Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Don't tell me government and its contractors only employ an inconsequential percentage of the population. Tell these people:
https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/...-in-the-nation
I know you know that The Hill is only scratching the surface. But are they counting suppliers? Are they counting suppliers to contractors? Because government is dictating to them, too.
Aside from the direct pressure that some people on this thread are rightly posting about, most of the info about vaccines out there is due to government trampling of free speech through the corporations.
It's cut and dried, get the boot of my neck. I don't care if it's corporate or government.
...
Government uses banks and insurance companies to arm twist businesses into things like vaccine mandates too.
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
Meanwhile, in other absolutely unrelated news:
https://twitter.com/birnbaum_e/statu...91815082192900
This whole thread is depressing. As far as I can tell you're the only one who passes this simple litmus test in this thread. The Count and Sonny Tufts agree with the vaccine mandate but only for that specific case, not for the general principle of liberty.
From Walter Williams:
"The principles that apply to one's commitment to free speech also apply to one's commitment to freedom of association. Like the true test of one's commitment to free speech, the true test of one's commitment to freedom of association does not come when he permits people to associate in ways he deems acceptable. The true test of one's commitment to freedom of association comes when he permits people to be free to associate — or not to associate — in ways he deems offensive."
The only one? You weren't paying much attention, then:
Last edited by Occam's Banana; 09-09-2021 at 02:13 PM.
More or less depressing than the number of seemingly intelligent people who can't see the iron hand of Washington, D.C. behind it all?
Does or does not OSHA demanding jab requirements make the whole question moot, at least for employers of any significant size?
The Montana legislature guaranteed us a chance to take this to SCOTUS as a Tenth Amendment question. Do tell us what's wrong with that.
Yeah, of course there's government pressure on businesses to have vaccine mandates. That solution is for that to stop. The worst thing you can do is ban employers from vaccine mandates. That's the textbook definition of fascism.
Government intervention as an excuse for more government intervention is a very bad idea.
How was Montana supposed to fight? Was it supposed to intervene against federal overreach by passing a law against the Congress passing laws? Do you figure that would have worked?
Do you choose to ignore the evidence that Zuckerberg was funded by the CIA? Is it unreasonable to demand a "private company" obey the First Amendment if it was created by a government entity? I, for one, do not consider privatization as a valid loophole to subvert the Constitution.
This is a state government trying to find a way to intervene in a federal intervention. I respectfully disagree that it's a bad idea for state governments to intervene in federal government overreach. And I care not how much you and Paul Krugman stand by and sniff at me for applauding.
Would I agree with the law under less dire circumstances? Not so much. Would it have been better to load it with "when coerced by the federal government" caveats? Maybe, if that could have been done without either getting it slapped down as a matter of course, or leaving it with a loophole you could sail the Queen Elizabeth II through. As it is, however, I find I cannot help but look favorably upon this valiant effort.
I agree about OSHA.
What if Montana banned employers from paying employees less than 100 dollars an hours? Would you support that?
Don't you see that the real issue is not whether YOU think it's a good idea but whether the EMPLOYER has the right to decide whether it's a good idea?
The problem is that among libertarians and their fellow travelers, there are too many people who imagine that the "private sector" and the "free market" are the same thing. They are not. We have a "private sector" but we do NOT have a "free market." The government and "private sector" are not somehow entirely separate stovepipes that are wholly independent of one another, without any feedback at all. Quite the opposite - they are incestuously intertwined with one another. For just one of myriad possible examples of this dynamic, many of these "private" mandate policies are almost certainly being implemented defensively as a hedge against a kind of "regime uncertainty" and would not otherwise have been implemented if not for all the hysteria that has been fomented by the government.
Another problem is that even among libertarians and their fellow travelers who recognize all of that, there are too many who think that the appropriate response is yet more government interference - for example, in the form of legislatively banning those "private sector" policies. But more government is NOT going to solve the problems caused by too much government.
And so libertarians and their fellow travelers end up ceaselessly bickering with one another on these interminable "no, you! ... no, you!" merry-go-rounds ...
Last edited by Occam's Banana; 09-09-2021 at 03:20 PM.
The jab is provided Free For All.
Companies, institutions, etc. can/will be "reimbursed", on the tax payer dime.
Companies provide/offer health insurance. Health insurance providers abide by contracts and government guidelines.
