Unofficial History of Drama in the Free State

[sillyperson]

Any way you slice it, it's hard to paint Russel's current incarceration as an "act of civil disobedience", as there's not a clear, obvious State perpetrator.
Enforcing contracts is the one thing that most libertarians -- even anarchs -- think the State might need to do for awhile until private organizations can take it over. And unless you know Russell personally, this sure looks like an (implicit) contract dispute between private parties, where someone -- the State, or a DRO -- might need to step in to enforce contract at some point.

There is a party here that at least makes a vaguely plausible case for being victimized. That's key.
IF the former wife & child are really owed $100,000 then it sure might make sense to put the debtor into a work prison. Granted, this ain't a work prison, but the end results are not so different.

It's just not in the same ballpark as, say, a private agreement to perform a manicure, where the state goons bust in to stop it (no victim), or a man trying to board an aircraft (no victim, unless the airlines were to step forward -- and they could just throw him off of their property), or not paying taxes (no specific victim), or any other victimless "crime" for that matter.

In short, it REALLY sucks that he might be in jail a long time, and that time is virtually useless as an example of state-sponsored aggression.

[Blackie]

I'm waiting for the paperback, personally.

Screw that. I wouldn't waste time reading that paperback. I'm waiting for the movie. And then only if it has titty scenes and hot actresses.

I would like to make some mini-movies. Or a serious docu-comedy about the FSP.

[One two three]

In short, it REALLY sucks that he might be in jail a long time, and that time is virtually useless as an example of state-sponsored aggression.

1 of the kids is his and 2 he adopted.  At most, make him pay for the 1 kid that is his, but only if he works and only a small percentage of his income.  Let's say he makes $1600 a month.  So, he should be charged $300 per month for 1 child or up to $600 per month for 3 children.

The state should not force child support, IMHO, though.  I see this as a 100% act of state agression, even if he did anything his Ex said he did.  He has already been punished for those things.  I don't see Mark being rearrested for stuff he did 15 years ago.  This whole thing is BS and Russell should be free.

And yes, my parents got divorced and it would have sucked if my dad didn't pay child support for the few years before my mom remarried.  That doesn't make it right.

[NHArticleTen]

Any way you slice it, it's hard to paint Russel's current incarceration as an "act of civil disobedience", as there's not a clear, obvious State perpetrator.
Enforcing contracts is the one thing that most libertarians -- even anarchs -- think the State might need to do for awhile until private organizations can take it over. And unless you know Russell personally, this sure looks like an (implicit) contract dispute between private parties, where someone -- the State, or a DRO -- might need to step in to enforce contract at some point.

There is a party here that at least makes a vaguely plausible case for being victimized. That's key.
IF the former wife & child are really owed $100,000 then it sure might make sense to put the debtor into a work prison. Granted, this ain't a work prison, but the end results are not so different.

It's just not in the same ballpark as, say, a private agreement to perform a manicure, where the state goons bust in to stop it (no victim), or a man trying to board an aircraft (no victim, unless the airlines were to step forward -- and they could just throw him off of their property), or not paying taxes (no specific victim), or any other victimless "crime" for that matter.

In short, it REALLY sucks that he might be in jail a long time, and that time is virtually useless as an example of state-sponsored aggression.

It is "disobedience" in the fact that the state has no business "assisting" and/or "demanding" "certain" "performance" from one and/or the other "parties" in a "divorce"...

Unfortunately, most couples involve the state as a third party in their "private" "union" when they erroneously request state "permission" in the form of a "license" to be "married"...

Then when one or both parties seek a divorce the third party, the state, gets to play dictator...with the approval of "the general population" and, of course, with the approval of the party that the judge "gives" "custody" and "support" and "alimony" to...

There are some states that figure child support based on what that state thinks is the average yearly cost to raise a child in that state...then the state determines how much of that amount each parent should pay...and that is regardless of which parent has custody...so you may have custody but still have to pay child support to the other parent...

This falls back to many erroneous "expectations" of the gooberment...like asking the gooberment to determine what an "adequate" education is...and how much one should cost...

It's subjective and therefore should never...NEVER be decided by third parties...if the primary parties can't come to an agreement...then so be it...no agreement...

Just like when you go to the orchard and offer the farmer a nickle for an apple he is charging ten cents for...he might say yes...or he might say no...if he says no...then you either give him ten cents or you don't get the apple...

Of course, then the government steps in and screws with everything...the farmer gets subsidies and then, in turn, is micromanaged by the gooberment goons...the customer is on welfare spending money taken at gunpoint from other people...and then the gooberment institutes price controls and demands that the farmer sell his apples below his costs(including his labor which he values at one point, and the gooberment devalues out of existence) and so the farmer is better off cutting all the apple trees down and using them for firewood...then nobody gets and fucking apples...

Unless there is a totally voluntary, full-disclosure contract between Russell and Mindy(which I'm sure that there is NOT)...then the fucking gooberment goons/bureaucrats/jackboots/mercenaries should stay the hell out of it altogether...

The thugs never do anything without the ultimate escalation being the threat of murder if someone steadfastly refuses to be "subject" to their "supposed" "jurisdiction" or "authority"...over another individual, sovereign planetary human being...

So they beat/abuse/rape/torture/mutilate/kidnap/imprison/murder in a direct and indirect attempt to maintain "power" and "control" over the rest of us...the slaves...the cattle...the beasts of burden...

Guess what they would do if everyone just stood firm and said "NO MORE"...

They would put their riot gear on and get busy...
What would they do...

beat you
hit you
kick you
smash you
spray you
burn you
cut you
shoot you
choke you
strangle you
stomp on you
tie you up
strap you down
tear your clothes off
rape your body
rape your space
rape your mind
tear gas you
pepper spray you
taser you
smash your genitals
let other prisoners rape you
let other prisoners cut you
let other prisoners beat you
murder you

I'm sure you can think of more ways that they use torture and fear to control everyone...



WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN WE QUIT PAYING THEM...
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN WE QUIT WORKING FOR THEM...
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN WE QUIT FEEDING THEM...
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN WE REFUSE THEM FOR GOOD...
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN WE REPEL THEM FOR GOOD...
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN WE DESTROY THEM...



So, you think they're going to stop doing these things...that get them "off" in a twisted perverted way...VOLUNTARILY!?!?!


Perhaps a few will see the writing on the wall...

Most of the rest...eh, not so much...


Read and/or re-read Atlas Shrugged today and quit supporting the looters/thugs/bureaucrats/jackboots/mercenaries!

They cannot operate forever without your consent...without your empowerment...and without your payment...

Become John Galt today!

Do the minimum necessary to survive...
Do your best to reduce and/or eliminate the amount of taxes and other fees that you "surrender" to the bureaucrats/jackboots/mercenaries...


And get ready for the ride of your life as the Amerikan Empire comes crashing to the ground...struggling, choking, gasping for breath...thrashing about...throwing you this way and that...trying to smash you back into submission...


We do live in truly interesting times...


As always, buyer beware...
Your mileage may vary...
Your target may move...
Your timing is yours...
No commands...
You're alone...
Individual...
Sovereign...
Human...
Being...
One...


THERE ARE MORE OF US...THAN THERE ARE OF THEM...
EVENTUALLY YOU WILL EITHER MAKE THE STAND...
OR YOU WILL FALL AND GROVEL AT THEIR FEET...
YOU WILL KNOW WHEN IT IS YOUR TIME...
AND YOU WILL CALL OR FOLD...
ALL IN YOUR TIME...
YOUR CHOICE...
YOURS...

NO ONE ELSE CAN OR WILL LEAD YOU TO ACTION...
YOU WILL MAKE THAT DECISION YOURSELF...
JUST LIKE MILLIONS OF OTHERS...
STAND TALL AND STAND FIRM...
AIM SMALL AND MISS SMALL...

THERE ARE MORE OF US...THAN THERE ARE OF THEM...

John Shaw!

[Bill Brasky]

Go outside while the big people talk. 

[Laetitia]

And yes, my parents got divorced and it would have sucked if my dad didn't pay child support for the few years before my mom remarried.  That doesn't make it right.

Money paid until the former spouse remarries is called alimony. Totally different thing than child support - at least it's supposed to be.

I think the lines are getting a little blurry, thanks to the assumption the non-custodial parent should pay to maintain the same quality of life the child had before the divorce. That's just not reasonable, especially if the husband was the only one working full-time, and the income is going from maintaining one residence to two.

[sillyperson]

As I understand it, it is not "The State" that is demanding the money here.
The State is acting as contract enforcer; the ex-wife is saying he has an obligation to make good on a financial obligation to help raise the kid.

Like I said: I dunno if Russ "really" owes her money (she says he does, he says he doesn't).
Why not agree to private arbitration? IIRC the ex-wife posted somewhere that she'd be open to that.

[dalebert]

The monthly dues were an amount arbitrarily decided by the state in the first place after the wife decided to divorce Russell. They were also based on salary from a job that he is no longer comfortable with and may not even be able to resume if he wanted. He's pretty dirt poor right now. I gave up a high-paying job to live on my own terms. It's particularly disturbing when you're busting your ass in a 9 to 5 that makes you miserable just to hand over half of it over for taxes, (and I don't just mean income taxes) so I can relate. It makes you truly feel like a slave.

[NHArticleTen]

As I understand it, it is not "The State" that is demanding the money here.
The State is acting as contract enforcer; the ex-wife is saying he has an obligation to make good on a financial obligation to help raise the kid.

Like I said: I dunno if Russ "really" owes her money (she says he does, he says he doesn't).
Why not agree to private arbitration? IIRC the ex-wife posted somewhere that she'd be open to that.

The "state" is a thug...plain and simple...guns for hire...to the biggest voting block of looters willing to put up with their shit as long as they are looting someone else...anyone else...besides the looters...

You are stating "the state is acting as contract enforcer"...
Please forward me a certified copy of this contract...
I will, of course, pay the expenses for this...

I'll continue to support Russell until I see a contract where he agreed voluntarily, with full disclosure...to specific terms...without any supposed person in a costume/dress/bathrobe holding the leashes of the goon squads with billy clubs, pepper spray, tasers, guns, etc. at the ready...

John Shaw!

[One two three]

And yes, my parents got divorced and it would have sucked if my dad didn't pay child support for the few years before my mom remarried.  That doesn't make it right.

Money paid until the former spouse remarries is called alimony. Totally different thing than child support - at least it's supposed to be.

Or, in my case, child support.  Once my mom remarried, my dad no longer paid child support because there were 2 parents supporting me.

[NHArticleTen]

And yes, my parents got divorced and it would have sucked if my dad didn't pay child support for the few years before my mom remarried.  That doesn't make it right.

Money paid until the former spouse remarries is called alimony. Totally different thing than child support - at least it's supposed to be.

Or, in my case, child support.  Once my mom remarried, my dad no longer paid child support because there were 2 parents supporting me.

That's not how it works now...during a divorce or a demand by one parent that another parent "contribute"...the "judge" decides who has custody from that point on...and who should pay what(different depending on the state)...and this "forced obligation" does not change until the child reaches 18...the court only "allows" the "contributions" to cease upon the successful adoption of the kids by the new husband...if the new husband makes a million dollars a year, but chooses not to adopt...the "contributions" must continue...

It's no wonder that men and women act the way they do towards each other...
It's exactly this sort of thing that is the reason why I advise young men to have a vasectomy so they can't be trapped by a woman...
I had both of these situations happen to me...
I had a verbal contract with my wife that we WEREN'T having kids and I made the mistake of trusting her(my fault for trusting anyone else)...
And...
Several years later, a gal I was seeing told me she was pregnant and it was mine...
Boy did I have the last laugh there...you should have seen the look on her face...
When I told her I was a certified blank shooter...OMG...LOL...

See, I knew I never wanted to bring children into this FU world and I tried desperately to get a vasectomy when I was 18.  Back in those days they hadn't perfected the reversal procedure so the doctors were very hesitant to perform these on young men(In a free market it would have been easy to find a doctor willing and able...in our FU country...not so much).  There was only one that would do it, and that was on the condition that I come back in six months with the same request...I didn't because in six months I was thousands of miles away from that particular doctor...

And because the medical industry isn't a free market...and because I couldn't trust even one other human being...I got screwed...

John Shaw!

[Blackie]

It's not my fault. It's the state. It's the medical industry,. It's the thugs. Wasn't me.

[Blackie]

When is someone going to start a fund to pay off Russell's child support debt?

[NHArticleTen]

When is someone going to start a fund to pay off Russell's child support debt?

Perhaps you're not following all the threads on this...or the previous ones...

Russell doesn't want anyone to bail him out...or pay fines...or pay any supposed "obligations"...

But I suppose if you wanted to pull it out of your pocket and give it to the bureaucrats, jackboots, and mercenaries...THEY would be DELIGHTED...

John Shaw!

[NHArticleTen]

It's not my fault. It's the state. It's the medical industry,. It's the thugs. Wasn't me.

If you had gangrene in your arm and the doctors refused to help you(the doctors refusal is based on a government and/or industry "standard" that is arbitrary and capricious in this example)...and the arm later had to be amputated...you'd have cause to blame the doctors...unless, of course, you could treat yourself...or cut your own arm off...which people have actually done BTW...

And it IS the "state" and their crimes against the free market and basic human rights that is the issue here...

And it IS the "medical industry" who force "rogue" doctors either into submission...or out of business...

And they ARE most certainly thugs/bureaucrats/jackboots/mercenaries...

What else would you call someone that routinely points a gun at you and demands ANYTHING of you....

John Shaw!