Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 51 of 51

Thread: Amash on the response to the virus

  1. #31

    It's Going to Blow Up in His Face

    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    We also need to give Amash some credit. When people are buying the devil's own dogma, sometimes it helps one tear it apart to say, "Let's suppose your belief has merit. Wouldn't it lead to this more sensible thing? And if your leaders in your dogma aren't doing that, does that not mean your leaders don't believe what they preach?"

    Is Amash trolling Congress and the electorate? Yes, yes he is. Accidentally or on purpose, he's playing some actual, useful, helpful chess against the fascists.
    Your scenario assumes the rationality of the general public that they would perceive Justin Amash's support for cash relief as "a reduction ad absurdum" against cronyism. However, I don't think the average American is that keen towards such tactics, especially given the fact that this crisis is being blown to proportions that increasingly try to justify more government involvement.

    But even so, Amash is supporting, de facto, socialism by his appraisal of cash relief to Americans. And that's all the electorate will see, especially "progressives" out there who are already praising Trump for his UBI talk.
    "Diverse weights are an abomination unto the LORD, and a false balance is not good." - Proverbs 20:23

    "Lowering interest rates punishes people for saving, thus encouraging consumers and businesses to spend every penny they make...The Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies harm the average American by eroding the dollar’s purchasing power." - Dr. Ron Paul



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    Your scenario assumes the rationality of the general public that they would perceive Justin Amash's support for cash relief as "a reduction ad absurdum" against cronyism. However, I don't think the average American is that keen towards such tactics, especially given the fact that this crisis is being blown to proportions that increasingly try to justify more government involvement.

    But even so, Amash is supporting, de facto, socialism by his appraisal of cash relief to Americans. And that's all the electorate will see, especially "progressives" out there who are already praising Trump for his UBI talk.
    It may blow up in his face. But face it: The only problem these Trumpublicans have with him is he's sounding a damned sight more populist than Trump is.
    Last edited by acptulsa; 03-22-2020 at 10:22 PM.



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    What are the deflationary effects of shutting in so much production and demand?
    In New Zealand:
    The Coastguard is a Charity
    Air Traffic Control is a private company run on user fees
    The DMV is a private non-profit
    Rescue helicopters and ambulances are operated by charities and are plastered with corporate logos
    The agriculture industry has zero subsidies
    5% of the national vote, gets you 5 seats in Parliament
    A tax return has 4 fields
    Business licenses aren't even a thing nor are capital gains taxes
    Constitutional right to refuse any type of medical care

  6. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by tebowlives View Post
    If government is ordering property owners to shut down their business, why shouldn't people be compensated?
    I want government employee pelts as compensation.

    Instead of cash (FRN's) fire five government employees for every small business that closes and forbid government from replacing them.

    This is the only mandate that would make both financial and ethical sense.

  7. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    Property owners also have the right to challenge the federal government on what constitutes an "emergency," especially if it affects their "bottom line." In any case, the responsibility to close business lies with the business owner, not the federal government, and because of that, business owners can refuse to comply, if they have better information or discernment that a shutdown is unnecessary.

    The fact that many states are designating certain businesses as "essential operations" reveals that property owners ought to have the freedom to remain open, of their own prerogative, without government interference. Private owners should decide whether their business is essential to the consumer, employees, and stakeholders, even in cases of public, medical concerns. And during such concerns, employees and customers have the liberty to decide if they want to work or buy/sell to those businesses. But the reality that businesses have to wait for a government entity to label them as "essential" in a crisis before they can continue their own business of their own capital and free will is the revelation that we're enslaved by the State.

    And that's my point. It is socialism in action by the fact that the federal government has arrogated to itself the authority to shut businesses down, at the behest of the federal government's own perception that a medical crisis exists, not of the property owner's discretion based on his or her own research, discernment, etc. It's not like federal governments don't lie about emergencies (false flags) and work their best to "never let a crisis go to waste." Private owners have the freedom to create their own "redress of grievances," too. But, no, we're seeing socialism rear its ugly head through the skin of a "national crisis," and even people like Justin Amash have to gaze in awe at it.
    It's not a perception that a medical crisis exists. It's a reality.
    Last edited by tebowlives; 03-23-2020 at 09:04 AM.

  8. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by cindy25 View Post
    shouldn't this be considered eminent domain?
    That's what I equated it too. Granted government has over reached with eminent domain.

  9. #37

    Do We Believe in the Right of Private Property, or Not?

