Unless you're an amoeba most folks have what's known as a political philosophy but sometimes our so-called inconsistencies are simply the recognition that our philosophy may have a logical absurdity or two if stretched, the Quirk (e.g. brother and sister should not get married). One can be strongly libertarian in spirit but hate abortion and Saty and soap bring up the usual tried-and-true pro-choice angles, really the skip in the record as if we've never heard them before. If we don't agree with Shaw for instance she tends to think we haven't considered her points. Oh no darling we hear you loud and clear we just disagree with you. That's possible ain't it? There's no need to pulverize your opponent, this scorched earth policy (S-Block). I like to think of this place as a coffee klatch, a passionate but friendly cafe. There's no need to break the saucer or piss in the sink.
Debated with Saty at her blog a few months back and for me Michael Schiavo at best was and is a questionable character so we got into a whole medical discussion and before long you reach The Impasse, a ravine or chasm with a shaky footbridge. For me I've reached the end of my walk, may as well turn around and head back to the car. IMO nobody won that one and I'm philosophical about it. It makes for a good Google search and I'm glad I did it. Not her but if people want to hold his water for him I got no problem so long as you don't begrudge me my take. You can even bring your 9/11 Truther movement over here and I won't get personal which reminds me I have to check out Alex Jones' views on the Mosque.
There develops over time if you're a true conservative a certain what I call Conservative Convergence. By this I mean it's ok to question aspects of your own movement from time to time, I've done it many times myself but after awhile you find yourself agreeing more and more with your fellow conservatives and kind of put the old feuds in a shoebox. It's better for society to be pro-life, the GZ mosque, unions are bad, traditional mores should be defended etc. etc. My own definition of being a true conservative is this: libertarianism or maximum liberty but with respect for social mores which many times we get the first part but not that leavening factor. You can be for maximum liberty and still see the wisdom in that it's better off for society to be pro-life for instance and I'm not even talking about the finer points of that debate which have been hammered home time and again (Soapie's Foundry) but the general principle. There's no need for a porn shop to be located within close proximity to a church and angel dust needs to stay banned for reasons of public safety. Many times marijuana is mixed with phencyclidine unbeknownst to the pothead and if you think your local drug dealer has a moral code you're an idiot.
How would you like your coffee?
Funny thing, Beck always implores his listeners to "question with boldness" that is unless of course you have reservations about the events of 9/11. Ironic to in that we're supposed to distrust the government's intentions with regards to Obamacare but trust their findings regarding the events of that day. I have my doubts and still hold my reservations about much of it.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Mosque thing, the most recent and interesting read I caught was this:
http://mindbodypolitic.com/2010/09/13/the-cia-mosque-connection/
More funny, no sooner do I mention Beck and I catch this over at Lew Rockwell....
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lewrockwell.com/maymin/maymin14.1.html
Well worth the read IMO.
Soap, that's a good point.
ReplyDeleteIt does seem that for both sides of the aisle, they believe you should trust the government, unless the other side is in control.
Stranded, you can probably guess where I'll come down your question...
The discussion is always better.
Rarely will you change minds in the heat of the moment, or debate.
If it is a true discussion, with legitimate give and take on both sides, there is always much to learn...
Another Good Post! Way to go, Z.
ReplyDeleteRespect for whose social mores? If some guy gets off work and wants to smoke a joint as opposed to have two rum and cokes, is someone who has a different moral value going to respect him?
ReplyDeleteWhy do we need to have a centralized planning authority to whip us in line and force us to adopt some sort of creed?
This precisely the action of a totalitarian regime.
"Is it more important to win the debate or have a discussion?"
ReplyDeleteI was never involved in
'Debate' in my school years, but have a nephew that coaches a formal Debate team. As I understand it, the debator
must be so well versed in the facts that he can easily take the part of either side, despite his(or her) own feelings in the matter. I think that is where lawyers come from...
It does seem that for both sides of the aisle, they believe you should trust the government, unless the other side is in control.
ReplyDeleteWhich is exactly why libertarians are against both sides of the current aisles, because both sides (pardon the language but they really do) suck. I don't trust most of them anymore, they are corrupt and out of touch with the common citizen.
