Author Topic: New Tennessee law  (Read 4477 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

charlesoakwood

  • Guest
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #20 on: July 06, 2011, 11:11:28 PM »

It's a reality question and a moral question.  If one decides to "go Gault" does one have the assets to maintain himself and his family for the rest of his life?  If one does not then going Gault is a temporary existence between comfort and subsistence.  Which puts the actor in the predicament of choosing suicide, total submission to government welfare, or working his way back into a financially stable situation -  Which will be much more difficult than working from an already functional situation.

Going Gault also begs the moral question of allegiance. Allegiance to the Flag, the Constitution, and the grand and noble experiment the United States of America and all those who are still working in allegiance toward its success.  Going Gault declares oneself a free agent and forgoes that allegiance to God and Country as one, and all those who do so swear.

The "play" is not over, we are merely in the opening scenes of the second act.   How we play our parts will determine the outcome of the play.

 

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 19529
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #21 on: July 06, 2011, 11:12:19 PM »
No, folks, you're dead wrong. You're pulling your chips off the table and quitting the game. You're quitting on all the other citizens who want this to work and will eventually fight for it. You're taking your ball and going home. What Rand wrote about was fiction. There is no hidden valley to run to. Literally or figuratively.
And please tell me how that course of action, pulling your money and productivity out of circulation, could possibly affect an entity that can create and print it's own money via fiat? You're hurting yourself more than them.

But I still hope to get the chance to stand w/ you when those 2d Amendment remedies are implemented.

The "Game" as it were is over.  We lost - a long time ago in fact. With the Income Tax Amendment. With the Popular vote of Senators. With FDR and the New Deal. If a 2nd Amendment remedy is forthcoming, I don't doubt that most here WILL stand with you, and we will be able to BECAUSE we have Gone Galt and are still independent of the government. Yes, we are taking the ball and going home.. but that doesn't mean we are throwing the ball  away.. merely that we are unwilling to play ball when the rules are so F'd.

We can hurt the government by withdrawing effort because of the nature of money-- it is a symbol of value, but not value itself.. When nothing of value is created, there is nothing to loot. Print the money, and it becomes more meaningless - because it is backed by nothing- the government can't be productive. . You force the government into a situation where it must try to use the whips and chains, where it must overtly take from people that already have little, and it forces these jerks to understand who and what they are and to display it.

Under thecurrent system youcan be a  chump or a looter, or withdraw.  A chump still produces, and that bread is taken and given to those who didn't produce. It keeps them alive. Produce only enough for you and yours..and have the ability to prevent its being taken by force, and those slimy little toadies starve.  I wish there was an armed rebellion going on, because it would be the better and faster way... but that is also forcing a rule change and refusing to play ball with the corrupocrats... Playing by the rules is no longer an option, and the more we demonstrate how inept and hopeless an blind faith in govt is, the faster we might get to a flash point- or not.   I see no other option now other than to let the ship of State sink under the weight of the parasites - the  rats, drowning the rats along with it. I suspect we will need water flooding the higher decks before enough people  will take up arms against the rats, and by then, it will be too late to save the ship.  We know how to build a life boat, how to swim and how to build a new Ship once the rats have gone down with the old one - but that means we need to be well clear of her when she goes down so we don't get sucked down after her.

This is the long and short of it.

Can't withdraw?  No foul, Dan.  We know you're ready to pull the lever when the time comes.
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

charlesoakwood

  • Guest
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #22 on: July 06, 2011, 11:13:31 PM »

Fatalist.


Offline Predator Don

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4576
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #23 on: July 06, 2011, 11:25:42 PM »
Sounds to me like rent seeking trash trying to squeeze the little guys out of business.

I have mentioned how much I loath rent seeking trash, and the politicians that service them, haven't I?

This is exactly what is occuring. Like obama protecting unions. This is nothing fair or equal, its about diminishing my business and protecting those who grease the palms of corruption.The corruption runs so deep, so wide and the limits of corruption are removed when liberals take control. It's bad enough when conservatives control things, but I haven't met a liberal who had any regard for the "little guy".....Unless "little guy" equates to the people who are enslaved by the myriad of gov't programs, created by some perverted version of fairness.

I wait with baited breath the responses of the reps I e mailed.
I'm not always engulfed in scandals, but when I am, I make sure I blame others.

