A very interesting, if long, article.
Norway is also full of entrepreneurs like Wiggo Dalmo. Rates of start-up creation here are among the highest in the developed world, and Norway has more entrepreneurs per capita than the United States, according to the latest report by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, a Boston-based research consortium. A 2010 study released by the U.S. Small Business Administration reported a similar result: Although America remains near the top of the world in terms of entrepreneurial aspirations — that is, the percentage of people who want to start new things—in terms of actual start-up activity, our country has fallen behind not just Norway but also Canada, Denmark, and Switzerland.
Here’s an interesting point. The government is simply another supplier of services just like private/public companies. And if it can do it better and cheaper than a company…
Whereas most entrepreneurs in Dalmo’s position develop a retching distaste for paying taxes, Dalmo doesn’t mind them much. “The tax system is good—it’s fair,” he tells me. “What we’re doing when we are paying taxes is buying a product. So the question isn’t how you pay for the product; it’s the quality of the product.” Dalmo likes the government’s services, and he believes that he is paying a fair price.
This is particularly surprising, because the prices Dalmo pays for government services are among the highest in the world. He lives and works in the small city of Mo i Rana, which is about 17 miles south of the Arctic Circle in Norway. As a Norwegian, he pays nearly 50 percent of his income to the federal government, along with a substantial additional tax that works out to roughly 1 percent of his total net worth. And that’s just what he pays directly. Payroll taxes in Norway are double those in the U.S. Sales taxes, at 25 percent, are roughly triple.
Admittedly, this wouldn’t work in the US. Corruption and greed are too ingrained to create a fair system. Our religion is Capitalism, damn it, and we’re sticking with it no matter how fast our economy sinks!
bobbo must be a politician. or bureaucrat. or shill.
# 41 bobbo, libertarianism fails when its touchstone values become tenets in a Dogma that corrupts the language of common discourse said:
Wow! did you fit all that in your head? Amazing!
In the language of common discourse, theft is the taking of a person’s property without permission. It includes pocket-picking, burglary, robbing, embezzlement, shoplifting, piracy, etc.
Taxation is the state doing the same, under the pretext of legitimacy based on the illusion of representational “consent” or some other flummery.
Had you objected that “robbery” was the more appropriate term I would have conceded the point.
You said:
“… SILLY to equate taxation with slavery. Your alternative is what? Say it plain?”
Are you ready?
The alternative to taxation is no taxation.
The power to tax is the power to destroy. It is unnecessary and foolish to grant that power to the state for all the potential good the state could do, let alone the amount of good it is likely to do. And certainly self-defeating in light of the “good” the state is now actually doing.
With apologies to Mao, social order does not come from the barrel of a gun.
True Story:
I happened to tune into “Nazi Propaganda Radio” (NPR) while out walking and they were interviewing a PhD.
Naturally.
In the span of 5 seconds the PhD says that the congress is not limited to the enumerated powers in the constitution and in fact, if they wanted to, they could impose a 100% income tax. If he said that last part wistfully, I couldn’t tell. But here’s the punch line: The reason, he said, that congress does not impose a 100% income tax is because it would “RUIN THE ECONOMY”.
Thank God they would never do that!
Oh, incidentally, your totally legitimate tax money is paying this guy’s salary. So, in a way, you have “consented” to pay this guy to make the intellectual case for your total enslavement.
OK, Bobbo, Its your turn to explain how a 100% income tax is not the same thing as slavery and it’s a heinous crime against the language to suggest otherwise.
# 26 Snyde the Remarkable said:
There is nothing wrong with capitalism.
In fact, I think all corporations should be coerced, by government regulation, into participating in capitalism.
(End Quote)
A good post over all.
But it is the removal of regulation that would force corporations to compete.
If that seems bizarre to you here is a web site that can help you understand why it is, in fact, God’s own truth: http://mises.org/
You realize that there are twice as many people in Los Angeles County as there are in all of Norway?
