Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Profile of ReasonableVoice
| |-+  Show Posts
| | |-+  Topics

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - ReasonableVoice

Pages: [1]
1
General / Libertarian statists have it right.
« on: February 12, 2015, 09:50:43 PM »
Libertarian statists have it right . . .

. . . if "state" refers to a NAP modeled constitutional minarchy which is funded only by corporation taxes.

2
When an agent of a government brings someone to court against their will, is that kidnapping ?
When a private DRS (Dispute Resolution Services) agent brings someone to DR against their will, is that kidnapping ?


When someone WITH a badge, or WITHOUT  badge,
 uses force against someone alleged to have used aggression,
. . . . . .
    is that  offensive force   (aggression)
or is that defensive force (non-aggression) ?



PS
Under common law it depended on the outcome.
That is, if the accuser who authorized the agent(s) to seize a person
was correct (able to prove a wrong) then it was not kidnapping
but if they were unable to prove a wrong,
the accuser was then liable for committing a wrong. ( table turned )


3
General / Why does God allow EVIL ?
« on: February 02, 2015, 08:24:18 PM »
( This is not a question/answer that applies only to a certain organized religion )

Question:  Why does God allow EVIL ?

  Answer:   GOD is LOVE.


LOVE is the greatest GOOD.

The greatest GOOD for humanity is accepting GOD’s LOVE.
The greatest  EVIL  for humanity is rejecting GOD.

Genuine LOVE requires FREE CHOICE.

FREE CHOICE must allow all of the possible choices.  <-- core immutable point in answer to the question

To stop EVIL is to stop FREE CHOICE.
To stop FREE CHOICE is to stop LOVE.
To stop LOVE is to stop the greatest GOOD.
To stop the greatest GOOD is the greatest EVIL.

4
Sound Premise = There should be no tax on people ( no individual income tax, etc )
            and regardless of what some courts say, corporations are not people.

So then . . .

Business opportunities in a society belong to "the people" of society.

Tax on corporations is simply the purchase of business opportunity from the people.
( And the tax is to be used FOR the people)

For a corporation to do business without paying for the opportunity would be stealing from the people

Defensive force against a corporation for stealing (not paying tax) would not violate NAP (Non Aggression Principle )



PS: Too many Libertarians/Anarchists see the word "State" and then
           jump off the deep end without even knowing how to swim.

5
General / What does "expressions of direct abuse" mean ?
« on: September 12, 2014, 09:10:17 PM »
And . . .

If someone says people should be tolerant of all people
but is not tolerant of people who are not tolerant
isn't that being a hypocrite ?

   :-0)

This next statement is false.
That previous statement is true.

6
The Show / Show ened 9/6/2014 mis-analyzed example of NAP
« on: September 06, 2014, 10:14:43 PM »
I'm posting here because no one will probably see it here  :-0)

The show ended by analyzing a person defending another person from getting hit by a bus through shoving them so hard that the defensive force hurt the person that may have been hit by a bus.

It seemed that Ian and Mark incorrectly thought this was violation of NAP.

#1 whether or not another person was hurt or not does not factor into NAP
( though generally, the ideal is for there to be NO harm)

#2 the only factor in NAP is whether the "initiation of force" is in defensive use or in offensive use

Initiation of OFFENSIVE force is AGGRESSION
Initiation of DEFENSIVE force is NOT AGGRESSION

If one is acting DEFENSIVELY of self or others IT IS NOT AGGRESSION

Yes, it may be unwanted, or even stupid, NON-aggression action, but the action does NOT violate NAP.

NAP has only on GRAY area - determining whether an action initiated as defensive action or offensive action.

Generally, there is very little gray area, but . . .
a factor in determining defensive or offensive is INTENT
and INTENT can be somewhat SUBJECTIVE (gray area) sometimes.

PS
Now if the person shoving thought they could actually hurt the person worse than the bus could hurt them and the intent was for them to hurt worse than getting hit by a bus, then, yes, it could be a violation of the NAP. :-0)


7
General / What might the central governance of a NAP minarcism look like ?
« on: February 07, 2014, 08:10:14 AM »
What Federal (centralized) departments/agencies/corporations would be eliminated under NAP minarcism ?


Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Department of Commerce
Department of Education (ED)
Department of Energy (DOE)
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Department of Justice (DOJ) - FBI,ATF,and all the rest
Department of Labor (DOL)
Department of the Interior (DOI)
Department of Transportation (DOT)
Architect of the Capitol
Capitol Police
Congressional Research Service
Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission
Medicare Payment Advisory Commission
Open World Leadership Center
Stennis Center for Public Service
U.S. Botanic Garden
Legal Services Corporation
Smithsonian Institution
State Justice Institute
United States Institute of Peace
United States Mission to the United Nations
Council of Economic Advisers
Administrative Conference of the United States
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
African Development Foundation
AMTRAK (National Railroad Passenger Corporation)
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
Commission on Civil Rights
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)
Corporation for National and Community Service
Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia
Director of National Intelligence
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
Export-Import Bank of the United States
Farm Credit Administration
Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Federal Housing Finance Agency
Federal Labor Relations Authority
Federal Maritime Commission
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
Federal Reserve System
Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
Institute of Museum and Library Services
Inter-American Foundation
International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB)
Millennium Challenge Corporation
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
National Capital Planning Commission
National Council on Disability
National Credit Union Administration (NCUA)
National Endowment for the Arts
National Endowment for the Humanities
National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
National Mediation Board
National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK)
National Science Foundation (NSF)
National Transportation Safety Board
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
Office of Compliance
Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive
Overseas Private Investment Corporation
Panama Canal Commission
Peace Corps
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
Postal Regulatory Commission
Railroad Retirement Board
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
Selective Service System
Small Business Administration (SBA)
Social Security Administration (SSA)
Tennessee Valley Authority
U.S. Trade and Development Agency
United States Agency for International Development
United States International Trade Commission
Administrative Committee of the Federal Register
American Battle Monuments Commission
Appalachian Regional Commission
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board)
Arctic Research Commission
Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Interagency Coordinating Committee
Barry M. Goldwater Scholarship and Excellence in Education Foundation
Broadcasting Board of Governors (Voice of America, Radio|TV Marti and more)
Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
Chief Acquisition Officers Council
Chief Financial Officers Council
Chief Human Capital Officers Council
Chief Information Officers Council
Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee
Commission of Fine Arts
Commission on International Religious Freedom
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki Commission)
Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements
Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States
Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Delaware River Basin Commission
Denali Commission
Endangered Species Committee
Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board
Federal Advisory Committees
Federal Executive Boards
Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council
Federal Financing Bank
Federal Geographic Data Committee
Federal Interagency Committee for the Management of Noxious and Exotic Weeds
Federal Interagency Committee on Education
Federal Interagency Council on Statistical Policy
Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer
Federal Library and Information Center Committee
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission
Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation
Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor Commission
Indian Arts and Crafts Board
Interagency Alternative Dispute Resolution Working Group
Interagency Council on Homelessness
Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin
J. William Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board
James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation
Japan-United States Friendship Commission
Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries
Joint Fire Science Program
Marine Mammal Commission
Migratory Bird Conservation Commission
Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission
Millennium Challenge Corporation
Mississippi River Commission
Morris K. Udall Foundation: Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental Policy
National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare
National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform
National Indian Gaming Commission
National Park Foundation
Northwest Power Planning Council
Presidio Trust
Social Security Advisory Board
Susquehanna River Basin Commission
Taxpayer Advocacy Panel
U.S. AbilityOne Commission
United States Election Assistance Commission
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Veterans Day National Committee
Vietnam Educational Foundation
White House Commission on Presidential Scholars – "Presidential Scholars Program"


WHAT A MINUTE !!!!
It might be easier to list what would remain or be added!!!



UNDER THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH . . .


Department of Defense would remain
but trimmed down to NAVY/COAST GUARD & AIRFORCE
The U.S. Army would be dispersed to State militias.

No more NSA, etc., meaning eliminate these:


    Department of Defense Inspector General
    National Defense University
    National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
    National Security Agency (NSA)
    Pentagon Force Protection Agency
    Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office
    TRICARE Management
    U.S. Fleet Forces Command
    U.S. Military Academy, West Point
    Unified Combatant Commands (Defense Department)
    Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
    Washington Headquarters Services
    Federal Voting Assistance Program

Department of Treasury would remain but eliminate these:    

    Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
    Bureau of Engraving and Printing
    Bureau of the Public Debt
    Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)
    Taxpayer Advocacy Panel
    Financial Management Service


leaving only:

United States Mint

and the I.R.S. - which would no longer have Form 1040, etc and would be
renamed to CORE (Corporation Oversight and Restitution Enforcement)

Should all Government acronyms be required to be 4 letters ? :-0)


General Services Administration would remain and be consolidated to include the Office of Personnel Management.
( standard needs of any business )

One agency would be tasked with Safety Review ( review Nuclear plants, etc )
This would really just be a replacement for NRC, OSHA, EPA, etc
and the policies would be fairly limited by the NAP constitution.



UNDER THE JUDICIAL BRANCH


Eliminate these:
FISA Courts
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
U.S. Tax Court
Federal Judicial Center
U.S. Sentencing Commission


UNDER THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The new NAP constitution would limit terms(length) of service
for all Senate and House members.



Now then . . .

some of those things that would be eliminated (like Social Security)
would require a gradual reduction, some things not so slow and some fairly slow,
but CORE would convert(from IRS) rather quickly and 1040 would be dropped immediately   :-0)




For the hard core Anarchy believers . . .  would this be a good step in that direction ?