    Quote Originally Posted by tebowlives View Post
    It's not a perception that a medical crisis exists. It's a reality.
    That's not the issue. The real issue is who's ultimately responsible for the affairs of a business during any crisis, and if you think the federal government has any authority to shut down a business against the would-be wishes of the property owner to stay open, then you're opening the door to allow socialism into the affairs of private individuals. The federal government, though properly instituted to defend against foreign enemies and administer justice within the jurisdiction of those employed by it, has no right to try to protect people and businesses from themselves. A "medical crisis" doesn't give them the authority to order a shutdown of a business because it's not their property.
    "Diverse weights are an abomination unto the LORD, and a false balance is not good." - Proverbs 20:23

    "Lowering interest rates punishes people for saving, thus encouraging consumers and businesses to spend every penny they make...The Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies harm the average American by eroding the dollar’s purchasing power." - Dr. Ron Paul

  10. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    That's not the issue. The real issue is who's ultimately responsible for the affairs of a business during any crisis, and if you think the federal government has any authority to shut down a business against the would-be wishes of the property owner to stay open, then you're opening the door to allow socialism into the affairs of private individuals. The federal government, though properly instituted to defend against foreign enemies and administer justice within the jurisdiction of those employed by it, has no right to try to protect people and businesses from themselves. A "medical crisis" doesn't give them the authority to order a shutdown of a business because it's not their property.
    ++++++ REP !
    “The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.”

    An Agorist Primer

  11. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    That's not the issue. The real issue is who's ultimately responsible for the affairs of a business during any crisis, and if you think the federal government has any authority to shut down a business against the would-be wishes of the property owner to stay open, then you're opening the door to allow socialism into the affairs of private individuals. The federal government, though properly instituted to defend against foreign enemies and administer justice within the jurisdiction of those employed by it, has no right to try to protect people and businesses from themselves. A "medical crisis" doesn't give them the authority to order a shutdown of a business because it's not their property.
    Your confusing two issues by combining them. It's about the fact that government has shut down those businesses. Those businesses had no choice. At least that's my point.

    Being in favor of allowing government to have emergency powers is another matter.

  12. #40
    no federal money for individuals or corporations. plan, save, and recover. Simple as that.
    Please consider donating to the Mises Caucus today. We are TAKING OVER the LP.

    We have big plans including creating a program to bring libertarians like Maj Toure and Tom Woods to college campuses.

    We have several LP Mises Caucus Members who won elected office in 2020 including multiple City Council seats.

    Your recurring donation is what helps us to set these ideas into motion.

    Donate today at www.TakeHumanAction.com



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41

    The Problem is Choice

    Quote Originally Posted by tebowlives View Post
    Your confusing two issues by combining them. It's about the fact that government has shut down those businesses. Those businesses had no choice. At least that's my point.

    Being in favor of allowing government to have emergency powers is another matter.
    [Bold emphasis mine]

    That's what I'm contending against. Of course, businesses had a choice whether to shut down or stay open during this pandemic; it's their property, after all. They could've challenged the federal and state governments by simply refusing to comply, and then settled the issue in the courts.

    But the fundamental principle of this issue is the right of private property and the freedom to keep it as the owner pleases. The federal government has no right to force a business to close its doors, but if a business owner does so, then the consequences of that fall on him or her, not the federal government because the owner always had a choice.

    That choice to close business by complying with a federal mandate shouldn't be rewarded by bailouts which come from further destruction of our currency through Fed-induced inflation.
    "Diverse weights are an abomination unto the LORD, and a false balance is not good." - Proverbs 20:23

    "Lowering interest rates punishes people for saving, thus encouraging consumers and businesses to spend every penny they make...The Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies harm the average American by eroding the dollar’s purchasing power." - Dr. Ron Paul

  15. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    [Bold emphasis mine]

    That's what I'm contending against. Of course, businesses had a choice whether to shut down or stay open during this pandemic; it's their property, after all. They could've challenged the federal and state governments by simply refusing to comply, and then settled the issue in the courts.

    But the fundamental principle of this issue is the right of private property and the freedom to keep it as the owner pleases. The federal government has no right to force a business to close its doors, but if a business owner does so, then the consequences of that fall on him or her, not the federal government because the owner always had a choice.

    That choice to close business by complying with a federal mandate shouldn't be rewarded by bailouts which come from further destruction of our currency through Fed-induced inflation.
    lol No a business told by government to shut down, has to shut down. They don't have a choice. I don't think there is a judge that would allow a business to continue to operate while the case was ongoing.

    Again this isn't about what you think should be done, it's about what should be done after a business is shutdown.

  16. #43

    Exposing the "Is/Ought Fallacy"

    Quote Originally Posted by tebowlives View Post
    lol No a business told by government to shut down, has to shut down. They don't have a choice. I don't think there is a judge that would allow a business to continue to operate while the case was ongoing.