Our country was not founded so that any one person's rights infringed upon another's, but the distribution of wealth is doing just that. And that quite frankly sucks! Not to mention that it is unsustainable and kills the economy.
Our Founding Fathers I would say would be considered libertarians. But they also felt that liberty needed to be coupled with a sense of morality. Soapie, you may say "whose morality" but it really is as simple as the Golden Rule. So, smoking pot, no, that really isn't doing anything unto others so it doesn't apply, but sucking a baby out of his mother, that is NOT treating the baby the way we would want to be treated, now is it?
Hi Beth,
ReplyDeleteI do Sort of Wonder what your Take on my most Recent Post would be. It's about Abortion and Rape.
To Soap, & the Rest of you,
There is Something else that Troubles me too about Libertarianism. A Little Birdie Told me that some Libertarians Actually believe that we should "Sell all Public Lands, including National Parks, to the Highest Private Bidder, Pull US Troops from all Foreign Territory, Stop all Foreign Aid and Eliminate Public Schools and Universities."
I am Especially bothered by the Selling of all Public Lands and the Eliminating of Public Schools and Universities. It's as if at least some Libertarians are Opposed to having anything at all that is Free to the Public. That's a Little Extreme, don't you Think?
Here's a Link that Explains the Libertarian Platform, or if you have a better one, let me Know.
The Libertarian Party Platform
If your dealer's putting PCP in your weed and not charging you extra he must be a close friend or owe you a favor.
ReplyDelete:P
Again, who's mores Beth? Freedom and Liberty mean freedom to choose one's own course.
ReplyDeleteFree to the public??? Dear Lista, there is no such thing as a free lunch.
ReplyDeleteIt's only extreme if you like statism.
ReplyDeletethe debator
ReplyDeletemust be so well versed in the facts that he can easily take the part of either side, despite his(or her) own feelings in the matter.
And when I do this around here I get accused of preternatural compartmentalism.
Our country was not founded so that any one person's rights infringed upon another's
ReplyDeleteUnless you were black, Native American, Asian, Jewish, Catholic, or female.
Then all bets were off, because you didn't really have all that many rights to begin with and no one was particularly concerned with protecting them.
'Rights' for the founding fathers were virtually exclusively the domain of white protestant men.
Let's stop romanticizing these people and look at what was really going on.
But Soapie, if one's course interferes with another's course, that is a problem, right? Hence, abortion is wrong because it interferes with the baby's right to life!
ReplyDeleteSeriously Saty, can you cite in the Constitution where any race, creed or gender was not included? Thanks!
ReplyDeleteBeth I'll never concede to your inquiry because you and I have far different definitions of Life.
ReplyDeleteAnd I believe rights as well.
ReplyDeleteSeriously Beth, have you looked at any of the AMENDMENTS to the Constitution where things like voting was finally ALLOWED for women?
ReplyDeleteSurely if it had been in there to start with, Susan B. Anthony wouldn't have wasted her time and an amendment wouldn't have been required.
Similarly, all those folks who died in the Civil War wouldn't have had to if owning other people had been illegal from the start.
The THIRTEENTH Amendment (1865) abolished slavery, nearly one hundred years after the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteThe FIFTEENTH Amendement (1870)made it legal for all MEN to vote regardless of race, creed or previous condition of servitude.
The NINETEENTH Amendment (1920), ratified LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO, made it legal for women to vote.
Would these have been necessary if 'everyone's' rights had actually been addressed in the original writing of the Constitution.
Questions?
The PCP in the weed thing. I've known a few people who smoke pot on a regular basis and many times their personalities changed for the worse imo and so I thought I'd bring up the whole sherming thing or maybe it being a secret ingredient they weren't aware of. Did some research on this and will use it every time people want to make a pro pot argument as soapie has done here. We hear so much about second-hand smoke, well what about second-hand pot smoke that may even be laced with PCP? Kind of adds a new twist to the debate.
ReplyDeleteSoap the argument that you should be able to ingest whatever is a strong one but the public safety argument is an even stronger one. Personally I find potheads annoying but when we talk about drug legalization I prefer to talk about the harder drugs. Pot is pot and we'll never agree on that but we should agree on the other stuff.
soap: "Why do we need to have a centralized planning authority to whip us in line and force us to adopt some sort of creed?"
