 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
MrRekoj,
I have to ask the next question because it is the right thing to do at this time according to my sense of right and wrong.
Are you playing some kind of mind game with me?
Example:
Why preface your response with a reference to running in circles; where someone or everyone is speaking of ideas with no reference to reality and then go on to describe some imaginary argument?
If you assume that my words express a preference for The Articles of Confederation over The Constitution, then, you do so with a measure of liberty that steps over specific points of reality as if those physical properties are meaningless. Then your progress of logic dives into a speculative venture of such vague generality as to almost leave reality aside in favor of some fancy. I am referring to your comparison between what may be called ‘low’ finance and what might be called ‘high’ finance.
When I see this type of report in response to something I wrote I find a few things to be important enough to point out as above and onward:
A. The Articles of Confederation were usurped by the people who pushed through and later enforced The Constitution.
B. My preferences will always favor Liberty over despotism and therefore your assumption is correct since The Articles of Confederation was a voluntary association of Sovereign States while The Constitution is a Limited Liability Contract incorporating an imaginary or false UNION of separate States into a merged conglomerate of incorporated legal entities run by legal criminals who have no moral conscience beyond that which is driven by greed.
C. “The Government” is an imaginary entity if the people are led to believe that “The Government” is a ‘self’ and therefore must ‘pay for itself’ and this type of thinking is exactly how legal criminals falsify their crimes on into perpetuity.
D. Government by the people figure out how to finance their government and they can as easily do so with or without involuntary servitude no matter how much falsehood suggests otherwise. In other words; the involuntary servitude ‘contract’ is a confidence scheme or it is naked extortion depending largely upon how duped the victims can be had – for the lowest possible expense – paid for ‘by the people’ who produce valuables (purchasing power).
E. If someone is stepping into the arena of fantasy, then, how about naming names rather than keeping me on the edge of my seat, since, there are two of us here in this discussion and one of us is entertaining the idea that both of us are reasonable people who command accurate perception and the ability to transfer that accurate perception to other people accurately.
F. A Straw-Man argument is one whereby the person doing the arguing has no intention of communicating anything accurately, rather, the idea behind the construction of a man of straw is to create an imaginary and weak opponent so as to destroy that weak opponent is a game of one up man ship or some other derivative of Hegelism.
G. I do not accept or tolerate being the butt of someone’s joke (if that is what is being done here).
Suppose that the truth is somewhere between the two perspectives being represented here within this discussion and someone other than these two participants where to create some kind of measure to illustrate how that demarcation is occurring in time and space.
The time is early 2008 and the space is a hard drive on some network node. The text appears to anyone on the planet earth who happens upon it for their own personal judgment.
The ‘side’ I intend to occupy is the one where people figure out how to nurture voluntary associations and on that side I suggest strongly that it will be the side capable of producing the most advanced civilization ever imagined by any human being since the masters and slaves left, on that side, will only be the ones who love to be masters and enjoy slavery. Those remaining masters will either find willing slaves or they will have none. Those remaining slaves will find willing masters or they too will have none, or, these types of people will find each other on the other side.
I cannot speak for those people who want the involuntary associations and I can hardly imagine what twisted logic occurs in their minds when they fabricate such things into existence. My guesses fail every time and therefore those types of people must speak for themselves or they must fabricate some puppet of some kind to work some kind of ventriloquist act. I reject being a part of that type of association.
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that I can speak for the other side and please know how I personally abhor argument since finding agreement is so much more, well, voluntary.
Suppose the other side imagines a need to enforce an involuntary tax upon everyone with the possible exception of the tax collecting agents who receive the tax and are therefore exempt from having to pay the tax. Note how I am speaking in terms of physical reality rather than imagining into existence some method of both paying and receiving at once as if both paying and receiving at once were possible. An agent of an involuntary association receiving purchasing power or valuables of any form by that involuntary means are people and people who earn their living by involuntary means. I cannot see this ‘reality’ otherwise and therefore, and again, I am a poor person in this endeavor to imagine what the other side thinks.
Suppose the other side does manage to enforce a flow of wealth from those who earn it to those who manage to enforce this flow of wealth. Now the people who earn the wealth have less and now the people who enforce the flow have more. That is called a wealth redistribution scheme. It is also a pyramid scheme. The reason why it is called a pyramid scheme happens to be a geometrical relationship and economic fact because the number of people creating the power to purchase (wealth) must occupy the larger and more numerous station within this fabricated reality (involuntary association) while the less numerous receivers of this wealth must occupy the higher (or more powerful) geometric ‘sides’ of the pyramid, and, the top is where the buck stops. The top is the final say on what is or is not real in this fabricated reality.
I have to admit that my version of the other side must be inaccurate since I have to guess at what kind of side is imagined into being. My perspective is based only on empirical evidence and personal experience. I cannot actually justify any notion of planning for and then assembling the necessary components required to construct an involuntary association. In my view the cost is prohibitive.
I prefer to speak for the other side where voluntary associations manage without these Straw-Men or whatever is meant by this:
+++++++++++++
provide for the general welfare of all the citizens of the nation
+++++++++++++
On my side there may be one other entity that could provide for the general welfare of all the citizens and that God is not The Nation; the people actually have to work on my side or the people have to depend upon charity – or God. On my side there isn’t some imaginary benevolent dictator who can provide ‘welfare’ to those who can’t or won’t work. On my side people learn to take care of other people because no one forces people to pay an involuntary tax to no one – not even a Straw-Man.
EVER
Yours truly,
Joe