H. Rearden on April 26, 2008, 10:14:04 pm
I would just like to add to this conversation that in my humble opinion Jefferson was the finest president that this country ever had or ever will have.  He was a true genius and renaissance man in every sense of the word.  Of course that means that in today's world that he wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever being elected to the Presidency.  Just look at the kind of mud slinging that took place when the closest thing to Jefferson that we have now, Ron Paul ran.   :'(  :'(  :'(

Jefferson almost didn't get elected in his day. The outcome of the election of 1800 was decided by the House of Representatives. I think Jefferson was a great man but I don't think that he was all that great a POTUS. HE imposed an embargo against European nations and thus violated the right of the American people to trade with Europe. He got the country involved in a war in the Barbary Coast  and he strong armed Congress into agreeing to the Lousiana purchase. I think that William Henry Harrison was the best POTUS.  ;D How can you know that Jefferson was the finest POTUS the country ever will have? Actually I think that Cleveland may have been the best POTUS. Prior to FDR, Cleveland had vetoed the most pieces of legislation of any POTUS. Cleveland was a strict constitutionalist. Coolidge was ok.

                                               $

                                                 
« Last Edit: April 26, 2008, 11:19:54 pm by H. Rearden »

Rocketman on April 26, 2008, 10:35:36 pm
It's William Henry Harrison not William Henry Harris.  If I remember correctly he was the only hoosier (Indiana) president and he only served for 31 days if I remember my history books correctly.  He got pneumonia during his swearing in ceremony and died a month later.  I guess since he didn't basically didn't do anything during his time in office you do have a case for him being the best president.   As far as how do I know that Jefferson is going to be the best president that this country will ever have?  Consideriing the caliber of the congress and the senate, not to mention the various governorships I feel that I'm on safe ground making that statement. ;D
« Last Edit: April 26, 2008, 10:42:42 pm by Rocketman »

H. Rearden on April 26, 2008, 11:21:22 pm
 As far as how do I know that Jefferson is going to be the best president that this country will ever have?  Consideriing the caliber of the congress and the senate, not to mention the various governorships I feel that I'm on safe ground making that statement. ;D

How do you know what the future will be like? Perhaps 75 years from now things will be a lot different. ;D

                                                 $

Rocketman on April 27, 2008, 09:48:29 am
IMHO the U.S. doesn't even have 30 years, let alone 75.  I still stand with my statement.  :'(

H. Rearden on April 27, 2008, 05:20:05 pm
IMHO the U.S. doesn't even have 30 years, let alone 75.  I still stand with my statement.  :'(

What is your opinion based on?

                   $

Leviathan on April 27, 2008, 05:24:03 pm
"I think blackbeard was the best pirate!  He stole from my ship at least eight times and must've killed at least a dozen of my shipmates!"  As it stands, even if one were to say Jefferson was the best POTUS, he stands in a den of thieves.  There's no distinction in that statement.

And I don't advocate, as it stands, armed uprising against the US government.  There's insufficient numbers to really dent the US gov's holding on the nation.  But when one thinks about going someplace nice, the US still ranks up there in economic and social liberties.  In fact, the funny thing is that places that approach or beat the US for economic liberty (Hong Kong, Singapore) often have comparable or lower social liberty.  Places that have greater social liberty (The Netherlands), have all the economic liberty of a concentration camp.  Nowhere is left that is really good to join up with.  I am considering finding ways to make a go of simply rendering some other country's ineffectual government a dead letter, though.  If I can find sufficient backing.

So, the US is strangling itself, but the rest of the world is too, and government pretty well has all territory sectioned off.  Cheers to mass insanity.

Rocketman on April 28, 2008, 08:50:08 pm
Rearden:
      I was afraid that you would ask that particular question.  If I went into detail I could easily fill up this format for the next several days if not weeks covering this subject.   So I am just going to just barely scratch the subject on ONE ASPECT of the enormous problem AND THEN NOT ANSWER ANY MORE QUESTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT.  Right now the U.S. government is so far in debt that there is no comparable example in the entire course of human history.
  When you include unfunded mandates, which are debts that it has agreed to pay but has not yet been started too, it has been said to exceed something like 96 TRILLION DOLLARS.  To give you an understanding of how large that number is if you take a second of time and used it as a dollar then ONE BILLION is thirty four thousand six hundred and eighty eight years.  Ninety Six trillion would be 96,000 times as large.  The total population of the U.S. is only a little over 300 million.  I'll let you do the math on that to figure out how much each man woman and child's debt is.  Of the money that we own right now which is over 8 trillion dollars (the "official" debt) over 50% of that money is owed to just two countries Japan and China.  Supposed that in a few years Taiwan decides to declare themselves an independant country and China decides to invade them.  The U.S. objects and the Chinese decide to sell off all of their dollars which would totally destroy the banking system in this country.  Now do you start to see what kind of situation that could force the various states to unite in the face of a total banking collapse and take action on their own and create their own independant countries?  Leviathan appears to think that I'm advocating something totally different from what I'm really talking about. 
« Last Edit: April 28, 2008, 11:01:54 pm by Rocketman »