ReplyDeleteI don't know where you're coming from on this. Just because one more may be don't have premarital sex doesn't mean you'll go to jail if you do. Mores have nothing to do with some Orwellian authority. They're just the values and morals and traditions that have accreted over time and it's my view we should respect them. A more would be some hot chick you happen to meet and you want to jump in the sack right away but her more says to wait awhile. Some men respect that, some don't but it's just the way it is soapie so why should she adopt YOUR view let's say?
Dave I knew you'd like this thread and I come at it like this. Sure I go into any blogging debate with a sort of aim to "win" and use every tool, every trick in my arsenal but the point is to have fun too and if I see it ain't going my way then it's not the end of the world. At that point let's just enjoy the discussion so yeah try to "win" the debate but it ain't the be-all and the end-all. I don't get this one-minded framework of many bloggers left and right to nuke the opposition.
ReplyDeleteBeth,
ReplyDeleteArticle 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution:
“ Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
You may recognize this as the 3/5's compromise. It excluded slaves, who were not given the right to vote, and made sure they did not have full representation as they were not all allowed to be counted.
Also in Article 1 Section 9 Congress was expressly prohibited from making any laws that prohibited the importation of slaves.
In spite of the romance many people have with our constitution, and t is a great document, as justice Marshall said, "It was flawed" at birth.
And this is just one example why folks of color are a little nervous when a predominantly white population starts talking about going back to "just" the original document.
As Saty pointed out, were it not for Progressives pushing amendments and changes to the Constitution, changes that I am pretty sure the originists of those days stood against, there;d be a whole lotta folks with less rights today, and you'd be among them as a woman.
Happy Constitution Day Everyone!
God the Indians Dave. I hear they're gonna riot and shut down the Thruway here in NY State if they have to cough up those new taxes on their cigarettes. I say leave 'em alone.
ReplyDelete"Soap the argument that you should be able to ingest whatever is a strong one but the public safety argument is an even stronger one."
ReplyDeleteThese two issues Z are not mutually inclusive. They are mutually EXCLUSIVE and should be addressed as such.
Me smoking a joint, taking LSD, snorting coke, etc. is one issue.
Causing an accident as a result of being under the influence and thus harming another individual is a complete and totally separate issue.
"why should she adopt YOUR view let's say?"
ReplyDeleteYou don't have to but my more is simply to allow you to chose your own moral values and live by them accordingly. In exchange, I will chose and live by my own moral values.
I seek to impose nothing on another.
If I wanna have premarital sex and I find a willing participant, that's up to me and her. Some God fearing individual might find that practice to be immoral and against the will of God. Of those two scenarios, you tell me who is more likely to want to impose one more on another? The Libertarian who simply wants to live by their own moral code or the God fearing person who thinks you ought to live by theirs (God's)???
Soap,
ReplyDelete"Freedom and Liberty mean freedom to choose one's own course."
Well, in the Case of Abortion, it is the Freedom to Commit Murder. Sorry. That wasn't very Politically Correct, but Oh Well.
"Dear Lista, there is no such thing as a free lunch."
A Person who is not Even Willing to Support a National Park with his Tax Dollars is Truly Selfish indeed. It's a Good thing that most People do not Think that way.
"It's only extreme if you like statism."
No, Statism is the Other Extreme.
That's Enough for now. I'll Read the Rest Later.
Ok, Maybe I was Bluffing about Reading the Rest Later. I'm still Here.
ReplyDeleteSatyavati,
You are actually making very good Points.
Though I disagree with you in relation to Abortion and could even say that this is another example of a Group of People that don't "really have all that many rights to begin with and no one is particularly concerned with protecting them."
Even so, your Points about the Amendments Illustrate how if Amendments were Needed, then the Original Constitution was Imperfect. If the Original Constitution was Imperfect, then more Amendments may still be Needed.
I Love the Point that you Made and yet, Perhaps an Additional Amendment is Needed in Order to Grant Freedom and Life to the Unborn.
Let's see, 7 more Comments. Yeh. I Better Take a Break. I'm Tired.
"A Person who is not Even Willing to Support a National Park with his Tax Dollars is Truly Selfish indeed. It's a Good thing that most People do not Think that way."