Lets compare Norway to an economy closer in population like Hong Kong. Norway has 4.8 million people. Hong Kong has 7 million people. Hong Kong works on capitalism despite being under Beijing’s thumb. Hong Kongs tax rate is progressive from 2% to 17%.
Norway’s economy is contracting. Hong Kong’s is not.
#21
What you are discussing a fundamental problem in the United States today verses its founding: the number of governed to the number of governing is completely out of whack. Right now, there is one representative for every 705K people or so. How well would Denmark work with seven representatives for the entire country? At the time of the founding of the country, the ratio was small (in fact it was suggested to move it down to 1 rep / 30 K but they left it at 1 / 100k until the early 1900s ). However since they capped it, representatives have gotten further out of touch with the populace. In short, the US has too many people (as does China and India) to be effectively governed by a small body of people.
#23
You have proved my point from #3, thank you.
capitalism isnt PROFITEERING..
What is happening is Profiteering.
First thing to do wiki: Norway – check!
Second: Capitalism -!
Measure distance between the two – too big!
Taste of salt cod – PRICELESS !!!
P.S. boobo…crickets…
bobbo…
please wake up…
http://tinysong.com/CWfF
USSR-been born in Kiev 83 count!
#49 bobbo,
What kind of society do we live in? Everyday, don’t you trade and barter? What do you think you’re doing when you go to the supermarket? Or pay your car insurance? Or mortgage? Or go see a movie? Or concert? That’s not trade and barter?
Your short-sightedness won’t allow you to see that all the services the government provides would easily be provided in the free market. It would be better and cost less. It would have to, because if one company did a poor job or charged too much, another would come with a better service for less money and drive the former out of business, unlike the federal government who can shovel crap down your throat, take your money by force and go into debt a trillion times over.
I could describe a society without taxation, but this isn’t a forum for a book length entry. Besides, “The Market for Liberty” does a superb job and is free to download in many formats at http://freekeene.com/free-audiobook/
Of course, I don’t expect you to read it because like hitler I’m sure you’d rather find a physical copy and burn it. Shills like you disgust me.
# 34 The black sheep said, “You are truly a mental midget.”
I was willing to let your inane comments go by until you had the gall to make that statement. That’s sort of analogous to a grammar nazi correcting someone’s spelling with poorly spelled words.
I suspect, sir, you are about 19 years old (if not younger) and full of reading utopian dream novels. You probably think the Na’vi are real and and Pandora is Walden Pond.
There has NEVER been a single successful society that did not require government of one kind or another. Never. Go ahead and argue the point, pinhead. You want to do barter? Okay. Go ahead. It’s gonna be tough trading the carrots you grew in the backyard for a barrel of oil. Oh? No oil? Then no technology. No cars, no refrigerators, no watch on your wrist, no telephone, i.e. a primitive society. And you’ll STILL have a chief to officiate at marriages or to settle disputes. And you’ll give that chief a chicken when you need his services. When you go to your witch doctor and give him a chicken for chasing away your capitalist nightmares, that’s a fee for service. When you pay the Chief, that’s called a “tax”.
I guarantee you that even if you could live in your chosen society, one of the other 7 billion people in this world would want what you’ve got. They, being primitive, will tax their citizens, raise an army and you will soon be bartering for … well, nothing. You’ll be dead. Darn. If only you’d had a government to protect you.
I don’t always agree with Bobbo, and in his posts above I find parts I disagree with. But don’t disagree with him while you live in a fairy tale. Go back to bed (I assume in your Mum’s house), pull the covers over your head and keep dreaming, you microcephalic mental case.
#51–songster==my current machine doesn’t have sound, but I’ll listen when I can. I’m interested in what “link” you have found relevant.
#52–BS==more with silly high school loose word associations and substitutions? Too silly to respond to. Any corn in your droppings? – – – – – – – – – Well, the assertion that a free market can deliver all is not free basing your dictionary-just free basing common sense.
A stretch goal: read a book but then to demonstrate you have understood what you have read, be able to synthesize it into transmissible bits of important. After all, if you “know” something, but can’t explain it, you might as well be ignorant, and in your case the presumption of knowing anything to begin with is purely hypothetical.
Silly child.
Animby–you had not posted as I started mine. thank you. We all must assume that no one agrees with us all the time? I don’t even agree with my myself all too often. take my own #49 and how to deal with minority points of view? Of course, I was thinking of the “extreme” cases and assuming folks of intellect and good will would know as a lib….. I support free speech and the intercourse of ideas if not everything else except syphilitic
traveling Aussies.
I only wish that when you disagree with me you would take a sabbatical from your humanitarian efforts and educate me. How am I ever going to get any better as a human being if I don’t learn where I am wrong, and by correction, become ever better?
Yea Verily==the goal of disagreement is not to win, but to learn. Sadly, most of our essence lies wasted in some Phnom Penh coffee house Animby calls a weigh station.
((Edit–actually just a re-read before posting which I need to do more of==last sentence makes little sense given its antecedent sentences got edited out–but I enjoy the imagery and leave it in for any prophylaxes that might be imagined. Plus, it cracks me up.))
#52
Even the most dire hard economist agrees that there are situations that call for government. The classic game theory scenario is the tragedy of the commons. A real-life example is national parks. Without government to regulate and protect the certain areas, they simply would never have been created and those areas would either be lost to industrialization or be purely the domain of the wealthy. Without government, there is no law other than the law of the jungle. The microcosm of drug cartel competition is a good example of life without government. The cartel with the baddest brute squad wins. There are times when markets breakdown and require oversight and regulation. All economists agree with this. Don’t take my word for it:
Well Thomas–I don’t know who you are responding to but your comment is right on point. Everything finds its greatest stability by being balanced by reality. And yet Liebertards will continue with their fantasy theories==ok in a vacuum but these fantasy ideas that cannot work have too much influence in our politics today. Like any good religious dogma, any nay saying only strengthens their feelings of persecution and being “right.”
Just totally foolish actually, and you don’t have to be living in your parents basement to be be so naive: See the Paul retards.
#56–Thomas==I went back to your excellent post to read again.
The drug cartel example is problematic as there would be no drug cartels if drugs weren’t made illegal BY GOVERNMENT. Please don’t quibble. And I suppose a “good” liebertard would say that only industry or the wealthy “should” have access to the geographic wonders our world provides–that is after all their model and if your parents couldn’t get it together to educate you to begin with how many people would actually even know that Yosemite even existed?
Dogma runs deep when it detaches from reality. I just saw Natalie Portman being interviewed about her fame and success. She commented you couldn’t be self aware and not see that no matter how hard you work for success, “luck” is still the difference between those who are successful in Hollywood ((or anywhere else)) and those who are not.
Maybe even most liebertards would take up arms to free people who were in actual CHAINS and enslaved as in “for real.” They just need to stretch their little brains to cover economic relationships that effect too much of the same injustice.
A tough nut for sure.
#53 Animby
Utopian dream novels? Who spoke of utopia? In a world without government, you’d still have theives and murderers. It just wouldn’t be justified with new speak. They wouldn’t call it taxes and wars. It wouldn’t be systemic. And I wouldn’t be funding either, either.
Never say never. What about Medieval Iceland? Or Celtic Ireland? Or the so called Wild Wild West? Turned out it’s wilder now than it was back when the US government wasn’t around, and that’s per capita.
http://sodahead.com/united-states/examples-of-societies-with-no-government/blog-371409/
Pinhead? Are you borrowing insults from papa bear? Is O’reilly really your role model?