    Again this isn't about what you think should be done, it's about what should be done after a business is shutdown.
    [Bold emphasis mine]

    No, they don't! Are you seriously going to defend the action of a federal government to shut down a private entity for its own *purposes? Can you not see how that is an act of socialist imposition upon the business affairs of a property owner?

    This is absolutely relevant to what should've been done, in the first place, because if the right of private property had been honored and upheld by the federal government, instead of reacting to a panic (provoked by the mainstream media, no less) by the call for more socialist policies through manipulation of monetary policies, then we wouldn't have to be here now trying to justify inflationary measures to prop up losses from businesses that were ordered to shut down arbitrarily.

    *I understand there is a public health concern from the federal government's perspective; however, the decision to close the doors of a business ought to stay with the owner of the business, for it's his prerogative to determine whether a health risk is sufficient to shut down production.
    "Diverse weights are an abomination unto the LORD, and a false balance is not good." - Proverbs 20:23

    "Lowering interest rates punishes people for saving, thus encouraging consumers and businesses to spend every penny they make...The Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies harm the average American by eroding the dollar’s purchasing power." - Dr. Ron Paul

  17. #44

    Exposing the Deflection

    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    [Bold emphasis mine]

    No, they don't! Are you seriously going to defend the action of a federal government to shut down a private entity for its own *purposes? Can you not see how that is an act of socialist imposition upon the business affairs of a property owner?

    This is absolutely relevant to what should've been done, in the first place, because if the right of private property had been honored and upheld by the federal government, instead of reacting to a panic (provoked by the mainstream media, no less) by the call for more socialist policies through manipulation of monetary policies, then we wouldn't have to be here now trying to justify inflationary measures to prop up losses from businesses that were ordered to shut down arbitrarily.

    *I understand there is a public health concern from the federal government's perspective; however, the decision to close the doors of a business ought to stay with the owner of the business, for it's his prerogative to determine whether a health risk is sufficient to shut down production.
    Again my comment isn't about what you think should have been done, it's about what should be done after a business is shutdown.
    Are you seriously going to keep ignoring that? And your response is absolutely not relevant, since it has nothing to do with me commenting on what to do after government shuts a business down.
    Last edited by tebowlives; 03-24-2020 at 07:38 AM.

  18. #45

    The Failure of Compliance

    Quote Originally Posted by tebowlives View Post
    Again my comment isn't about what you think should have been done, it's about what should be done after a business is shutdown.
    Are you seriously going to keep ignoring that? And your response is absolutely not relevant, since it has nothing to do with me commenting on what to do after government shuts a business down.
    I'm not ignoring your premise about what should be done after a business is shut down; I'm challenging the a priori notion that the federal government was in the right to order businesses to be shut down, in the first place, and whether private owners were in the right to comply. Once those two issues have been understood and resolved, then we can deal with the presumption that eminent domain has taken place by the federal government, which basically, is that it isn't a matter of eminent domain.

    The businesses who shut down by complying with federal government mandates (based on arguable evidence and public appeals to fear through the media), instead of their own decisive, informed choices based on their own conclusions of the risks of Coronavirus, are responsible for the losses that come with shutting down from compliance with federal mandates. Therefore, what needs to be done is simple: no bailouts for businesses nor workers, both of which should've planned ahead by having their own cash reserves in preparation for emergencies. It's not the Fed's role to devalue currency in order to subsidize poor planning nor poor decision-making by private entities.
    "Diverse weights are an abomination unto the LORD, and a false balance is not good." - Proverbs 20:23

    "Lowering interest rates punishes people for saving, thus encouraging consumers and businesses to spend every penny they make...The Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies harm the average American by eroding the dollar’s purchasing power." - Dr. Ron Paul

  19. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    I'm not ignoring your premise about what should be done after a business is shut down; I'm challenging the a priori notion that the federal government was in the right to order businesses to be shut down, in the first place, and whether private owners were in the right to comply. Once those two issues have been understood and resolved, then we can deal with the presumption that eminent domain has taken place by the federal government, which basically, is that it isn't a matter of eminent domain.

    The businesses who shut down by complying with federal government mandates (based on arguable evidence and public appeals to fear through the media), instead of their own decisive, informed choices based on their own conclusions of the risks of Coronavirus, are responsible for the losses that come with shutting down from compliance with federal mandates. Therefore, what needs to be done is simple: no bailouts for businesses nor workers, both of which should've planned ahead by having their own cash reserves in preparation for emergencies. It's not the Fed's role to devalue currency in order to subsidize poor planning nor poor decision-making by private entities.

    Exactly!
    @tebowlives - Instead of kowtowing government abuses/endless bailouts, we should be standing on principle, promoting and educating to take back our rights.


    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Theocrat again.
    “The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.”