ReplyDeleteMy intention is not to attack you personally Lista but I really must say that you are exposing yourself for who you really and truly are. It's speaks directly to Satyavati's point which is that you are not content with simply believing in what you believe and going through life acting on said beliefs. Instead OTHERS must submit to this belief as well.
That I or anyone else might not wish to pay for a national park they do not intend to use, in your mind, is selfish. I regret to inform you, that's not selfish
You want to know what is truly selfish? An individual who wants a national park (or a dog park, or a pro sports stadium, or a corn subsidy, or a bike path, etc.) and then expects someone else to pay for it.
That my dear is the epitome of selfishness and greed.
Personally, I know people who would do well with a bit of dust in their weed.
ReplyDeleteYou could call it medically necessary if you like.
And I'm particular about my coffee.. Gevalia Kenya and Antigua are my favs, and that can be brewed with one less scoop than they recommend, and served with very cold half/half and Equal.
ReplyDeleteAnd maybe some Stella D'Oro on the side.
I used to get into Kona and the Blue Mountain but they got to be spendy and I was going through it too quick. I almost hate to say but I went to folgers in the "stay fresh" container (which is hilarious because all it is is a plastic container with a lid LOL).
ReplyDeleteIf we're talking proletariat grocery store coffee then I'm all about some Eight O'Clock in the green bag.
ReplyDeleteIt kicks the hell out of Dunkin Donuts and every other general retail coffee out there.
When I was a lil kid I remember going to the grocery store and every register had a big coffee grinder where you would grind the beans right as you paid for them. The whole store smelled so good.
As a side note, coffee should ALWAYS be perked, not dripped. And if you have a real old fashioned stovetop percolator it tastes better. I have my mom's and also my mother in law's. Caveat emptor: coffee today is ground much more finely, so put a filter into that stainless steel basket.
I like french press and though I have one, I never use it.
ReplyDeleteFrench Press is the best. Leaves the oil in the coffee.
ReplyDeleteGuatamalen Antigua, great en la manana!
Oil and I have restraining orders against each other.
ReplyDelete:/
Cheapest instant coffee works for me. Not all liberals are elitists...
ReplyDeleteThe amendments are consistent with the Constitution, wouldn't you say? So, what is your point?
ReplyDeleteSoap I'm really not getting you here. Folks who are against premarital sex don't have the power to throw you in jail nor would they want to. Where are you coming from on this? Their values say don't do it, your values say do it so what's the problem from a legal standpoint? You're entertaining some kind of phantom menace here.
ReplyDeleteRe drugs causing car accidents consider this. I've done alot of research on phencyclidine lately, also known as PCP. PCP unlike LSD let's say gets retained in your fatty tissue after your body metabolizes it. After this it's known by other names or chemical initials but these elements still have full psychoactive potential and things like stress, fatigue or exercise can bring them out again. These aftershocks are entirely physical in nature and real unlike LSD flashbacks which have a psychological origin. Angel dust can cause problems for the user even a year after stopping use. Now who's to say one of these aftershocks can't cause a car accident down the road? Before you take the full libertarian position on drug use you have to really research the issue.
McDonald's coffee is the best.
ReplyDeleteOk, Let's see how well I do at keeping up with this Conversation.
ReplyDeleteZ Made some good points about Pot, PCP and Other Drugs, as well as Other Subjects. I'm going to Leave the Cigarette Discussion Alone, but I Agree with Z and not Soap on the Hard Drugs Issue.
And Yes, as both Satyvati and Dave Said, the Constitution was Flawed at Birth, and Dave made some Very Excellent Points about this.
Soap,
I Think that all that Z was saying is that if you do Decide to Go Out with someone who does not Believe in Premarital Sex, than Hopefully, you would Respect her Values, yet I do not Know you Well Enough to Question you on that Issue.
And as to your Selfishness Comment, Desiring to Keep a Yacht, while Paying Workers a Minimal Wage for a Large Amount of Work is more Selfish than Desiring Food and Medication for Ones Family that that Minimal Wage is not Enough to Cover.
Parks, Pro Stadiums, Skate Parks, Etc. are also set up for the Sake of Giving the Teens of the Poor Something to do with their Time, in Order to Cut Down on Gang Activity and Crime and we all Benefit from that, whether we use these Things or not. The Reality is that an Increase in Poverty Leads to an Increase in Crime and a Few Parks and Free Activities are Cheaper than Putting them all in Prison.
Come On, Soap, this is a very Minimal Expense and you can't say that there is not also a Benefit, even to those who do not Use these Services.
Soap is hardcore libertarian. To give you a flavor he believes that private companies should have the right to discriminate against African-Americans is where he's coming from. He's not a racist but a purist intellectual theorist but just the same he should know by now most conservatives are not into his brand of extreme libertarianism. I'm happy with public parks and museums and have never given it much thought. It's not something that keeps me up at night.
ReplyDeleteI Don't Make Coffee in the Morning in Order to Wake Up and my Husband is Actually Allergic to it. I do Drink it at Restaurants on Occasion, but am not Picky about how it's Made. Occasionally, someone will Offer to Pour Out the Old and "Make a Fresh Pot", but I just say. That's Ok. Don't Bother. Just Pour me what's there. I Guess I'm more Impatient than Picky. :)
ReplyDeleteYeh, Thanks Z,
ReplyDeleteFortunately, there's Probably not Enough who Share Soap's Position in Relation to Public Parks to Make much of a Difference Politically.
I've been perking my coffee these days and it's like sitting around a campfire. I tend not to go into Starbucks because I easily get disorientated - Coffee of the Day, Vietnamese/Thai Blend. Dunno, I just stand there slightly out of it.
ReplyDeleteI'm too distracted by my job sucking to give it much thought. Straight libertarianism is just such a hard brew.
ReplyDeleteI'm Happy to Hear that you're more Reasonable, Z. The Cold Blended Coffees are Really Cool, I Like White Mocha, yet there are Lots of Coffee Places that Serve Them. Don't Care much for Starbucks. I'm going to Move to your Other Post Now.
ReplyDeleteCoffee sold at those 50 cent vending machines at supermarkets are pure crap btw.
ReplyDeleteDon't Usually Drink Coffee at Super Markets. Too Busy Shopping.
ReplyDeleteI Thought I'd Mention that my Body doesn't Respond much to Caffeine, yet when I Asked for Two Shots in my Coffee Once at a Coffee Place, I actually got a Little Bit of a Buzz by it. I was so Surprised. I Wonder if that is what a lot of People get from only one Shot. Oh well.
You're right in that there aren't enough hard-core libertarians that take my position and certainly none with said positions who've climbed to any ranks within the Federal Government. And yet....their positions on issues is stamped far too extreme/ outside of the orthodoxy.
ReplyDeleteThis of course suggests that the status quo has served us well and will continue to serve us better.
You Continue to Make me Laugh, Soap, and you Remind me of my Friend Griper who I am all the time Labeling a Black and White Thinker. That is a person who Always Thinks that Things Have to be One Way or the Other and there is No In Between. Just as your most Recent Comment Suggests that it is Either the Extreme that you Want, or the Status Quo. Well, Soap, there is a Huge Area of Options In between.
ReplyDeleteYou can have any number of variations on command and control statist directives. In the final analysis however it either works or it doesn't, it's either served the citizens well and not saddled them with unsurmountable debt or it has.
ReplyDeleteYou Miss my Point, Soap. What we have now is Neither Totally Statism, nor Totally Free Market. Total Statism is Socialism. I Agree that we are Moving Quickly in that Direction and that Obama has Gone Way too Far with it, yet just because I do not Agree with Obama's Extreme, does not Mean that I Agree with your Extreme Libertarianism.
ReplyDeleteOh it's statism alright. Fascism to be more specific. The examples are a plenty.
ReplyDeleteAll I'm saying is that we are not Quite Over the the Extreme yet, in Relation to Statism, yet Unfortunately we Appear to be Working on it.
ReplyDeleteWanna bet? There is little more that is as statist as the state effectively taking over the means of educating children and yet the Republicans (save for maybe a handful) are committed time and time again, not to abolish the Federal Department of Education but instead, to try and morph it to their liking.
ReplyDeleteSoap,
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that people define these words according to their own agendas and preferences.
That's how everything with this administration became 'Socialist', 'Fascist', 'Nazi', and 'Communist', all at the same time.
People just use these hot-button words to mean whatever they wish them to mean (a la Humpty Dumpty) and exploit them for their emotional content.
I understand the distinction between the various isms. Regardless of whether it is Socialism, Fascism, Communism, Statism, at its core is Collectivism (the collective in this case is not the people but rather the state. The people merely become servants or wards of it) and so within Collectivism (the hub if you will) you will see various spokes that effectively branch out in their attempt to pull the masses in towards the hub (which is collectivism). All of the aforementioned negate the right of the individual in favor of the greater good. In fact, the Nazi's even codified the dotrine on the edges of the Marks of that era.
ReplyDeleteIt is, to be certain, and evil ideology as in practice it requires the brute force of a gun to impose it.
Sayavati is Right about the Hot Button Words, yet we are Moving in the Direction that Soap is Talking about at a Fast Enough Rate, that I don't Feel like Opposing him too Strongly in the Matter, for Caution is most Definitely in Order. When Moderates Start Sympathizing with Extremists, that is when we Know that the Left has Gone too Far and Needs to Come Back to the Right a little.
ReplyDeleteI agree with soapie's take on education. I never got why it is mandatory to educate your child. If you want to raise a Paris Hilton that should be your business.
ReplyDelete"...for Caution is most Definitely in Order."
ReplyDeleteCaution be damned. What good is caution if you're still inching forward to destruction? We need a complete 100% reversal from these statist policies that have been inflicted upon the American people from these two political parties for the past 100 years.
Like I Said, I don't Feel like Adamantly Opposing you Right Now, so you just go ahead and Go For It!! I'll Oppose you when the Pendulum Swings back in your Direction, though, at this Rate, that may not Happen.
ReplyDeleteLet's just say I've already begun. All this is simply not sustainable. Thus, when it crumbles will you be ready? Are you preparing right now or simply banking on faith that a pendulum swing will make things better?
ReplyDeleteI have just Told you that the Hoped for Pendulum Swing may or may not Happen and this does Concern me. Hopefully, it will Swing back, because if not, our Country is in Trouble just as you have said.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you're understanding me at all Lista. By pendulum swing do you mean Republicans regaining power in the House and/or Senate and perhaps the Oval Office in 2012?
ReplyDeleteWhat I'm saying is it is almost certain that it is not going to matter.
Do you think if Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, et al were to get elected that we'd see an end to the Federal Reserve; to a fiat currency and continued foreign intervention all across the globe?
I seriously have my doubts. Now, if you don't happen to think that a fiat currency poses the greatest threat to your liberty and freedom then I suppose it really doesn't matter.
Great points soapie!!! I'm with soapie on this one.
ReplyDeleteThanks but you don't have to take my word for it. The framers were quite clear on the subject of a central banking cartel.
ReplyDelete"A private central bank issuing the public currency is a greater menace to the liberties of the people than a standing army...We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt."
Thomas Jefferson, One of the Founding Fathers and the 3rd President of the United States of America
I don't Know as much about this Issue. There is a Lady in our Tea Party that Holds a Sign that says "End the Fed", but I'm not well Versed on what that Means.
ReplyDeleteFor a concise understanding read Ron Paul's book of the same name. If you want to have your mind blown, read "The Creature from Jekyl Island".
ReplyDeleteAnd once you do, you'll learn not only about the evils of central fractional reserve banking but you'll also come to understand that until we abolish the Federal Reserve, your money isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
& setting up the gold standard again.
ReplyDeletePrecisely (no thanks to Nixon on that)
ReplyDeleteAn exerpt from The Creature from Jekyll Island:
ReplyDelete"The basic plan for the Federal Reserve System was drafted at a secret meeting held in November of 1910 at the private resort of J.P. Morgan on Jekyll Island of the coast of Georgia. Those who attended represented the great financial institutions of Wall Street and, incidently, Europe as well. The reason for the secrecy was simple. Had it been known that rival factions of the banking community had joined together, the public would have been alerted to the possibility that the bankers were plotting an agreement in restraint of trade-which, of course, is exactly what they were doing. What emerged was a cartel agreement with 5 objectives: stop the growing competition from the nation's newer banks; obtain a franchise to create money out of nothing for the purpose of lending; get control of the reserves of all banks so that the more reckless ones would not be exposed to currency drains and bank runs; get the taxpayer to pick up the cartel's inevitable losses; and convince Congress that the purpose was to protect the public. It was realized that the bankers would have to become partners with the politicians and that the structure of the cartel would have to be a central bank. The record shows that the Fed has failed to achieve its stated objectives. That is because those were never its true goals. As a banking cartel, and in terms of the five objectives stated above, it has been an unqualified success."
Soapie's right. IMO Republicans might be somewhat better than Democrats but nobody, I repeat nobody is gonna rock the status quo. They'll talk about lower taxes, not abolishing the IRS outright. When you talk about getting rid of the Fed you get the wingnut treatment. Just ask Ron Paul.
ReplyDeleteYou should check and see if your library has either of those books Z.
ReplyDeleteLibraries have a liberal bias my friend. Worked in a library once for about six years and got a little familiar with the American Library Association (the ALA) and its liberal ways. Oh I know they have Banned Books Week every year but sometimes certain books are mysteriously not put on the shelves.
ReplyDeleteYou'll never know unless you check.
ReplyDeleteHave to do it tomorrow. Who's the author of the Jekyll book?
ReplyDeleteG. Edward Griffin
ReplyDeleteGood one to own actually.
ReplyDeleteI guess I'll Start my Reading with the Comments Under this Post, since there are about 30 Unread Comments Under the "Is the Right to Abortion Self-Evident?" Post and Only 7 Unread Ones Under this Post.
ReplyDeleteStarting with the Comment just After my Last one...,
Soap,
I'm quite Certain that I Don't Read the Amount of Books that you do and when I do, I Pick Stuff that Interests me Personally. Sounds like Z Might Read it, though.
I guess Taring Down the Federal Reserve and/or the IRS would not be a Very Easy Task. Good Luck!
As to the IRS, You do Realize, Z, that a Government can not Run without at least some amount of Money, so Certainly we will always have some form of Taxes.
Repeal the 16th and institute the fair tax. If we can cap the percentage and get meaningful tort reform we'd be going somewhere.
ReplyDeleteI have Mixed Feelings about the Fair Tax. Ending the Fed might not be such a bad Idea, but there are just too many other Libertarian Issues that I just do not at all Agree with.
ReplyDeleteMy guess is that those reservations are based almost exclusively on your initial gut feeling and not on any understanding of why Libertarians hold those positions nor how they'd be applied in the real world.
ReplyDeleteWhat's your beef with the Fair Tax?
Beth once said that "there are two Americas, one that cares about individualism and one that cares about collectivism." and Actually my Friend, the Griper, also said something similar.
ReplyDeleteWhen Griper Talked about it, he Connected Individualism with the Concept of Free Choice and Collectivism with the Concept of Determinism. Individualism and Free Choice are the Focus of the Republicans and Libertarians. Collectivism and Determinism is more the Focus of the Democrats and Socialists.
Accepting one of these Focuses or the other, or a Combination of Both, is Going to Effect a Person's Political Views. I was Considering doing a Post on this Subject and maybe I will, for there is no Easy Way to Explain why a Person is so Opposed to a Certain way of Thinking Politically, though I do Assure you that "Gut Feelings" are not the Explanation.
I don't Know about Fair Tax. It Seems that those First Starting Out and who are Poor and not yet Established would Carry most of the Tax Burden because they are the Ones who have the Need to Purchase Things, yet those who are already Established can more Easily Choose not to Purchase Things because they already have them.
I Prefer the Fair Tax Idea, though, to the Flat Tax Idea and after Thinking about the Issue Further, I realized that if Necessities, such as Food and whatever else was not Taxed, then this would Relieve some of the Tax Burden from the Poor who Spend a Larger Percentage of their Income on said Necessities and thus, it might Actually Work if it was Set Up Right.
Believe it or not. I've been Thinking about this one and am not as Adamantly Opposed to it as you might Think.
I'm not against the other taxes Lista, only the income tax. Soapie many libraries here have the Ron Paul book but not the Jekyll book. I'm getting the feeling the Jekyll book is more a cult classic deal that's hard to find. It may not be so much censorship as it's not even a blip on the radar screen.
ReplyDeleteWell what the hell can I say? There are two copies available for checkout at the Minneapolis Central Library. Cult classic or not, it is chock full of historically factual information about the Federal Reserve Banking system.
ReplyDelete