Rocketman on April 29, 2008, 08:09:32 am
Rearden:
    I hope that my eariler post didn't put you off.   I just didn't intend for my quick answer to get bogged  down into something that is going to have to be fully explained to a degree that takes up so much of my time that I don't have time to do anything else.  Google "David Walker" who is the former comptroller of the United States (he quit in disgust after nearly no one listened to him in Washington D.C. concerning this problem), start reading a daily e-mail called the "Daily Reckoning" put out by a man who's paying attention, Bill Bonner.  I also like reading Magambo Guru a.k.a. Richard Daughty who's favorite line is "We're all freaking doomed!" to understand what is going on.

H. Rearden on April 29, 2008, 09:46:03 pm
Rearden:
    I hope that my eariler post didn't put you off.   I just didn't intend for my quick answer to get bogged  down into something that is going to have to be fully explained to a degree that takes up so much of my time that I don't have time to do anything else.  Google "David Walker" who is the former comptroller of the United States (he quit in disgust after nearly no one listened to him in Washington D.C. concerning this problem), start reading a daily e-mail called the "Daily Reckoning" put out by a man who's paying attention, Bill Bonner.  I also like reading Magambo Guru a.k.a. Richard Daughty who's favorite line is "We're all freaking doomed!" to understand what is going on.

I wasn't put off and thanks for your answer even though it is a real downer. Are you a red pill person?

                                       $
« Last Edit: April 29, 2008, 09:51:02 pm by H. Rearden »

Leviathan on April 30, 2008, 12:35:13 am
Now do you start to see what kind of situation that could force the various states to unite in the face of a total banking collapse and take action on their own and create their own independant countries?  Leviathan appears to think that I'm advocating something totally different from what I'm really talking about. 

My response was more about how a lot of people in the minarchist/anarchist movement are looking at Paul like he's going to bring about Heaven on Earth and singlehandedly destroy all the evil that is government.  The problem is that even if that were his goal, him getting the presidency wouldn't accomplish it.  And his goal is simply to "restore" the constitution minus the sixteenth amendment, weaken the 14th section 1 until it doesn't guarantee birthright citizenship, but probably retain the ending of slavery.  The irony is that the modern minarchist is what the old statists were.  But that's all he intends.  So even assuming he hits reset, we just go back to having a constitutionalist government and wait for it to decay in the same way the whole thing did the first time.  Only most likely at fast-forward, since people are used to more government now.  He outright supports the idea that there is such a thing as a legitimate state, and that to my mind is both immoral and leads to the same endpoint.

In other words, I mostly don't have Ron Paul faith anymore.  Though I'll still put whatever weight I have behind the least of all available evils, I don't really believe handing the reigns of power to anybody will do anything but further the fall of the empire.  That's all I'm saying.

And also, that calling someone the best "elected" tyrant dictator who pretends to speak the voice of the majority is a distinction utterly without distinction to my mind. 

But even if the states secede under those conditions, we'd still have government to contend with.  Governance.  Doesn't matter whether the fed is saying it's in charge or The Republic of Texas is.  If there's a seat of power, it's gonna get abused unless people can pick and choose which government they're under with little to no effort.  Think of it in terms of market solutions.  Let's say there's five Widgets on the market.  But these Widgets require customization to be perfect replacements for each other.  Which costs time and money.  People are more likely to put up with a lot if it takes time and money and effort and possibly failure of their equipment to use a cheaper Widget that requires customization to work in their Doohickey. 

Same with states.  Even if there's open borders along the resulting mini-nations, it takes time, effort, energy, and possibly saved up money if the property values are vastly different between The California Collective and The Republic of Texas.  People are more likely to put up with higher regulations if it's troublesome to switch governing entities.  The Icelandic Althing got as close to anarcho-capitalism with a setup along those basic lines because you didn't *have* to move anywhere to change allegiance.  You switched at any time for any reason, and didn't move your dwelling one inch in any direction.  Then their government just got bought out and nothing's been the same since.  A shame, really.