Offline Predator Don

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4576
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #24 on: July 07, 2011, 12:03:23 AM »

It's a reality question and a moral question.  If one decides to "go Gault" does one have the assets to maintain himself and his family for the rest of his life?  If one does not then going Gault is a temporary existence between comfort and subsistence.  Which puts the actor in the predicament of choosing suicide, total submission to government welfare, or working his way back into a financially stable situation -  Which will be much more difficult than working from an already functional situation.

Going Gault also begs the moral question of allegiance. Allegiance to the Flag, the Constitution, and the grand and noble experiment the United States of America and all those who are still working in allegiance toward its success.  Going Gault declares oneself a free agent and forgoes that allegiance to God and Country as one, and all those who do so swear.

The "play" is not over, we are merely in the opening scenes of the second act.   How we play our parts will determine the outcome of the play.

 


I felt I "went gault" when I left my old position of relative safety and security to begin a new venture. I left because "the rules" were changing and if you don't want to play by them, then do something different. So I left.

Now, I'm faced with different rules, many which I knew and I accepted the challenge.....I didn't go in blind. I guess you could call it reality, but my reality is providing for my family and frankly, Ive done some dirty jobs in my life to provide and I've found avenues to "play within the rules" without sacrificing my morals. Corps do it every day...Its why we have no job growth and so much wealth overseas. Corruption within itself creates loopholes. Outs.
At some point, as I exhaust my avenues to deflect the advances of  morally corrupt idiots, I may reach my crossroad and choose to "go gault" again, but personally, I don't know if I can just quit and sit tight with what I have (I do not consider selling...quitting....I'll just go a different direction) because I can't be a free agent.

I realize everyone has thier own decisions to make. I don't like what is happening any more than others do, but me, I need to fight the idiocy because I have a family who depends on me.
I'm not always engulfed in scandals, but when I am, I make sure I blame others.

Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 19529
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2011, 12:15:14 AM »

It's a reality question and a moral question.  If one decides to "go Gault" does one have the assets to maintain himself and his family for the rest of his life?  If one does not then going Gault is a temporary existence between comfort and subsistence.  Which puts the actor in the predicament of choosing suicide, total submission to government welfare, or working his way back into a financially stable situation -  Which will be much more difficult than working from an already functional situation.

Going Gault also begs the moral question of allegiance. Allegiance to the Flag, the Constitution, and the grand and noble experiment the United States of America and all those who are still working in allegiance toward its success.  Going Gault declares oneself a free agent and forgoes that allegiance to God and Country as one, and all those who do so swear.

The "play" is not over, we are merely in the opening scenes of the second act.   How we play our parts will determine the outcome of the play.


First, there is no "u" in Galt.

Second, such allegiance as described here belongs to those who believe in the collective, not the individual and is not relative to God in any way.

It must be frightening to some, who rely on government subsistence, the idea of individuals withdrawing their support from the looter utopia.

Some beds, once made, must be laid in.

"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

charlesoakwood

  • Guest
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #26 on: July 07, 2011, 12:15:39 AM »
...
You can't quit on a Republic that no longer exists.  Washington, Jefferson, Hancock and the rest of the Founders took up arms to create a Republic-- and it was lost - long before I was born. Momentum has carried us another 100 years or so, but now there isn't room for honest men. . You can either beg for your table scraps from the Socialists,  or you can drop out, and become a Neo-Hippie in the style Leary originally intended (only without the drugs)


Don, going Gault is dropping out, non participatory, non contributory, off the grid.  You are not talking about that.  What I hear is that your business is becoming so frustratingly burdened that you are seeking another avenue to participate, another business, a new venture.  That's the opposite of Gault, it's staying in the game and kicking it up a notch - in your favor.


charlesoakwood

  • Guest
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2011, 12:22:20 AM »
First, whether there is or is not a u in Gault is highly significant to the topic.

Second, in America God and Country under the Constitution are ONE and inseparable. This nation was not conceived as a collective, not written, nor ascribed as a collective the collective is the enemy.

Those who do participate and those who do not will receive portions equal to their effort.




Online Pandora

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 19529
  • I iz also makin a list. U on it pal.
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #28 on: July 07, 2011, 12:42:10 AM »
First, whether there is or is not a u in Gault is highly significant to the topic.

No.  Spell it correctly or do not use the reference.

Quote
Second, in America God and Country under the Constitution are ONE and inseparable. This nation was not conceived as a collective, not written, nor ascribed as a collective the collective is the enemy.

