Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 02:15:46 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: What is your opinion of the Maximum role of Government in society?
Absolute: Government should control all services and prices. - 4 (4.7%)
Moderate: the Government should control some services, and not others (explain) - 23 (26.7%)
Minimal: The Government should limit itself to courts and military. - 32 (37.2%)
None: All services and goods should be provided privately (or collectively). - 27 (31.4%)
Total Voters: 85

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Maximum role of Government?  (Read 23071 times)
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 09:17:13 AM
 #81

England is a democracy so a policy of unlimited immigration would require a political party to propose it and win elections.  Feel free to suggest a benefit to your idea as I can't see how anyone would go door to door asking people to vote for such a daft idea.

The US used to have that policy, even had it engraved on a statue... I'd also like to point out that it was at a time of great prosperity...

But regardless, I don't believe that a Libertarian and certainly not Anarchist society will ever come about via a vote. Primarily because voting requires Government OK. If it changed anything, it would be illegal.

The issue is why people won't vote for it.  It will reduce living standards.

I think you seriously underestimate the friction uncontrolled immigration from violent societies will cause. Let me give you 2 other things to think about:
1. Female genital mutilation is practiced all over East Africa.  How would you prevent it being done here after your unlimited immigration has taken place? Or are you simply going to say their women are their property and they can do as they please?
2. The ability to take down aircraft is well established in Afghanistan and Somalia.  The US Army does not have the ability to defeat them in their homelands.   If you allow uncontrolled immigration, you will have their militias in your community with their clan structures and they will insist on sharia law.  What you going to do?  Leave?

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480860946
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480860946

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480860946
Reply with quote  #2

1480860946
Report to moderator
1480860946
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480860946

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480860946
Reply with quote  #2

1480860946
Report to moderator
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2011, 09:23:37 AM
 #82

The issue is why people won't vote for it.  It will reduce living standards.

I think you seriously underestimate the friction uncontrolled immigration from violent societies will cause. Let me give you 2 other things to think about:
1. Female genital mutilation is practiced all over East Africa.  How would you prevent it being done here after your unlimited immigration has taken place? Or are you simply going to say their women are their property and they can do as they please?
2. The ability to take down aircraft is well established in Afghanistan and Somalia.  The US Army does not have the ability to defeat them in their homelands.   If you allow uncontrolled immigration, you will have their militias in your community with their clan structures and they will insist on sharia law.  What you going to do?  Leave?

You're from the UK, so I understand your inability to see what would happen in a truly libertarian or anarchistic society the minute someone gets violent.

Here's a hint:

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 09:33:59 AM
 #83

You are from US so you should know that your army has fought against the Taliban for 10 years and lost. 

Are you 100% sure you want to move them to your country? 

XIU
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
July 08, 2011, 09:38:46 AM
 #84

Minimal or none, the less the better....

1xiuHwHk81j4TRnLuLBMvH2ctqtTsubT6
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2011, 09:40:09 AM
 #85

You do understand that then the situations would be reversed, right?

They would be the invaders, and we would be the entrenched group... and it would be profitable to deal peacefully while deadly to deal violently.

Darwin was a Brit, right?  Grin

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 09:53:50 AM
 #86

You do understand that then the situations would be reversed, right?

They would be the invaders, and we would be the entrenched group... and it would be profitable to deal peacefully while deadly to deal violently.

Darwin was a Brit, right?  Grin

If all they wanted was profit, the US could have bought them off years ago.   But their goal is an Islamic state called the Caliphate that covers the world.  Thats why they will never stop attacking Americans and Europeans and all non-Muslims.  And your proposal is that we get "entrenched" to fight them ? 

In any case, we have established you accept than uncontrolled immigration will lead to a fall in living standards and now that it will bring increased warfare.

You've skipped over the female genital mutilation issue.  Understandable as none of us like to think about such savagery but do remember its something you are going to have to decide about if you allow unlimited immigration from East Africa.

Remind me again why you think uncontrolled immigration is a good thing?

myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2011, 10:06:31 AM
 #87


Remind me again why you think uncontrolled immigration is a good thing?

I didn't skip the mutilation, I counted it as 'Violence'.

And I think the main reason is that, Living in the US as I do, we don't really have a problem with Africans trying to get in. Maybe that has something to do with how the last group that came over got treated... Our main 'problem' is with mexican immigrants, who come here because of the relative prosperity. And frankly, I think that would continue to be the main issue.

And as I've said, we wouldn't have to 'get' entrenched, we already are.

Do me a favor, and read at least the first post of this thread.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 10:29:41 AM
 #88


Remind me again why you think uncontrolled immigration is a good thing?

I didn't skip the mutilation, I counted it as 'Violence'.

And I think the main reason is that, Living in the US as I do, we don't really have a problem with Africans trying to get in. Maybe that has something to do with how the last group that came over got treated... Our main 'problem' is with mexican immigrants, who come here because of the relative prosperity. And frankly, I think that would continue to be the main issue.

And as I've said, we wouldn't have to 'get' entrenched, we already are.

Do me a favor, and read at least the first post of this thread.

"No one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, nor to delegate its initiation."

"Now, here I will differ from some anarchists, in that I do not support the use of retaliatory force, either. I see no need to inflict harm upon others who have harmed you in the past. What is done is done, and there is no turning back the clock. All that can be done is restitution."

Those are good ideas.  Really they are.  But how does unlimited immigration from violent societies help?  If you convert your people into a minority and the majority is dedicated to establishing their Caliphate, things will be bad for you.

Btw, I come to the US regularly.  The 'problem' with Mexican immigrants is like the 'problem' with Polish immigrants in France.  Its just a matter of tolerance and I know you guys will work it out as both sides are basically decent and civilised.  I would contrast with the problem of African immigration in Europe where the society is struggling with religious killings, honor killings, female circumcision and terrorism. 

I hope you can agree with me that setting some limit on such immigration is a decent and civilised thing to do.

myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2011, 06:16:08 PM
 #89

Those are good ideas.  Really they are.  But how does unlimited immigration from violent societies help?  If you convert your people into a minority and the majority is dedicated to establishing their Caliphate, things will be bad for you.

Btw, I come to the US regularly.  The 'problem' with Mexican immigrants is like the 'problem' with Polish immigrants in France.  Its just a matter of tolerance and I know you guys will work it out as both sides are basically decent and civilised.  I would contrast with the problem of African immigration in Europe where the society is struggling with religious killings, honor killings, female circumcision and terrorism. 

I hope you can agree with me that setting some limit on such immigration is a decent and civilised thing to do.

I see it as being less of a problem than you do. First, I don't, by a long shot, expect that to be the only immigration. With the economy I expect an Anarchistic or Libertarian society to have, workers will be flooding in from all societies. Second, A libertarian society will be more heavily armed than even the US is today. Open carry will be commonplace, as well as concealed carry, Especially if immigrant violence becomes a problem. Thirdly, There will not be enough of them to make anyone a minority, certainly not all at once. (and if there were, that would rightly be seen and treated as a hostile invasion) Violent individuals would be treated as criminals, peaceful individuals as friends. Darwin would take care of the rest.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 07:03:38 PM
 #90

Those are good ideas.  Really they are.  But how does unlimited immigration from violent societies help?  If you convert your people into a minority and the majority is dedicated to establishing their Caliphate, things will be bad for you.

Btw, I come to the US regularly.  The 'problem' with Mexican immigrants is like the 'problem' with Polish immigrants in France.  Its just a matter of tolerance and I know you guys will work it out as both sides are basically decent and civilised.  I would contrast with the problem of African immigration in Europe where the society is struggling with religious killings, honor killings, female circumcision and terrorism. 

I hope you can agree with me that setting some limit on such immigration is a decent and civilised thing to do.

I see it as being less of a problem than you do. First, I don't, by a long shot, expect that to be the only immigration. With the economy I expect an Anarchistic or Libertarian society to have, workers will be flooding in from all societies. Second, A libertarian society will be more heavily armed than even the US is today. Open carry will be commonplace, as well as concealed carry, Especially if immigrant violence becomes a problem. Thirdly, There will not be enough of them to make anyone a minority, certainly not all at once. (and if there were, that would rightly be seen and treated as a hostile invasion) Violent individuals would be treated as criminals, peaceful individuals as friends. Darwin would take care of the rest.

Oh come on - you already agreed that for the locals, wages will be reduced by uncontrolled immigration.  So the only immigration will be from places poorer than yours. 

You are importing heavily armed militias and you have the idealist hope they will suddenly give up their fundamental beliefs.  And you say that if you are wrong, you will have concealed carry of firearms to defend yourself.  Against people who the US Army has been unable to defeat.  Really?

Who benefits from lower wages for workers and a more violent society?  Remind me again - how is any of this good? 






myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2011, 07:28:59 PM
 #91

Oh come on - you already agreed that for the locals, wages will be reduced by uncontrolled immigration.  So the only immigration will be from places poorer than yours. 

You are importing heavily armed militias and you have the idealist hope they will suddenly give up their fundamental beliefs.  And you say that if you are wrong, you will have concealed carry of firearms to defend yourself.  Against people who the US Army has been unable to defeat.  Really?

Who benefits from lower wages for workers and a more violent society?  Remind me again - how is any of this good? 

