----- Original Message ----- From: "John Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>If I moved to the US >> (which I wouldn't) part of the deal I would strike with the government >> would >> be to accept say bans on short selling of stick if the government decided >> that was a good idea, > > What if "the government" decided all citizens who immigrated from > Australia > should immediately become slaves? Would you accept that?
Another part of the deal (there would of course be thousands of parts) would be assurances that I would not become a slave after I emigrated (I believe the American constitution would spell that out). I agree with you in theory when you say "I do not think it is fair for someone to bar me from trading with a mutual consenting partner." I just want to point out that in the bigger picture a partner could be an individual or a corporation or a government, and that agreements can't be taken in isolation, and that to be fair you should probably take into account the trade you have done with the government (tacit or otherwise) to provide you (amongst other things) security for obeying the law. You can't trade away your right to trade something (slaves say) in exchange for Citizenship, and then expect to be able to sell slaves anyway anymore than you can trade your cow to one person for a horse and the same cow to a second person for a sheep. Sorry if the analogy is confusing or faulty, my main point is that governments are "consenting partners" too. Regards, Wayne. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