Wow. Why would I trade carrots for oil? If you understood the economy, or trade for that matter, you wouldn’t stoop to such lame @ss examples. Currency can exist without a government. Currencies can compete in the marketplace, just like they do worldwide. And money, i.e. gold, silver, etc., can be used to barter also. So, in your farcical example, I’d sell my carrots for the currency that the market has deemed the strongest, and use that currency to buy oil. Your foolish little argument might work on a mental midget such as bobbo, but you can’t fool me, sh1t for brains.
And like I said, if you want a chief to order your life for you, in a free society, that’s your decision. What are you and bobbo so afraid of? I just want to be left alone to interact with others who have what I want or need and exchange on a voluntary basis. And why are you trying scare tactics on me? Someone already does want what I’ve got today in this real world of yours. It’s called the government. And they take it from me by force. And according to many supreme court decisions, the fed government has no obligation to protect me from foreign aggressors.
http://endtimesreport.com/NO_AFFIRMATIVE_DUTY.htm
If I felt I really needed protection from foreign aggressors in a free market, I’d pay a group like blackwater to do it for me. Of course, the government “middle man” would be cut out, and they would have to answer to me. Of course, there would be many blackwaters competing in the free market if these type of protection services were needed. And the ones who did the best job for the lowest price would be successful.
Unlike you, I believe that the majority of people on this earth are peaceful people, and the small minority that find themselves either in government or in the black market (i.e. gangs/mafia) take advantage of the fact that the masses are a bunch of brainwashed drones who don’t understand FREEDOM, LIBERTY and VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE. So they let the minority steal from them and enslave them, either by calling it a tax, or by terrorizing them more directly. But one day, they will evolve. And the minority will go into hiding with all their convoluted bull crap on why it’s necessary for society to be enslaved to prop up the elite political class.
I may be dreaming. But Martin Luther King had a dream also.
“… SILLY to equate taxation with slavery. Your alternative is what? Say it plain?”
“Are you ready?
“The alternative to taxation is no taxation.
“The power to tax is the power to destroy.”
And the lack of taxation is the power to bring any government or private business to a screeching halt. Transportation no longer exists (because things fall apart–see California for an example). Commerce ceases because there’s no way to conduct business, move goods, educate people in schools, and do other things that enable “Real Life.”
Yes there’s the Internet, but how many people can eat food that’s transferred through a wire?
Discuss, but think about it first.
Sure, and the judge can be the jury too.
Give him a gun and he can efficiently serve as the executioner as well.
Government is not a provider of commercial services, it is the guarantor of liberty under law and the holder of common public infrastructure. Period.
# 61 Floyd said:
“And the lack of taxation is the power to bring any government or private business to a screeching halt.”
No, and no.
I totally don’t get the part about private business not being possible without taxation.
When I asked Bobbo if he paid sales tax on his crack, I wasn’t just being a smart-ass, I was making a point.
When I said:
With apologies to Mao, social order does not come from the barrel of a gun.
I was answering the first bit.
Since you raise a legitimate question that can’t be fully expounded in this forum let me give you a few terms you can look up and peruse at your leisure:
“anarcho-syndicalism”
“anarcho-capitalism”
“Hans-Hermann Hoppe”
“Frank Chodorov”
“Murray Rothbard”
“Lew Rockwell”
Don’t miss Lew Rockwell Podcast #183 “We Do Not Need a State” which you can reach from his web site.
Along the way you’ll probably discover that Libertarians are starting to make a distinction between “Government” and “The State” the way they already make a distinction between “law” and “regulation”.
Consequently, I am often mis-understood to be advocating total anarchy when I flatly state that regulation ought to be done-away with.
Similarly, Government is being associated more with social order while “The State” is more associated with the apparatus of plutocratic exploitation and oppression.
The typical libertarian attitude towards those who would be king is “To hell with them”.
Which is nothing that a self-respecting American should ever apologize for.
You may recall that about 200 years ago we resorted to violence over the issue of “taxation without representation”. We chose “taxation with representation” instead but it has lead back to “taxation without representation” in the present day.
That may have been inevitable, but in any case, the current system has been mortally corrupted and is doomed to collapse due to spreading internal rot. That makes the point of “workability” moot in your lifetime.
In view of that lamentable fact, some of us being sadder but wiser, is it so crazy to consider giving “representation without taxation” a try?
Don’t answer just yet, look that stuff up first.
“Medieval Iceland”–was that not a trade and barter society?
“Wild West”–can’t give you that one==it was the fringe of organized society with taxes and government. And even if allowed: population density was how many per square mile?
Just too stupid.
#60 – Polo Loco? Black Sheep?
First, let me say you must not have read the link you provided. A quick Google got you the info? The three or four articles I looked into referred to the laws, the constitution, the administration of justice, the frailty of the king’s power, i.e. government. A chaotic, anarchic government, indeed, but government. So, I say to you again, there has never been a successful society that did not have rules (i.e. government).
The wild west? The west was never without laws and government. They were just extremely difficult to impose. Arizona had the Rangers who were famously known as the 26 Men. Twenty six horse riding police officers to enforce the laws for a large and rugged territory. That’s not lawless, that’s just damned tough.
Ooops. Pardon me. I hope I haven’;t offended you with my use of that word. I noticed you used an @ for the first letter in ass. Do you even know what lame ass means? It is a reference to a four legged beast of burden that is having trouble walking. Pinhead. And I have been using the word pinhead to describe failures like you since before O’Reilley started doing Entertainment Tonight. He has no trademark on the word. But, if he has referred to you as a pinhead, then I agree with him.
You have failed on all accounts in your post. Go ask Mommy for more help.
Well like all empires this one is doomed. I just hope it isn’t replaced with another oppressive government that is doomed to fail. When people finally say enough is enough and do away with giving up their rights as human beings to an elite few to make their choices for them. Until then, I will always push for anarchy and the non aggression principle. You can’t argue morally, so you rely on fear and propaganda to support your excuses for tyranny. Well I’m not buying it. Taxation is theft. War is government sanctioned mass murder, property tax is a state enforced rent on property owners, and the political class are a bunch of douche bag elite using the ignorance of the masses to their advantage. The laws are too many, arbitrary and inane. And statists like animby and bobbo want to keep the status quo.
#66 – Polo Loco? Black Sheep?
Statist? Me? I haven’t lived in my native country for about 20 years. I’ve traveled and worked in many countries. I’ve paid taxes to those that require it of me. I take a salary from whatever organization wants my services but do a lot of it for free. I’m in Cambodia doing it for free right now. I’ve worked in communist nations, democratic republic nations, fascist, etc. Muslims, Hindus, Animists, Buddhists and, now and then, even Christians. I do not blindly say, my country right or wrong. In fact, I think there is much wrong with the way the US is going and I’m not too shy about saying so.
Now, as I understand it, “statism” is a belief that a centralized government should be all powerful and manage economic and social programs.
I don’t believe I said (or believe) that at all. What I tried to explain is that without government IN TODAY’S WORLD, society would inevitably fall prey to entropy and begin to deteriorate into anarchy. Your society with no rules would, by some definitions, BE an anarchy.
If you want to go off and start a commune according to your uptopian ideals, great. Go for it. I’m sure you’ll fail. But good luck. No, really. Go.
And take your Mommy with you. Maybe she can help you find one single example of a successful society that has ever existed without laws. No, of course, she can’t. There ain’t none.
Well, just because I am wide awake and the sun’s not up yet:
animby==well done. I’ve never seen you so animated on a subject. Anti-anarchy, anti-idiocy, or both? I suppose putting people back together who suffer the outrages of no/weak government have put your views in the correct ballpark?
BS==I know talking to you is like talking to Alfie, but I’ll parse for those who are new to libertarianism and may benefit from a counsel against its over application?
Well like all empires this one is doomed. /// Correct. Every known civilizaiton has failed. As Arnold Toynbee noted in his review of the 22 civilizations that he took note of: they fail when they become too civilized to fight for their own survival. To rephrase-they become capture by ideas of personal liberty or get too lazy.
I just hope it isn’t replaced with another oppressive government that is doomed to fail. /// See definition of “every” or “always.”
When people finally say enough is enough and do away with giving up their rights as human beings to an elite few to make their choices for them. /// Sadly, for aren’t we all civilized men==just the opposite.
Until then, I will always push for anarchy and the non aggression principle. /// Idiot child. Yes push for A and the unavoidable consequence of A. Well done. Thats called: “Works in theory, but not in practice.”
You can’t argue morally, so you rely on fear and propaganda to support your excuses for tyranny. /// The consent of the majority is not tyranny in the better sense meaning protecting minority rights==not your idiot self centered nihilism.
Well I’m not buying it. Taxation is theft. /// Buy a dictionary.
War is government sanctioned mass murder, property tax is a state enforced rent on property owners, /// Agreed.
and the political class are a bunch of douche bag elite using the ignorance of the masses to their advantage. /// Thats issue dependent, but I’ll agree too many people don’t vote their own self interest enough to put the Corporate Welfare Queens in their proper service role.
The laws are too many, /// Start a list. Most laws are there for a purpose and this statement looks like a rephrased appeal to anarchy/nihilism. Even if there are “too many” you still only get rid of the bad ones, or reform them.
arbitrary and inane. /// Never. They all have their own purpose.
And statists like animby and bobbo want to keep the status quo. //// Buy a dictionary dolt.
I feel I have wasted my time, but….there it is.
“Property tax is a state enforced rent on property owners”
Which goes toward state provided services that are put in place for your benefit.
This means that if your house if burning down you don’t have to run back in to the fire to grab your cheque book to pay the privately owned fire department to save your house.
MrMigu==I will quibble because you touch on one of my examples of how PUKES become so self centered: Property Tax in the main is used to support local school systems. Shithead Engle in Arizona said her children were raised and gone, why should she be forced to pay property taxes?
Same here but I am happy to live in a society where all our citizens are getting an education ((or a chance at one?)). So self centered and destructive an idea she voiced, no doubt supported by BS and his LIEberTARD self centered/destroying tax is slavery point of view.
To your issue: fire/sewer/garbage/electrical/etc as it varies is normally done by a per unit fee. Yes, a regressive tax if you will.
#60
El Polo Loco
RE: Wild West
First, that is not an example of anarchy (either under the definition of chaos or lack of government) as rule of law did exist and was enforced at the county, State, Federal level and local level (meaning the community enforced its own law). Second, the efficiency of imposing that law was significantly hampered by the speed of travel and communication which are both problems that do not exist today. Third, protection of property rights can only exist where rules exist to settle disputes. Fourth, it is utter folly to think that private capitalists can resolve every possible kind dispute. Having private capitalists settle all types of disputes results in “Who has the bigger stick?”.
RE: Medieval Iceland or Celtic Iceland
Again these examples depend on very low population density and hampered speed of travel and communication. It simply does not work in a modern society. Furthermore, they had rulers/leaders and force of implied rules within their community. That their laws/rules of acceptable conduct were not written does not mean there were no laws.
RE: Currency
Your arguments are simplistic. Yes, trade can exist without currency however barter (the alternative to using currency) is incredibly inefficient. It actually hinders trade. Economic systems evolved past using barter because use of currencies, backed by governments, is many orders of magnitude more efficient for trade and economic growth.
#67 Animby
What does you living abroad or not have anything to do with you being a statist? Instead of guessing what it means, I’ll pull up M.W.’s definition:
statist: an advocate of statism
statism: concentration of economic controls (i.e. the Fed) and planning in the hands of a highly centralized government (i.e. the Treasury and alphabet soup of agencies) often extending to government ownership of industry (i.e. Government motors, first class mail, education, private security, etc and so forth)
Now, let’s take the definition of anarchy that I’m using for those who are confused.
anarchy: absence of government
By government, I mean, NO RULERS. Just because there are no rulers, doesn’t mean there aren’t any rules. When I say I’m for anarchy, that means I am for SELF-Governance. I govern myself, you govern yourself, and as long as we don’t aggress against each other, we can coexist in peace.
Think about it. Who Governs the government? The people? That’s not only a joke, the people does not exist as a singular entity. If you follow bobbo’s train of thought, the people = the majority. Therefore, the majority can oppress the minority. As long as there’s a vote, the minority is screwed. So basically, the government governs itself.
Now, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. If you give government a little bit of power, it is only going to strive to grow that power. That’s why the constitution is a joke and doesn’t restrain a single thing. Therefore, the government is unrestrained and ungoverned. It’s like asking who created god?
So, I see you believe that Order comes from the barrel of a gun. Well, screw you and the Mao you rode in on. I believe that most people just want to live there lives, and they want to coexist peacefully and make their lives as pleasant as humanly possible. That means that people will create common laws that they will abide by in any given soceity. As long as people understand what freedom and liberty mean, then it won’t be a problem. And pray to god they don’t put religion ahead of freedom and liberty (religion is just another way to enslave the masses, just a primitive form of government itself). It’s the few, the power hungry, megamaniacal douche-bags who feel they have the right to control other people. Without government, people will still exchange goods and services to the benefit of both parties, as when you go grocery shopping or hire a landscaper or buy a weapon or donate to a charity.
But those few, the ones who want power and control, have convinced the majority that without that gun to create order, there would be chaos. It’s fear factor. Just like those boogeymen the native americans, the communists and now the terrorists. They have convinced the many that it is okay for an elite group of people to earn their living by stealing from them, and kidnapping them for not obeying their diktats.
Now you see, I wish I COULD go start a society according to my ideals. Unfortunately, the government will want their pound of flesh. And if I don’t comply, saying, hey, this is my society, go screw yourselves, we’ll see how far that gets me. But, I’ll keep running my mouth instead, and one day, people will finally open their eyes.
And even if something has never been done before, doesn’t mean it can’t be done. Your narrow-mindedness is mind boggling. Try opening your mind to something other than your statist ideals.
Btw, how good does bobbo’s lips feel around your phallus?
SOrry, wish I could respond to your inane chatter bobbo, but I gotta go. Maybe later!
Thomas #72
I never said I had anything against using currency. I have something against GOVERNMENT fiat currency. I’d prefer currencies issued from PRIVATE organizations which would compete with each other keeping them honest. As opposed to the worthless pieces of crap called the federal reserve note. And they even had the gall to outlaw ownership of gold, confiscating it from individuals, in this country. And yet you trust them to back your currency???!?!?!??! Wow. Well, when Weimar germany happens all over in this country when the FRN is no longer the the world reserve currency, you’ll see just how great having a government backed fiat currency really is.
#74/75 – Loco Sheep : In 74 you post long and rambling and contradict yourself so much it’s impossible to construct a reasonable reply. Your logical failures are beyond enumeration and your failure to acknowledge the psychology of human beings merely shows your youth.
You’ve finally admitted in your utopia there would be rules. Rules are worthless if they are not enforced and if they are enforced, you got yourself a gubmint, boy.
That’s why, despite a very feeble attempt, you cannot point out a single instance of a successful society that has EVER existed without some form of government. Governing starts small and early: who was the “head” of your home. Mommy or Daddy?
IN your second post you show us where you get your information and let me tell you, Alex Jones is NOT a better role model than Hannity or Limbaugh because, what you’ve failed to understand is – they are all entertainers! Your boy Morlock Jones is making a fortune off the innocence of Eloi like you.