You don't - I'd almost say you're refusing to - see the bigger picture. Richer societies also tend to be more controlled, so we'd be getting skilled workers from there, as well. And no, we're not "Importing violent militias" We're allowing people to come in. Peaceful ones will be treated with friendship, and violent ones will be treated as criminals. Should a violent militia come in, as I said, they will be treated as invaders. Also, you have to ask yourself why the US army is failing to defeat them. The US army is a traditional fighting force, invading, and attempting to defeat a force that is fighting for their homes, and blends in with the indigenous population. This is exactly the position any invading "Hostile militia" would put itself in.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Grant
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 07:34:20 PM
 #92

Thats why they will never stop attacking Americans and Europeans and all non-Muslims....

Who benefits from lower wages for workers and a more violent society?  Remind me again - how is any of this good?  


Troll alert ?

Or maybe you're just a conspiracy-theorist. I'm from Norway and i see how the massive inflow of foreigners has helped enterpreneurs to hire cheap labour to establish business. To put it short, if you don't see how you could benefit from this you are a moron. (this is pure arbitrage, leverage it while it's still available!)

FredericBastiat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
July 08, 2011, 07:43:04 PM
 #93

Here's your answer to the maximum role of Government. There isn't anything else (there might even be less).

THE LAW

Men, Women, Agent(s), Person(s), and Life collectively or individually have synonymous equivalent meaning herein. De facto entrusted crucially dependent Life admits safe guardianship or conveyance thereto.
1.   All men are equal in Rights.
  1.1.   All men are intrinsically free, whose expression when manifest, admits autonomy.
  1.2.   Rights exist because man exists (consequent to Life).
  1.3.   Rights are inalienable and inherent, hence discovered not created.
  1.4.   Man commits autonomous choices apart from all other men.
2.   Rights are defined as the Liberty to control, secure and defend one’s Property and Life.
3.   Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything not in violation of other’s Rights.
4.   Rights Violations are unprovoked physical aggressions (UPAs) initiated by man against another, or Breaches of Contract (BOCs), resulting in an incontrovertible diminishment in one’s Rights.
  4.1.   UPAs are non-consenting acts which cause an Object (Property or Life) to undergo a transferred or transformed change to the Object’s original energy state or condition.
  4.2.   Energy transfer to/from an Object or energy transformation of the Object occurs by means of three ways, namely: thermodynamic work, heat transfer, or mass transfer.
  4.3.   Contracts are compulsory promissory agreements involving Property or Life (and specific performances or forbearances therewith) between mutually consenting men.
  4.4.   Misrepresentation of Contract obligations or BOCs resulting in misappropriation of Property or Life, or expenditures related thereto, is subject to Rights Violations.
5.   Property can be anything comprised of physical material matter (PMM).
6.   Property is the exclusive non-simultaneous possession or dominion of discrete PMM.
  6.1.   Unconstrained/non-delimited/uncontrolled PMM (UPMM), UPMM effusions or energy transmissions, are not Property; they are ownerless nonexclusive UPMM or Emissions thereof, until physically made to become otherwise.
  6.2.   A Property’s inertial reference frame, dimensions, Emissions/Emitters, usage and genesis thereof, define and constitute its Property Scope Ambit (PSA).
  6.3.   PSAs that initiate tangible material perturbations which intersect or preclude another’s preexisting or antecedent PSAs may be subject to Rights Violations.
 6.4.   Preexisting antecedent unconstrained Emitters cannot proscribe the receipt of similar, both in magnitude and direction, intersecting Emissions Flux.
  6.5.   Property cannot transform into something extracorporeal, extrinsic or compulsory due to the manipulation or interpretation of its PMM composition.
  6.6.   Absent Contract and Force, Property or Life of one man shall not control, compel or impede Property or Life of another.
  6.7.   Unintentional personal ingress vouchsafes unimpeded passage and egress.
7.   Force is the means –proportionate to the aggression– to obstruct, inhibit or extirpate the Rights of any man who interferes with or imminently threatens the Rights of other men.
  7.1.   Force can only be applied to resolve Rights Violations and is consequently just.
  7.2.   Man, or an Agent to man, must ascertain that a Rights Violation has occurred.
  7.3.   Man is severally liable and accountable for solely his Rights Violations a posteriori.
8.   Justice, viz., lawfulness effectuates disjunctive Rights between men.
9.   That which is neither just nor lawful is Violence and imperils the Rights of man.
10.   Violence causes inequality (unequal in Rights of man) and is forbidden.


http://payb.tc/evo or
1F7venVKJa5CLw6qehjARkXBS55DU5YT59
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 07:48:22 PM
 #94

Oh come on - you already agreed that for the locals, wages will be reduced by uncontrolled immigration.  So the only immigration will be from places poorer than yours. 