Are you a red pill person?

I love the red pills myself.  Just as long as the "red pill" isn't more 9/11 truther crap.  I've gotten enough of that, including outright insults as to my character and intelligence for not immediately falling in line behind them, hanging around the Ron Paul supporter crowd.

Yes, I know you were talking to Rocketman.  I just thought I'd respond too.

Rocketman on April 30, 2008, 03:33:41 pm
Guys:  I want to say that I never intended this in any way as an insult or criticism of anyone.  Yes, even if Paul were to win I didn't think that a heavenly choir of angels would be at his side proclaiming peace and plenty throughout the land.  The one thing that a Paul presidency would be able to do though is to provide a "bully pulpit" if I can use that phrase.  Paul as president could be on television at least once a week on prime time, talking about libertarian style solutions to various problems, telling why he thinks that bigger more intrusive government isn't the answer.  This would stimulate discussion.  It seems like all of the times I've heard the various TV pundits (who are either socialists or communists) trying to give their take on libertarian ideas they ALWAYS manage to get it wrong.  Either because their idiots or because their doing it deliberately (probably some of both).  This would be a way to get our message across the same way the Reagan did by talking straight to the people.   Your right about another thing, the older I get the less possibility that I see of us being able to get out of this mess that the Congress has managed to get us into.   :'(  :'(  :'(  :'(

Rocketman on April 30, 2008, 07:17:10 pm
You might be interested in knowing that I just accidently learned that the "official" debt isn't a little over eight trillion dollars because in November of 2007 it officially passed nine trillion.  Well someone once said that you get the government that you deserve.  We must have done something awful to get this one.  :'(
« Last Edit: May 01, 2008, 12:40:46 pm by Rocketman »

Leviathan on May 01, 2008, 12:58:05 am
Never said otherwise, but there's a subtle "flaw" to Paul.  I'd like him for being in the right direction, and bad ideas are better than horrible ideas.  Basically he doesn't even come close to saying that the state itself is illegitimate.  He says that the state is doing things that are illegal by its own rules.  And that is, to him, what makes it bad to have a controlling power allowed to initiate force.  Hell, he wouldn't even really have hated it as much if congress *had* been declaring war each time we went out after these other nations.  He's just advocating government abiding by its own rules.  Flawed intent, flawed ideology, it's gonna have flawed results.  Assuming he doesn't just succumb to the temptations of power and try to wield government power like a club.  And that's really why I don't truly like Paul anymore.  He has broken his own statements of federal government limits when he thought, say, "partial birth abortion" was so horrible and evil.  He voted for the ban on that one.  And also voted against gays being allowed to adopt in DC.

I, on the other hand, advocate abiding by no rules, except those which are natural rules on how to get along with my fellow humans.  I advocate there being no power authorized to initiate force.  Ever.  If a person or group is doing so, it should always be considered okay to pop a cap in its ass.  Which means to me that government is always criminal, always despicable, always evil.  So I cannot in good conscience advocate Paul except as by far the least of available evils.

However, unless we can get rid of government schools and the FCC, we're unlikely to ever actually spread real information around enough to make a difference.  We need to get people really listening.

You might be interested in knowing that I just accidently learned that the "official" debt isn't a little over eight trillion dollars because in November of 2007 it officially passed nine trillion.  Well someone once said that you get the government that you deserve.  We must have do something awful to get this one.  :'(

I heard about that one.  Here's something to make you really weepy: that debt figure I understand does not in fact include unfunded mandates.  With those figured into debt, the count supposedly is much, much higher.

Rocketman on May 01, 2008, 12:31:53 pm
"that debt figure I understand does not in fact include unfunded mandates.  With those figured into debt, the count supposedly is much, much higher."  You need to read my April 28 post above.  That's what I talked about.  As the Mogambo Guru says "We're all freaking doomed!!!"  :o

Leviathan on May 02, 2008, 01:51:43 am
I think I read it.  However, for some reason I have trouble thinking of it without also thinking of this.  And yes, we're fucked.  What's the saying that purports a creature with a thousand mouths and no brains?  Yeah, that's voting demands, and politicians.  Also part of the problem with it is that people don't see the pricetag when they ask politicians for something.  "I want free health care!" "Well, you're in luck.  Oh, and on a completely unrelated note, taxes are going up this year and we've issued all these treasury bonds we won't have to pay back for twenty years!  *as an aside* By which point I'll either be out of office, retired, or dead anyway."