    An Agorist Primer

  20. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    I'm not ignoring your premise about what should be done after a business is shut down; I'm challenging the a priori notion that the federal government was in the right to order businesses to be shut down, in the first place, and whether private owners were in the right to comply. Once those two issues have been understood and resolved, then we can deal with the presumption that eminent domain has taken place by the federal government, which basically, is that it isn't a matter of eminent domain.
    You're still not getting it. It's not like eminent domain, it's the same thought process as eminent domain. An emergency. Like during WW2. A state of emergency allows things like the suspension of laws and orders of evacuation.
    If you want to say it really hasn't reached that level, understood.

    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    The businesses who shut down by complying with federal government mandates (based on arguable evidence and public appeals to fear through the media), instead of their own decisive, informed choices based on their own conclusions of the risks of Coronavirus, are responsible for the losses that come with shutting down from compliance with federal mandates. Therefore, what needs to be done is simple: no bailouts for businesses nor workers, both of which should've planned ahead by having their own cash reserves in preparation for emergencies. It's not the Fed's role to devalue currency in order to subsidize poor planning nor poor decision-making by private entities.
    You keep repeating yourself and have not presented anything new. An emergency based on the choice to shut down vs because government said to do it. It's that simple.

  21. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by PAF View Post
    Exactly!
    @tebowlives - Instead of kowtowing government abuses/endless bailouts, we should be standing on principle, promoting and educating to take back our rights.


    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Theocrat again.
    @PAF Instead of making things up and creating fake drama like kowtowing to government abuses/endless bailouts, cats and dogs living together, how about responding to the topic?

    It's not about anything but this one event.



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #49

    You're Assuming It's an Emergency and the Legitimacy of the Feds to Stop Businesses

    Quote Originally Posted by tebowlives View Post
    You're still not getting it. It's not like eminent domain, it's the same thought process as eminent domain. An emergency. Like during WW2. A state of emergency allows things like the suspension of laws and orders of evacuation.
    If you want to say it really hasn't reached that level, understood.

    You keep repeating yourself and have not presented anything new. An emergency based on the choice to shut down vs because government said to do it. It's that simple.
    I don't think you understand that I'm criticizing the assumption that it's "an emergency based on the choice to shut down," which, of course, ties into their saying to businesses, "Do it." There are prerequisites to my argument.
    "Diverse weights are an abomination unto the LORD, and a false balance is not good." - Proverbs 20:23

    "Lowering interest rates punishes people for saving, thus encouraging consumers and businesses to spend every penny they make...The Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies harm the average American by eroding the dollar’s purchasing power." - Dr. Ron Paul

  24. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    I don't think you understand that I'm criticizing the assumption that it's "an emergency based on the choice to shut down," which, of course, ties into their saying to businesses, "Do it." There are prerequisites to my argument.
    Don't understand your post here. You are criticizing because you don't think it's an emergency or are you saying government should not be able to shut down a business based on emergency or at least they can't until they meet certain prerequisites?

    And no I'm not assuming it's an emergency. I'm saying if it's been declared an emergency then government can pay people. I thought I was clear. Guess not
    Last edited by tebowlives; 03-24-2020 at 06:24 PM.

  25. #51

    What I Mean

    Quote Originally Posted by tebowlives View Post
    Don't understand your post here. You are criticizing because you don't think it's an emergency or are you saying government should not be able to shut down a business based on emergency or at least they can't until they meet certain prerequisites?

    And no I'm not assuming it's an emergency. I'm saying if it's been declared an emergency then government can pay people. I thought I was clear. Guess not
    I'm saying that before we can determine whether a government can order a business to shut down because of an emergency, we have to, first, resolve whether a business has the right to determine on its own that such an emergency is sufficient to close its doors, independent of a government mandate. That's the prerequisite of dealing with what to do when a government shuts down a business based on an emergency.

    If businesses have a right to not comply, based on their own research and convictions that a "crisis" isn't detrimental to staying open to the public (and I believe they do), then the issue of what to do when a government shuts down a business takes care of itself.
    "Diverse weights are an abomination unto the LORD, and a false balance is not good." - Proverbs 20:23

    "Lowering interest rates punishes people for saving, thus encouraging consumers and businesses to spend every penny they make...The Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies harm the average American by eroding the dollar’s purchasing power." - Dr. Ron Paul

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Similar Threads

  1. Bourbon virus - New quick killing virus spread by ticks
    By donnay in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-11-2015, 08:43 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-12-2013, 01:37 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-07-2013, 07:21 PM
  4. Justin Amash Response to Obamacare Ruling
    By Spoa in forum Justin Amash Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-28-2012, 08:32 PM
  5. Anti-virus live virus. very nasty
    By sarahgop in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-14-2010, 03:54 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •