: "Voluntaryists would do away with the state altogether. There would be no public roads, no public police force, no public education, no Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, no Congress, no courts, no gun laws, no seat belt laws. There would be no Treasury Department printing paper money. There would be no taxes. There would be no war. There would be no restrictions on interpersonal interactions." For Progressive and Conservative control freaks this probably sounds as close to hell on Earth as it is possible to imagine other than, say, Auschwitz. Oh well, any publicity is good as long as they spell the name right, eh?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    mhstahl, I planned on sticking to whatever I wish, but thank you for your blessings. And, I realize that you don't know me, so for the record, I have read more than those marvelous quotes I posted. I don't know if anyone else here reads all the material on this subject, which I make available via embedded links, but I most certainly do; including Thomas Paine.
  • Chris Dates's picture
    Chris Dates 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Alright, I apologize Kenk. I must have misunderstood your comment.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    @ Chris Dates, "KenK did not jump in to defend Paul," yes, I did. And further "he [KenK] jumped in to be rude." No, I didn't. Clearly you're not much of a mind reader and so I suggest you quit making a fool of yourself jumping to conclusions that rely on such a talent.
  • mhstahl's picture
    mhstahl 4 years 17 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Suverans2, You are certainly welcome to stick to whatever you wish. I would encourage you to look into the historical development of the concept of "natural law", particularly in the case of slavery-I suspect that you'll not like overmuch what you will read. When you do, read the original documents-they are mostly available-rather than the interpretations offered by those looking to build a case for a certain point of view. Since the term has been used to define several distinct political philosophies, and has many of its roots in the justification of medieval social strata, do you really think that it is all that useful as a slogan? But, that really is not the question at hand, rather the question Paul brings forth is the ACTUAL circumstances of people living without government, historic and contemporary. This is illustrated by your quote from Bastiat: "On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place. " Bastiat was wrong. He could not have known that when he wrote, since anthropology (and history) was in its infancy and operated as a political treadmill rather than science. He used speculation as a justification that property is "natural" and therefore it IS proper because it WAS proper. The argument is circular, and is frivolous based upon modern knowledge of societies without(or with very limited)written law. That does not mean Bastiat, or any of the other likewise minded writers you mentioned, was wrong in everything that he wrote, but rather that his philosophy was not grounded in an accurate concept of reality. Rather like Newton believing in Alchemy. If one today proposes that Alchemy is legitimate only because Newton-a great mind-believed it so based on knowledge of the time, is the argument sound? Of course not, and we might even be able to presume that given today's knowledge base that Newton would find Alchemy pointless. Even so, it is wrong to pretend that there was a consensus on the matter, even, ironically, among the people you cite. I'll leave you with this from Thomas Paine in hope that it drives you to read more thoroughly of the "old farts" you quote: "There could be no such thing as landed property originally. Man did not make the earth, and though he had a natural right to occupy it, he had no right to locate as his property in perpetuity on any part of it." Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice, 1796.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 17 weeks ago
    Brooklyn Street Art
    Web link Sharon Secor
    Double posted. My bad.