Then stop advocating for the good of the collective.

Quote
Those who do participate and those who do not will receive portions equal to their effort.


Again, no.  You're counting on the contributions of those who do participate ~~ and do not go Galt ~~ to carry you, hence your urging of them who are so inclined to not drop out, aka not going Galt.

"Participation" in the current government scheme do not recommend for equal portions according to effort; it recommends for rewards equal to adhesion to the government scam.  Crony capitalism = rent seeking.



"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain

"Let us assume for the moment everything you say about me is true. That just makes your problem bigger, doesn't it?"

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5731
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #29 on: July 07, 2011, 06:19:26 AM »
Going Gault also begs the moral question of allegiance. Allegiance to the Flag, the Constitution, and the grand and noble experiment the United States of America and all those who are still working in allegiance toward its success.  Going Gault declares oneself a free agent and forgoes that allegiance to God and Country as one, and all those who do so swear.

I do not understand how withdrawing my production in any way violates my duties as an American citizen. It, rather, seems consistent with my civic duty to resist tyranny. Nor does "Going Galt" mean that you quit working, or go live in a completely self-reliant way.  I means only that you produce less.. I may choose to give up a 6 figure salary and forge a new business that makes 40-50K a year.  With no mortgage, partial food production, and no  electricity or heating bills, thats a lot of money.  And I will pay next to nothing in taxes.  Or are you arguing that paying taxes is patriotic?  ::USA::

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5731
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #30 on: July 07, 2011, 06:31:38 AM »
Don, going Gault is dropping out, non participatory, non contributory, off the grid.  You are not talking about that.  What I hear is that your business is becoming so frustratingly burdened that you are seeking another avenue to participate, another business, a new venture.  That's the opposite of Gault, it's staying in the game and kicking it up a notch - in your favor.

And then they will close off those avenues as well.

Quote
Come a day there won't be room for naughty men like us to slip about at all. This job goes south, there well may not be another. So here is us, on the raggedy edge. Don't push me, and I won't push you - Malcolm Reynolds- Firefly

I know you don't think the war is lost yet, but you don't provide a very compelling case for why you believe that, or any of the rest of us should.   Dagny Taggert refused to give in till the end too, thinking she could save her railroad, by making deals, by fighting. Rearden's trial shows you why that won't work.. because the government does not recognize your rights - to life,to property, to the pursuit of YOUR happiness, and so in the end, they will always be violated.

Online IronDioPriest

  • Administrator
  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10828
  • I refuse to accept my civil servants as my rulers
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #31 on: July 07, 2011, 09:44:40 AM »
Neal Boortz made a good point yesterday in regards to the Casey Anthony trial that I think may translate to this discussion. I'll paraphrase as best I can.

Government has one "right" that no citizen has. Government has the right to take your life, your liberty, and your property, when it deems it has a compelling reason to do so. Under our system of laws, it must meet constitutional and legal criteria in order to deprive you of these things, but when those criteria are met, that power is absolute.

His point was that government wanted to kill Casey Anthony or take away her freedom, and standing as a bulwark against that power were twelve citizens constitutionally granted the power to deny government if it did not meet the criteria.

(This is me now, not Boortz) What we are increasingly seeing in government is a willingness to use its absolute power in ways not permitted by the constitution, not legal, and without the consent of the governed.

Taken to the extreme, if the government decided right now that your possessions are no longer yours; that you are not free to move about; or to take your life at the point of a gun - to whom would you appeal? Ask yourself, if a government is willing to engage in the threatening posture against the citizenry that we are currently witnessing on many fronts, what assurance do we have that our life, property, and liberty will not be directly threatened by that same government?

Don is facing oppression by a government against whom there is no realistic means of appeal. He can try - as he is - but in the end, if the government decides that he must comply with regulation or the power of government will be brought against him, then options for redress of grievances becomes a narrow set. He will have choices to make, and he will have to live with them.

At that point, I would say his duty to "society" as we understand it in the context of supporting free enterprise and his duty to himself and his family might be in conflict with one another. He is the one who will have to live with his choices. Society, after all, is what keeps placing government obstacles in his way every other November.

I am speaking of Don only because he is the direct example facing us now. But in Weisshaupt and others, we see anticipation and making preparations for the time when that decision will be forced.

I don't blame Charles a bit for wanting to hang in there. I've always been taught that optimism is a powerful force that can mold the future, and that what manifests in reality must first be conceived in the mind. If we had a nation of people whose majority insisted that the future we are being handed by this government is not destiny but a mere obstacle to be overcome on the path to constitutional government, I do not believe the government could possibly stand in the way. I see the Tea Party as a possible mechanism to change minds in that direction, so I do not lose hope.

In fact, I will not lose hope until the government begins killing citizens, placing citizens in prison without trial, or depriving citizens of their property without due process. On those last two, we see the most egregious transgressions, and that is why we are all agitated. Government seems to be quickly moving toward confiscating our property, and is chipping away at our liberty. But my hope is not gone while we are still free to resist peacefully and forcefully.

Likewise, I don't blame anyone else for feeling pressure to "bow out". When one believes ones efforts are increasingly fruitless and unappreciated, from where comes the motivation to continue? At what point is it ones duty to ones family to turn ones attention inward and make sure things are taken care of for ones own, society be damned?

I don't think there are any easy answers. Perhaps "expect the best and prepare for the worst" is the best we can do right now. I would modify that to "do whatever the hell we can to work against the worst, hold optimism for success, and prepare for the worst."

« Last Edit: July 07, 2011, 09:47:47 AM by IronDioPriest »
"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."

- Thomas Jefferson

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5731
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #32 on: July 07, 2011, 10:19:50 AM »
At that point, I would say his duty to "society" as we understand it in the context of supporting free enterprise and his duty to himself and his family might be in conflict with one another. He is the one who will have to live with his choices. Society, after all, is what keeps placing government obstacles in his way every other November.... I don't blame Charles a bit for wanting to hang in there. I've always been taught that optimism is a powerful force that can mold the future, and that what manifests in reality must first be conceived in the mind. ..In fact, I will not lose hope until the government begins killing citizens, placing citizens in prison without trial, or depriving citizens of their property without due process. On those last two, we see the most egregious transgressions, and that is why we are all agitated. Government seems to be quickly moving toward confiscating our property, and is chipping away at our liberty. But my hope is not gone while we are still free to resist peacefully and forcefully.

Well said and I don't disagree on any particular point.

I have been wrong enough times to not discount the possibility now,  but the window for political solutions is nearly, if not completely closed. The ticking time bomb of the debt is still patiently waiting to go off, and the Tea Party cannot replace members of Congress fast enough to result in real changes to that situation. Optimism, while powerful, must be tempered by a sober reflection and understanding of reality, risk and consequences.  

All of the events you describe have already come to pass: Citizens are being targeted for assignation without due process, the Kelo decision gave the government unbridled capacity to deprive citizens of their property, and  citizens are being placed in Jail without charges.

Our ability to resist is going to depend on our ability to survive without the largess and structure of the Federal government. State Governments are and will hopefully increase playing their intended role in preventing Federal overreach - and that may result in a clash of arms and the beginning of a 2nd Amendment solution.. but the debt and the looming world war may allow the fed to circumvent that scenario, IF it arises. FDR was successful because he made Americans scared and desperate.  I haven't given up hope.. only hope of a peaceful political solution or one that avoids the coming wave of debt, because I no longer see a path by which those can be accomplished, other than by the grace of God. As a result, we must incorporate those facts into our planning. Perhaps I am too fatalist in suggesting we have lost the war.. but we have lost this battle in it. We need to recognize that fact and plan our next moves in light of it. A great disruption in our way of life is coming - and we need to be ready to use that disruption to our advantage.

RickZ

  • Guest
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #33 on: July 07, 2011, 10:20:49 AM »
In fact, I will not lose hope until the government begins killing citizens, placing citizens in prison without trial, or depriving citizens of their property without due process. On those last two, we see the most egregious transgressions, and that is why we are all agitated. Government seems to be quickly moving toward confiscating our property, and is chipping away at our liberty. But my hope is not gone while we are still free to resist peacefully and forcefully.

As for the bolded, two points:

1)  The SCOTUS' Kelo Decision, and
2)  Obama's abrogating bankruptcy law in the GM case.

One can argue Kelo was due process, but was it really?  Government can take over individual private property to give to another private corporate entity using the tax base as a justification?  That's like Congress using the Commerce Clause to force people to buy insurance.  Using that logic, what does the Commerce Clause not forbid?  With Kelo, what individual will pay more taxes than a corporation, thereby making the individual lose the tax base argument every single time?  Eminent Domain is bad enough; Kelo is legal thievery.

Offline Predator Don

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4576
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #34 on: July 07, 2011, 10:23:03 AM »
Going Gault also begs the moral question of allegiance. Allegiance to the Flag, the Constitution, and the grand and noble experiment the United States of America and all those who are still working in allegiance toward its success.  Going Gault declares oneself a free agent and forgoes that allegiance to God and Country as one, and all those who do so swear.

I do not understand how withdrawing my production in any way violates my duties as an American citizen. It, rather, seems consistent with my civic duty to resist tyranny. Nor does "Going Galt" mean that you quit working, or go live in a completely self-reliant way.  I means only that you produce less.. I may choose to give up a 6 figure salary and forge a new business that makes 40-50K a year.  With no mortgage, partial food production, and no  electricity or heating bills, thats a lot of money.  And I will pay next to nothing in taxes.  Or are you arguing that paying taxes is patriotic?  ::USA::


Ah.....I have a better understanding of your thoughts now....I believed you were advocating "disappearing", completely off the grid, so to speak. I couldn't do it, even if I had the financial means....I'd dry up and die. It is not in my DNA and I do not believe it is in the DNA of most conservatives. Imo, I lose if I completely disappear.

Charles was also correct in I had become frustrated with my old positions burdensome, tired ideas. (Btw, they filed for bankruptcy) I've seen it before, business which goes from flexibility, fresh ideas in their field to a generic, one size fits all approach. It does not work in business...it does not work in gov't. I don't believe it works in interpreting "galt" either....LOL

In addition, Weisshaupt described to a tee my thought pattern. I had worked hard, saved money, didn't owe anyone and didn't need the aggravation of my ever changing title, especially in lite I know I can do something to be productive. I didn't need as much money to live, but driven to earn what I can because I will leave it to my family....They need the financial means to keep the fight going.....But I could easily live on less, create a situation where I didn't pay much in personal tax and give the finger to the gov't. Now, gov't sticks its nose in my business, again, with what else, more burdensome regulation, more prying into my life.......And has made my existence more difficult.


So I choose to "go galt" ( my definition) and take a different direction. I may need to do it again if we cannot stem this tide, but I can't quit, because I'd wither and that, my freinds, is when liberals win.


I'm not always engulfed in scandals, but when I am, I make sure I blame others.

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5731
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #35 on: July 07, 2011, 10:41:32 AM »
Ah.....I have a better understanding of your thoughts now....I believed you were advocating "disappearing", completely off the grid, so to speak. I couldn't do it, even if I had the financial means....I'd dry up and die. It is not in my DNA and I do not believe it is in the DNA of most conservatives. Imo, I lose if I completely disappear.
.... I had worked hard, saved money, didn't owe anyone and didn't need the aggravation of my ever changing title, especially in lite I know I can do something to be productive. I didn't need as much money to live, but driven to earn what I can because I will leave it to my family....

Disappearing is certainly an option if you can manage it. But most people can't - the big capital, however, can. It already has, and that is why there are no jobs.  Why risk building more, providing more,  when that makes you a target?  Where are the Jobs?  They are sitting in the sun soaked hand of some millionaire/billionaire on a beach somewhere. Or they are building elsewhere in the world.. not here.

I have lost the need to produce for others. Maybe I am becoming Wally from Dilbert.. the realization that the Government Debt was going to wipe out my savings for the last 20 years could be a factor.  I can't ever retire now, the drawbridge to wealth is closed- you either have it now or you do not. You can buy influence or you can't .  Wish I were on the other side of the bridge.  I am not.  I can b  a looter, or a chump, ortry to balance in the middle.

Offline Predator Don

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4576
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #36 on: July 07, 2011, 11:25:44 AM »
Ah.....I have a better understanding of your thoughts now....I believed you were advocating "disappearing", completely off the grid, so to speak. I couldn't do it, even if I had the financial means....I'd dry up and die. It is not in my DNA and I do not believe it is in the DNA of most conservatives. Imo, I lose if I completely disappear.
.... I had worked hard, saved money, didn't owe anyone and didn't need the aggravation of my ever changing title, especially in lite I know I can do something to be productive. I didn't need as much money to live, but driven to earn what I can because I will leave it to my family....

Disappearing is certainly an option if you can manage it. But most people can't - the big capital, however, can. It already has, and that is why there are no jobs.  Why risk building more, providing more,  when that makes you a target?  Where are the Jobs?  They are sitting in the sun soaked hand of some millionaire/billionaire on a beach somewhere. Or they are building elsewhere in the world.. not here.

I have lost the need to produce for others. Maybe I am becoming Wally from Dilbert.. the realization that the Government Debt was going to wipe out my savings for the last 20 years could be a factor.  I can't ever retire now, the drawbridge to wealth is closed- you either have it now or you do not. You can buy influence or you can't .  Wish I were on the other side of the bridge.  I am not.  I can b  a looter, or a chump, ortry to balance in the middle.


I don't consider the big capital "disappearing" because it moved to a better neighborhood, it did not go away, just moved to a hipper place. We all do what we believe is best. If big capital didn't re locate, most of us would be sitting here with retirement accounts in more shambles than they are now. If we, as individuals, do not invest in emerging markets,even if it is on a much smaller scale, we are not learning the lesson big capital learned.

You don't need to be a looter or a chump. You may not be able to physically move, but you have moves you can make. Maybe balance in the middle equates to moving your money from out of failed institutions and ideals, I don't know, but in the end you certainly are not producing for others, at least here in America.
I'm not always engulfed in scandals, but when I am, I make sure I blame others.

Offline LadyVirginia

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5168
  • Mt. Vernon painting by Francis Jukes
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #37 on: July 07, 2011, 11:39:07 AM »

 Washington, Jefferson, Hancock and the rest of the Founders took up arms to create a Republic-- and it was lost - long before I was born.

The original intent of the Founders was to preserve the rights of Englishmen and not start a new republic. It ended up being that ---which as history has taught us --what is intended is often not what occurs.


"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5731
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #38 on: July 07, 2011, 12:03:50 PM »
I don't consider the big capital "disappearing" because it moved to a better neighborhood, it did not go away, just moved to a hipper place. We all do what we believe is best. If big capital didn't re locate, most of us would be sitting here with retirement accounts in more shambles than they are now. If we, as individuals, do not invest in emerging markets,even if it is on a much smaller scale, we are not learning the lesson big capital learned.
You don't need to be a looter or a chump. You may not be able to physically move, but you have moves you can make. Maybe balance in the middle equates to moving your money from out of failed institutions and ideals, I don't know, but in the end you certainly are not producing for others, at least here in America.

Actually I bet there is a lot of Capital onthe sidelines at the moment - or like my IRA, being funneled into assets that are not really "investments" in the the classical sense. The "rich" may decide to buy an Island, and then prep it - using the money they would have otherwise put into a business.  Granted their prep is driving economic production, but like government spending, that prep is transient, and doesn't create an on going concern, jobs, etc.  Its a little better than stuffing your mattress with money, but not much.  Where captial has relocated it has done so largely because of the uncertain business  envrionment,  and growing corruption. Why bribe to do business in America, when you can bribe officials in South America with less risk, and a cheaper work force? 

There isn't a place in the world now where the Looters don't hold sway - just the degree and the methods differ - and many will prefer to give money directly to looters as bribes vs. the more risky and round about methods in use here. Bottom line, you are a chump no matter where you go now to produce.. its just a question of how much of a chump are you willing to be?  As was pointed out.. there is no Galt's Gulch to run to.

Offline Weisshaupt

  • Conservative Superhero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5731
Re: New Tennessee law
« Reply #39 on: July 07, 2011, 12:27:14 PM »
The original intent of the Founders was to preserve the rights of Englishmen and not start a new republic. It ended up being that ---which as history has taught us --what is intended is often not what occurs.

I respectfully disagree. Our revolution and Constitution didn't just "happen" and they were not the unintended consequence of a quest to preserve the rights of Englishmen. 
They were the result of  a long and  thoughtful deliberation and a decision to "quit" the old nation and start a new one.  That was the point of the Declaration of Independence and the reason that its passage was so controversial and difficult - it was an agreement to change the goal - to make the objective the creation of a free and independant State based on the prinicples of Limited Government, Government by Consent, and inalienable rights, and to give up on a peaceful/political solution in which the political system and existing loyalties were preserved.   The conclusion that this was the path that must be taken, and that the costs were worth paying  came sooner to some than to others. Many have remarked on how miraculous those events were, and I think it is sheer Hubris to expect a repeat of them, though God willing, I certainly pray for it. .