Already, without digging deeper into various other contracts, state/federal, corporation status, etc., it is a "multi-lateral" agreement.
In other words, the company, and you, are being coerced. Which does not operate in a true Free Market environment.
For those defending the company's "right" to mandate the jab... best do some soul-searching.
How's that for a litmus test.
____________
An Agorist Primer ~ Samuel Edward Konkin III (free PDF download)
The End of All Evil ~ Jeremy Locke (free PDF download)
Would I support that? It depends. Did the Federal government ban, or threaten to ban, anyone from paying a hundred or more per hour?
The rights of the employer? Does a federal contractor have any rights other than giving up on getting some of our tax dollars back into the civilian population? Does an employer have the right to ignore OSHA?
I full well realize beltway libertarians will stand by while government perpetrates any number of abuses, refusing to muddy their skirts, rather than suffer the moral humiliation of fighting fire with fire. I, however, am not a beltway libertarian.
Yes, a lack of principle got us into this mess, and abandoning our principles to get out of it is liable to lead to us jumping from the frying pan into the fire. But one government fighting another government's intervention is a far cry from the Hegelian trap.
Last edited by RJB; 09-09-2021 at 03:26 PM.
...
T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men
"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato
We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me
Originally Posted by Philhelm
Well, @Krugminator2? Montana "impinging on the rights of" people whose hands are already forced by insurance companies and lawsuit threats elicited plenty of your verbiage. They are now subject to an executive dictat with which Congress had nothing to do. Did you save any moral outrage for this?
That's what happens when you have a private sector without a free market - every day has the potential to be a horrible day for personal liberty.
It's a problem that can't be solved by making the government even more overweening - or the market even less free - than it already is.
Last edited by Occam's Banana; 09-09-2021 at 03:44 PM.
Ok so the trick to liberty is to ban the opposite of what the federal government bans?
Since the fed bans employers paying under $7 an hour Montana would have to ban employers from paying over $7 an hour in the pursuit of liberty. Who knew liberty was so complex?
I'm going to crawl back to the economics forum where it's safer.
What gets me in this case is that the federal government incentivizing vaccine mandates is a baby step towards fascism, but the supposed "cure" is to BAN vaccine mandates? That's not a baby step towards fascism that IS fascism!!!
It sucks that the federal govt is doing that but virtually anything would be a better response than that.
How about if Montana levies a 100% tax on the incentives the fed is giving out to businesses?
Liberty needs no tricks, those who would destroy it do. Your minimum wage examples are a trick, as all of that is a far cry from "take this thing into your body or starve". Making a point about apples by talking about oranges is an age old trick.
But hey. When in Rome, talk about grapefruit. The federal government decrees that euthanizing anyone over 70 isn't murder, and Blue Cross/Blue Shield starts shooting any of their elderly customers who come in their office as trespassers who are threatening the fiscal health of the corporation. Should Montana rewrite their murder statute to accommodate this behavior?
Absolutely not. That's just more of the same market-warping bull$#@! that's causing the problem in the first place. Rather than creating yet more new rules that will only serve to warp the market even further, what states ought to be doing is telling the feds that they can just go straight to hell, pure and simple - and that they can take their damnable regulations with them.
For example, when it comes to Biden's just announced anti-COVID plan, the states ought to be making it clear that any attempt by OSHA (or any other federal agency) to actually impose any of that bull$#@! on their citizens or their businesses will be resisted - up to and including the arrest and prosecution of any of their agents who attempt to actually enforce any of the feds' nonsense.
That is the kind of thing they ought to be doing.
But given that the states are now pretty much just ballsless, pseudo-autonomous administrative districts of the federal government, the best that we can probably hope for is that they'll sue the feds in court, for whatever good that might end up doing.
Last edited by Occam's Banana; 09-09-2021 at 04:41 PM.
As long as you are harming no one but yourself, not a single entity on this earth has the right to tell you what you can and can not do with your life. Period, end of story. Any that let themselves be tricked into believing otherwise deserve everything brought upon them. If you are the one to stop me from living my life, then by god make your best play. It better be a damn good one, otherwise we both die at least.
"The issue is that you to define the best candidate solely based upon what they stand for." - CaptLouAlbano
This is the mindset trying to take hold on RPF.
"Kelly Thomas did this to himself." - FrankRep
Connect With Us