8
General / Liberty Lovers !!!! The idea of the State is NOT your enemy.
« on: February 01, 2014, 01:52:11 PM »
"War on Liberty" in not being waged by all those who believe in the IDEA of the STATE.

Many believe in the IDEA of the STATE as way to BRING more LIBERTY.


Yes, certain portions of the current implementation of the State
clearly are a portion of an enemy, but they are not the head of the snake.


Though many "Libertarians" or "Liberty Lovers" berate the idea of the State and,
worse, berate Statists (those who believe in using the idea of the State to good purpose),
the truth is . . . the idea of the State is a neutral thing just like any tool.

Statism is nothing more than a tool.

Corporatism is a tool.

A firearm is a tool.

Some tools when used improperly or without proper maintenance can be dangerous
and when those tools fall into the wrong hands can be VERY VERY . . . VERY dangerous.


Those who gain control over large implementations of Corporatism
can then use that tool to gain control over most implementations of Statism.
(  implementations of the idea of the State with solid constitutional founding
             are more difficult for them, but not impossible )

The "money changers" are well aware of this and have used their "money changing ways(often by fraud)"
to gain control over large implementations of the Corporatism tool.
They then use those implementations of the Corporatism tool to gain control over
implementations of the Statism tool.

The tools are not the problem !
Some of the hands in which those tools are currently held - THAT is the problem.

If you observe the revolving doors between the implementations of Corporatism and Statism
you can see how this slight of hand is performed.

The revolving door between Goldman Sachs et al. and the Department of the Treasury.
the revolving door between Monsanto board members and the top officials of the FDA,
the revolving door between . . . well, I think you get the idea.



PLEASE STOP FIGHTING with those who wish to use the TOOL of "the idea of the State"
in order to implement that idea in the form of a NAP guided constitutional governance (a form of minarcism).
THEY ARE NOT YOUR ENEMY.


PS

In early United States history, better limitations were in place concerning CORPORATIONS.

A corporation is not a NATURAL PERSON and should not have the rights of a natural person.

9
THREE QUESTIONS ??? FOR THE NAP(Non-Aggression Principle) ANARCHIST
 
What is the guiding principle of governance ?
Minarchist : NAP
Anarchist : NAP
 
Who is the final arbiter of what constitutes harm (offensive force)
and what remedy is available when harm has been inflicted ?
( punishment / restitution / other defensive force )
 
Minarchist: Legislature ( elected representatives )
Anarchist : ???
 
 
Who is the final arbiter of determining how much harm has been caused and
what the remedy should be ?
 
Minarchist: Judiciary ( jury )
Anarchist : ???
 
If remedy toward the injured party is not consented to voluntarily,
who should extract ( defensive force ) the remedy ?
 
Minarchist: Executive ( elected benevolent grim reaper )
Anarchist : ???


10
General / TOPIC: NON-AGGRESSION PRINCIPLE : Violence
« on: September 20, 2013, 02:22:32 PM »
While the hypothetical assertions within this post may or may not be actual scenarios,
please accept them as true for purposes of discussion as the logic should be able to apply to
a wide range of scenarios.

On to the topic . . .

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TOPIC: NON-AGGRESSION PRINCIPLE : Violence

Violence, not used to make whole, but simply used to only stop violence of aggression.

Is it acceptable under the non-aggression principle that
violence employed defensively can be used to stop offensive violence, that is, to stop violence of aggression ?

Is it acceptable under the non-aggression principle that
violence employed defensively can be used to stop offensive violence, that is, to stop violence of aggression
REGARDLESS of whether the violence is overt or covert ?

Is it acceptable under the non-aggression principle that
violence may (or should?) be employed in defense of yourself or another ?

Is it acceptable under the non-aggression principle that
deadly violence may be used against deadly violence of aggression ?

Is an "eminent deadly threat" considered "violence of aggression" ?

If not, why not ?

Is personal common sense or personal best judgment satisfactory to rely upon for determining an eminent threat ?

If not, why not ?


Overt violence of aggression :
If one individual had been directly killing others,
and that individual stated the killing by that individual would continue,
would that constitute an eminent threat ?

If not, why not ?


Covert violence of aggression :
If one individual had funded a plan to use vaccines to kill and injure others,
and others were being killed and injured by vaccines,
and the individual stated more funding of the plan would continue,
would that constitute an eminent threat ?

If not, why not ?



PS:
I love that BBS (bulletin board system) is referenced for this forum as the bbs concept was the most widespread mainstay of shared content on the internet . . . in the early days of the internet.

And the Terms of Use for this forum is among the best liberty-minded Terms of Use I have seen. Thumbs up.

Pages: [1]

Page created in 0.017 seconds with 29 queries.