You are importing heavily armed militias and you have the idealist hope they will suddenly give up their fundamental beliefs.  And you say that if you are wrong, you will have concealed carry of firearms to defend yourself.  Against people who the US Army has been unable to defeat.  Really?

Who benefits from lower wages for workers and a more violent society?  Remind me again - how is any of this good? 

You don't - I'd almost say you're refusing to - see the bigger picture. Richer societies also tend to be more controlled, so we'd be getting skilled workers from there, as well. And no, we're not "Importing violent militias" We're allowing people to come in. Peaceful ones will be treated with friendship, and violent ones will be treated as criminals. Should a violent militia come in, as I said, they will be treated as invaders. Also, you have to ask yourself why the US army is failing to defeat them. The US army is a traditional fighting force, invading, and attempting to defeat a force that is fighting for their homes, and blends in with the indigenous population. This is exactly the position any invading "Hostile militia" would put itself in.

You already agreed that wages will be pulled down.  There is a famine on in East Africa.  North Africa is in crisis and its people are already risking death in boats trying to make it to Europe. If any Western country allows uncontrolled immigration, tens of millions of people will move there and so far I see no evidence you have any plan how to absorb them. Even if you only take the people of Somalia in, you are taking on a challenge that would overwhelm any peaceful society.  

So far, you have been up front about the huge costs of your open border idea.  But you haven't suggested a benefit.  There must be some good from inviting in these 10s of millions of poor uneducated people who speak no English but are very good at killing infidels.  Whats the advantage that makes the lower wages and increased violence worthwhile ?

Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 07:52:23 PM
 #95

Thats why they will never stop attacking Americans and Europeans and all non-Muslims....

Who benefits from lower wages for workers and a more violent society?  Remind me again - how is any of this good?  


Troll alert ?

Or maybe you're just a conspiracy-theorist. I'm from Norway and i see how the massive inflow of foreigners has helped enterpreneurs to hire cheap labour to establish business. To put it short, if you don't see how you could benefit from this you are a moron. (this is pure arbitrage, leverage it while it's still available!)

Thanks Grant.  You've proved my point about immigration lowering wages.  Thats why Norway has such strict immigration controls.  You don't think, even for a second, that Norway could take in 10 million people from East Africa do you?

EDIT: Permits for skilled workers (granted for up to 12 months) and seasonal workers (3 months) can be applied for by jobseekers at a Norwegian Embassy or Norwegian Directorate of Immigration - http://www.udi.no/

Just thought I'd show you that your own Government has no interest in taking in a few million unskilled people.


Grant
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 07:57:06 PM
 #96


Thanks Grant.  You've proved my point about immigration lowering wages.  Thats why Norway has such strict immigration controls.  You don't think, even for a second, that Norway could take in 10 million people from East Africa do you?



We had for a while pretty much unlimited labour from east europe, yes idiots kept complaining, while entrepreurs kept booming. Globalism is maturing, this is the game. Either profit from it or stay the hell out of our way while we profit.

And no it didnt lower wages, most of the workers that got imported to Norway are simple workers. Higher positions benefited from it.

myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
July 08, 2011, 08:00:39 PM
 #97

Maybe you missed the part way up at the start of the discussion where I said "You're welcome to live in an area that restricts who can live there"

The benefit is that you don't have a state extorting the entire society to enforce an immigration policy that only a portion of the society supports.

And you're completely ignoring the fact that they would have to get here on their own dime.

Also:
Here's your answer to the maximum role of Government. There isn't anything else (there might even be less).

THE LAW

Reads like if a physicist wrote the constitution. I like.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 08:09:32 PM
 #98


Thanks Grant.  You've proved my point about immigration lowering wages.  Thats why Norway has such strict immigration controls.  You don't think, even for a second, that Norway could take in 10 million people from East Africa do you?



We had for a while pretty much unlimited labour from east europe, yes idiots kept complaining, while entrepreurs kept booming. Globalism is maturing, this is the game. Either profit from it or stay the hell out of our way while we profit.

And no it didnt lower wages, most of the workers that got imported to Norway are simple workers. Higher positions benefited from it.

You are not comparing like with like in that you are comparing less than 200k East European immigrants to 10s of millions from the rest of the world. 

I return to my question - could Norway take 10 million immigrants now?  Would you open the border to all who want to come to Europe from anywhere in the world?

Grant
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 08:24:57 PM
 #99

Would you open the border to all who want to come to Europe from anywhere in the world?

All borders should be open yes.

Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
July 08, 2011, 08:47:41 PM
 #100

Would you open the border to all who want to come to Europe from anywhere in the world?

All borders should be open yes.

Cleverly dodged the question Smiley  There is no question of all borders being open.  The UK is taking over 200,000 refugees and immigrants per year and thats as much as we can handle here. 

I return to my question - could Norway take 10 million immigrants now?


Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!