<Grin>!! Nope, I am outright laughing!!
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Bruce Majors <[email protected]>wrote: > Tommy the idea of an obviously ill educated and somewhat dim little > fountleroy like you trying to discuss any topic in political economy or > political philosophy is laughable > > might as well stick you in a tutu and your mom's heels and have your prance > about for after dinner entertainment > > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Tommy News <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Brucie Girl Minor's Psychosis: >> >> Libertarianism: Loveably Kooky or Dangerously Crazy? >> >> Libertarians" have discovered this citadel of liberal (or progressive) >> thought recently to challenge its users on their ideology. So let's >> examine what the libertarians believe to challenge their ideology. >> >> :::::::: >> >> This election season put before the nation a philosophy that many >> Americans gobbled up without questioning. That philosophy of >> "libertarianism" was promoted by Texas Rep. Ron Paul as he sought the >> Republican presidential nomination. He gathered little numerical >> support for his philosophy but considerable zeal for what he espoused. >> But what he proposed doesn't hold up to scrutiny as a solution to the >> problems of a modern advanced industrial nation or society. >> >> The two main thrusts to libertarianism are economic freedom (i.e. >> deregulation) and no taxes. On other secondary matters, such as >> reproductive rights, flag burning as protest, separation of church and >> state, morality, censorship, assembly, association, and dying without >> government interference, some libertarians may often appear to be >> closer to liberals than to conservatives, even if they don't recognize >> that. >> >> This article will deal wish the two main factors of libertarianism; >> business regulation and paying of taxes (or nonpaying) in which it has >> a ironclad attachment with far-right conservatism. If there were a >> modern nation operating on the libertarian philosophy it might be the >> island nation of Haiti. That nation, is controlled by a small group of >> wealthy elites, who live separated from the people and pay no taxes on >> the wealth they gained in a regulation-free economy. Haiti, in which >> the majority of the population is destitute, is the poorest nation in >> the Western Hemisphere. The United States began its history as a >> libertarian nation in which the federal government had limited power >> of national defense, foreign relations and a uniform monetary system. >> That was under the Articles of Confederation (1781-89) which failed >> badly. If libertarianism failed in a simpler 18th Century in a nation >> of less that 4 million population there is little reason to believe it >> would succeed in a nation of more than 300 million people in a >> complicated 21st Century. >> >> On deregulation, we have to look no further on the results of such >> folly. When I was in graduate school studying constitutional law, one >> professor stated that all regulations exist to counter evils present >> in the system, and when those regulations are removed the evils >> return. >> >> Since the rise of conservative control of our nation, commercial >> regulations have been repealed or ignored and the evils have come >> flooding back. Ronald Reagan loosened the oversight on banking during >> his disastrous reign and we got the savings-and-loan failures and >> scandals that the taxpayers have had to clean up. After the dust >> cleared from that Reagan disaster, it was estimated that the cost of >> getting past Reagan's mess was $500 billion. Anyone with money in a >> savings account knows about the cost of that cleanup with interest >> payments close to all-time lows as that $500-billion bill was being >> paid. Reagan proudly declared that, "Government is not the solution to >> our problems, government is the problem." He was wrong. The truth is >> that "Reaganism is not the solution to our problems, Reaganism is the >> problem." >> >> To see the folly of commercial deregulation we need not look past the >> frauds and crimes surrounding corporations as Worldcom, Adelphia, Tyco >> and Healthsouth. In each case, executives of the corporations looted >> the companies so they could live lives of kingly splendor while those >> who actually made the money for the companies lost their jobs, >> careers, homes and retirements. Owners of the corporations, the >> stockholders, lost much or all of their investments. The frauds and >> crimes were illustrated by million-dollar birthday parties in foreign >> lands for the CEO or $6,000 shower curtains in the CEOs home to >> accompany gold-plated bathroom fixtures. >> >> Now we have the subprime mortgage scandal that threatens the nation's >> financial health. In this present mess, mortgages were sold under >> false promises to people who couldn't afford the interest rates that >> would come years later. The sellers then packaged the mortgages to >> unload on the financial market and pocket millions for themselves >> while their victims lost homes, credit ratings and reputation. >> Financial institutions that wound up holding those unsustainable >> mortgages were threatened with bankruptcy. Former Federal Reserve >> chairman Alan Greenspan ignored the looming crisis with the statement >> that bankers didn't need oversight because they would do nothing to >> harm the reputation of their industry. He was wrong. >> >> The petroleum industry is now giving us a picture of what could happen >> when an important segment of commerce runs wild and does as it >> pleases. While it has apparently broken no laws or regulations, the >> industry is using speculation on the world petroleum market to enhance >> its already record profits at the expense of everything else. Family >> budgets are busted over the cost of gasoline or heating oil, shipping >> of goods is too expensive for many truckers to make a living, food >> prices that depend on that trucking are skyrocketing just as >> everything else that must be moved to market. >> >> For the wonderful world of commercial deregulation and tax freedom we >> have to look no further than the success of Enron, the giant Texas >> energy-trading company that collapsed amid scandal and crime. Enron >> had managed to free itself from regulations and taxes through close >> affiliation to many politicians, contributing to their elections and >> helping draw up the energy program for the Bush administration as it >> took control of the nation in 2001. >> >> Because Enron had successfully escaped taxation, it listed any income >> it had as profit thereby causing its stock price to soar. Executives >> then cashed in on the high stock price to enrich themselves while >> everyone else suffered. Employees lost the jobs, careers, life savings >> and retirements tied to Enron stock they were forbidden to sell. >> Investors lost billions. >> >> Enron was free of regulation and used that freedom to engineer power >> shortages in many markets but even the money it extorted from its >> victim-customers wasn't enough to prevent its collapse from the crimes >> it committed under both deregulation and tax freedom. >> >> Business regulations can rightfully be called "economic law and order" >> but those who want to control our private lives with "law and order" >> don't want lawful economic behavior, even though we give government >> power to confront commercial crimes through our Constitution. >> Deregulation basically enables the dishonest businesses to have an >> unfair advantage over reputable firms, that then must adopt dishonest >> practices to compete and we all lose in the process. >> >> And the destruction of unions in America may do something for the >> economic freedom of the aristocratic elite, it has done nothing for >> the working class's economic freedom, which should include the freedom >> from want. >> >> To justify their disastrous actions, conservative libertarians will >> ever argue that regulations either do no good or actually harm the >> businesses being regulated. >> >> That's total nonsense. But, if it ever it were true there is a simple >> solution that wouldn't lead to the disaster deregulation always seems >> to lead to. Article I, Section 8, paragraph 18, of the Constitution >> says that all laws are to be "necessary and proper" in order to be >> constitutionally legal. Corporations have multimillion-dollar legal >> departments usually devoted to courting and paying politicians to get >> the harmful deregulation they desire. Corporations could use those >> legal departments to argue in court that a regulation or series of >> regulations that do nothing are unnecessary. The overpaid lawyers in >> those legal departments could argue that a regulation that harms the >> business is not proper. Any competent judge in America would then void >> such unnecessary and improper regulation or regulations. It might be >> less expensive to go to court for a corporation rather than legally >> "bribe" hundreds of corrupt politicians and we would have a >> more-honest government in return. But corporations don't go to court >> on these issues because they know they have no, or few, compelling >> arguments. It might be noteworthy to observe that George W. Bush has >> been busy appointing incompetents to the federal bench. >> >> There is an idiotic notion on the "libertarian" far right that there >> is no law requiring Americans to pay taxes on their incomes. For >> anyone to believe that they would have to be out of touch with >> reality. >> >> The United States first imposed an income tax to pay for the Civil >> War, but that tax was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court >> after the war because it was a direct tax on individuals, forbidden by >> the Constitution at that time, rather than a tax on the states, based >> on their population. The states then taxed individuals, which made it >> an indirect tax from the point of view of the national government, >> which was constitutional. To pay for World War I, Congress proposed an >> amendment to legalize an income tax. Congress drafted and passed the >> proposal, then sent it to the states, which also passed it to make it >> part of "the supreme law of the land." >> >> But righties of libertarian persuasion want us to believe that >> Congress then forgot to make a law to collect that tax. The right >> propagandizes the point constantly, and yet Congress doesn't notice >> and pass an income-tax collection law? Right-wing nut cases have been >> arguing, and losing, in court for years that there is no law requiring >> them to pay an income tax, but still Congress neglects to pass a law >> to collect the taxes? Are we to believe that of the hundreds of laws >> concerning taxes that Congress has passed over the years not one >> requires a tax collection? That we are told to believe even though the >> Constitution says "The Congress shall have to power to lay and collect >> taxes on income ..." >> >> Please note, the amendment doesn't specifically say that Americans >> have to pay the income tax because that statement would be totally >> superfluous as the 16th is clear in stating that Congress has power to >> collect income taxes; that is the law. To impede Congress' power of >> collection, or subvert its intention, is a crime. The Constitution >> states what government has power to do, not what citizens or residents >> must do or cannot do. >> >> To counter such a clear statement of purpose, the "libertarian" >> right-wingers counter by saying that the Fourth Amendment prohibits >> government from requiring the filing of a tax return without a >> warrant. But the Fourth says a warrant is required only for "searches >> and seizures" and a tax return involves neither. If someone lies >> (perjury) about their taxes, government could send someone to examine >> all financial papers and information the reluctant taxpayer possesses. >> When that agent goes to a home or business to look over information >> and takes those papers for evidence, that is search and seizure, which >> requires a warrant. >> >> When the righty loses that argument, he or she resorts to the Fifth >> Amendment, claiming revealing income facts constitutes testifying >> against oneself. But the Fifth pertains to criminal trials, not >> collection of information. The Fifth clearly says "criminal cases" and >> filing a tax return isn't a criminal case. Most Americans are familiar >> with the phrase in the Miranda decision that "what you say can be used >> against you" in court. So what you say on a tax return can be used >> against you in court. Plus, if one is capable of reading between the >> lines of the Fifth, the clear intention of what James Madison was >> talking about becomes evident. But when a "libertarian" can't >> adequately read what is on the lines, reading between them is >> impossible. >> >> To understand the issue, one must be able to use reasoning. Because of >> the statement that "Congress shall have the power to lay and collect >> taxes on income ..." we have to understand that any law based on that >> statement must also address the power grant in the statement. That is, >> all laws must empower the collection of taxes, and don't need to state >> what a taxpayer "must" do, although most do. Congress established the >> Internal Revenue Service to collect the taxes, and that is all one >> needs to know. >> >> Libertarians will claim that if they have to pay taxes to sustain the >> nation in which they live they are being "punished" by the government, >> usually "punished" for the magnificent success they have created all >> by themselves. That is a strange argument for it supposes that the >> very nation whose government created and protects the conditions that >> allowed this magnificent success doesn't need sustenance to continue >> conditions for success. And no one ever achieved success completely >> alone. We all need the society around us to succeed in any way. A >> business needs customers with purchasing power to succeed. A writer >> needs publishers to print and readers to read. An actor needs casting >> directors to offer jobs, producers and directors to make the product, >> which needs audience members paying money to make it all work. >> Teachers needs schools and colleges to have a job, and those schools >> and colleges need students and taxpayers. Insurance salesmen need >> customers who need insurance. We all need each other. >> >> Then a libertarian refers to taxation as "robbery," which can only be >> interpreted as meaning that libertarian thinks the United States of >> America is a criminal entity, the men who wrote the Constitution that >> authorizes taxation are just a bunch of common thieves and the >> Constitution itself is a criminal conspiracy. But the Constitution is >> a creation of, "We the people." As James Madison, father of the >> Constitution said, "In the compound republic of America, the power >> surrendered by the people ..." That means we have given to the >> government the power to tax us. This is not a static one-time grant of >> power by Americans long dead, it is ongoing grant, and by living in >> the United States that authority continues to flow constantly from >> each of us. The only way to stop that flow of authority by an >> individual is to leave the jurisdiction of the nation receiving the >> power. >> >> A libertarian wrote in a recent diary that, "To a libertarian the >> difference between paying a person or company for a good or service >> one desires and having the government take money by force (against >> ones will) is obvious." That is nonsense, because by continuing to >> reside in the United States that libertarian continues to give >> government power to tax him. That is self taxation, not force, and >> staying within the jurisdiction of the taxing government is completely >> voluntary. >> >> Holding valid views of the role the Constitution plays on the issues >> of commercial regulation and taxation could get one accused by a >> staunch libertarian of advocating a police state or being a communist. >> >> There is no single definition of "patriotism." To some, waving the >> American flag or wearing a flag pin on a lapel is patriotism. To >> others patriotism is howling support for a war regardless of its >> justification, but that's militarism, not patriotism. Some think >> patriotism is sporting "I Support Our Troops" on the bumper sticker of >> a gas-guzzling SUV that keeps us dependent on imported oil. To others >> patriotism is merely the political party one belongs to or adherence >> to their political ideology; blindly following a political leader >> regardless of what kind of, or how many, crimes he commits; shouting >> down anyone who holds a differing opinion or expressing disdain for >> anything foreign, even subjecting foreign nations to US demands or >> control. My definition of patriotism is two-part: putting the needs of >> the nation ahead of personal interests and strict adherence to the >> Constitution of the United States (which would include paying taxes, >> correcting and atoning for national sins and admitting the nation was >> founded on secular principles not religious). By this definition, no >> libertarian can be a patriot. >> >> (Author's note: I grew up with libertarians and learned a valuable >> life lesson from a libertarian family. I became a professional artist >> in the fifth grade when David Niskanen paid me a nickel to draw a >> ghost for him on his Halloween greeting card being made in art class >> at Kenwood Elementary School in Bend, Oregon. David is the younger >> brother of William Niskanen, one of Robert McNamara's Whiz Kids during >> the Vietnam War, and who served in the Nixon administration's Office >> of Management and Budget, was a member of Ronald Reagan's Council of >> Economic Advisors from 1981 to 1985 and chairman since 1985 of the >> libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, DC, whose "scholars" have >> been furnishing crackpot economic theories to right-wing DC >> politicians for decades, the theories that continually lead us into >> economic trouble. In fairness, Bill is not a fan of the >> "starve-the-beast" mantra of the political right and is a >> balance-the-budget-before-cutting-taxes advocate, but received his >> doctorate degree in economics at the University of Chicago, another >> victim of Milton Friedman's economic teachings. The lesson I learned >> is that "them what got the nickels pay us who got the talents to do >> for them what they can't do for themselves." As mentioned above, >> nickel owners need talent possessers just as much as the talented need >> the nickel dispensers. It is also noteworthy that the Niskanen family, >> which owned the Trailways bus franchise in Oregon for many years, used >> the US court system and the economic regulations libertarians love to >> hate to sue Greyhound Bus Lines for restraint of trade and win a >> $23-million judgment ~ although probably settling for less in an >> out-of-court settlement to avoid endless appeals ~ and that represents >> a whole lot of brand-new nickels.) >> >> We can end with paraphrasing Reagan again by noting that, >> "Libertarianism will not be the solution to our problems, >> libertarianism will be the problem." >> >> More: >> http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=7535 >> >> On 12/13/10, Bruce Majors <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Tommy News <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Keith- >> >> >> >> Your hatred, lies, and false smear are again evident in these false >> >> statements. >> >> >> > >> > that's a lie >> > >> >> >> >> I never once said that SPLC was reputable, I simply said that is not a >> >> "Hate Organization" as you falsely stated. >> >> >> > >> > it's a tendentious and dishonest smear group and you circulate its >> > calumnies >> > >> >> >> >> I did not post any "missive full of lies." That is another false lie. >> >> >> > >> > You are lying. You only post government propaganda and disinformation, >> > quisling that you are >> > >> >> >> >> I am most certainly not out of step with reality, that is false >> >> slander, a lie, an insult, and a smear. >> >> >> > >> > Another Tommy lie by the deluded brain dead step n fetchit Obama bot >> > >> >> >> >> I am not a "Marxist", that is yet another slanderous false lie, and a >> >> personal smear. >> >> >> > >> > You just felch Marxist ass >> > >> >> >> >> I am not a "Anti-American", that is yet another slanderous false lie, >> >> and a personal smear. >> >> >> > >> > You hate American values like individual liberty; you are a fascist >> > >> >> >> >> Mocking me, "making your points", and continuing to spew forth your >> >> homophobic lies and personal attacks is nothing to give thanks for. >> >> >> > >> > Tommy hating you is not hating gays; you are a poor excuse for a gay or >> for >> > anything else except a crackpot >> > >> >> >> >> You, Keith, should be deeply ashamed of your hate, lies, smear, >> >> personal attacks, and your highly offensive vicious behavior. >> >> >> >> >> >> He should be ashamed he takes the time to reply to a dipshit like you >> > >> > -- >> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> > >> > * Visit our other community at >> > http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> >> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> >> >> -- >> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. >> Have a great day, >> Tommy >> >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at >> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at > http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
