The real State of the Union is very weak. The US debt is bigger than ever, the liberties of people are weaker than ever, the government is more powerful in terms of what it can do to individuals (and even citizens of other countries) than ever.
The economy of USA (and Europe) are weak and getting weaker, the inflation is higher and getting higher, the wars are long and getting longer, the corruption - meddling of government in business and as a corollary meddling of business in government is enormous. Iran and India are now trading oil for gold, and in USA people who show the obvious illegitimacy of government power are thrown to jail - politicalprisoners.
Government is supposed to be there to protect your liberties and freedoms, but this does not mean to protect your liberties and freedoms against other non-government civilians.
Government is inherently evil, but it must exist to occupy the space where otherwise the evil would exist that didn't have public legitimacy on its side.
The point of government is to exist to occupy space of where the inherent evil lives and to protect the individuals from the inherent evil that occupies that space. Now, whether it is realistic to expect some entity to occupy space of evil and not turn evil itself... (and my argument goes further, but I am not going there in this discussion), but basically government exists to protect people FROM ITSELF.
It is the government force that we are all vulnerable to. Other individuals and companies - that's a private matter.
Now governments failed people completely, including the court system, the Supreme Court in USA as well, so this just shows how inherent the evil is and how it permeates into whatever entity that is occupying that space.
But the Constitution is law above government, and government broke that law long ago and it continues to brake it every day. Government protecting people from government does not mean that government must protect people from other people.
The theory of government and understanding of government is completely flawed.
The system that exists to supposedly protect people from crime should not be the same and must not be conspiring with the system that exists to occupy the space of evil government power.
Once you mix together the system of government, which is supposed to provide you with freedoms from itself, and you mix it with system that may be set up to provide you with security from other individuals, you end up with a government system that has the tools and the will to destroy your liberties.
The separation of power (legislative, judicial, executive) in government is not done correctly and that's where the fault in current government theory shows itself.
Repeal is another side of it, but here is what everybody should understand - the moral thing to do is this: when presented with any law that concerns an individual and the government on the opposite sides, always immediately assume that the government is wrong, and always strike down the law.
Always break the law where it concerns individual vs government, always pay no taxes where you can and try to pay no taxes where the government says you must. Avoid giving any money to the government, avoid agreeing with government on anything always.
Basically the only moral thing to do is always to put the individual above the government. Government is always wrong and the individual is always right.
As to laws that are related to entities that have nothing to do with the government, that is a different story, there it's basically - do no harm.
The most important right that a jury member has is the right to judge the law, and apparently it is very dangerous in USA to notify juries of their right to do so and judges are on the side of the government on this, so they actually place people to jail who notify juries of this, even though this is an extremely important power that common people have to fight unjust laws - just always find the defendant not-guilty because the law is unjust.
One of the cases of this is discussed in this interview (the interview starts at the minute 41).
Interview is with Bernard von NotHaus, founder of NORFED & the Liberty Dollar, on exhausting his appeals process and his forthcoming prison sentencing.
Of-course do not forget that there are other political prisoners in USA, Irwin Schiff is one of them, this is an interview with Irwin Schiff from 2004, where he talks about his books where he predicts the economic collapse, education collapse, housing crisis, debt crisis, eventual collapse of the dollar, destruction of the manufacturing base in USA. Irwin Schiff also talks about the reasons for the incoming problems and he is giving an interesting look at the history of US over the past 100 years and how economy was changing. Also throughout the interview (really, it has to be viewed fully to see all of the points), Irwin Schiff shows that the income taxes in USA are voluntary and are collected illegally. Of-course he is spending 12 years in prison even though all of the evidence shows that he should not have been convicted, but the judge in the appeal case is refusing to look at the evidence.
So my point with all this is that AFAIC it is a good thing for the jury to be able to get some information that they don't have, because too often it looks like they are selected specifically in a way that would prevent anybody with any knowledge of the problems with the system from being in jury.
Jury nullification needs to be taught in school on day one, and of-course in the government ran schools it's not.
By the way, now with the NDAA signed by Obama, Bernard von NotHaus can in principle be 'disappeared' by the military and held indefinitely in a military prison because he was deemed a 'terrorist' for selling silver 10-20 Liberty dollar coins (of-course there are no silver 10-20 dollar USD that are used, these cannot be confused with actual USD and anybody who owns Liberty dollars is making a profit in terms of USD, which is being destroyed.) So do we need jury that are knowledgeable of what the system is like today or not?
Nullification - this is what all juries must be told. Nullify all laws that government is using to convict people whenever it concerns individual rights, property rights, etc. Government is the evil today, nothing else, nullify all laws.
Apple is a company that is making money for its investors, so it's helping the people it's supposed to help - investors.
Apple is a company that builds products that apparently people like to use - it's definitely increasing the wealth and prosperity of people by allowing them the privilege to buy Apple products.
Apple is a company that creates tens or maybe hundreds of thousands of jobs, maybe even into millions, given all the supply chains, shipping routes, etc. Apple pays salaries and contract fees and it buys all sorts of materials. All kinds of taxes are paid with money that is generated by Apple.
Apple has done more for the economy and society than anybody can ever expect one company to do, so they are doing much more than anything anybody is doing, including all GOVERNMENTS combined.
You, on the other hand, aren't doing much at all, you are slacking off, not hiring people, not allowing others to participate in investments that you are leading, you probably don't create any products on your own that anybody cares about.
So you can shove that attitude where the sun don't shine.
The problem with you conservatives is that you only care for yourselves. You can't even comprehend the idea that people might care for another. The idea that I can look at a guy on the streets, and see a human being, not just some cockroach to be (at best) ignored is utterly alien to you. You're fucking sociopaths. Gee, wasn't that fun and productive?
- by the looks of it it's you, who only cares about himself, you want others to give you stuff you clearly didn't earn.
Apple provides the world with products people want, jobs people do and wealth that it creates, so much of that goes into the economy, in all ways, from taxes, to just purchasing power and new business opportunities and investment for people who want to participate in Apple's success by buying shares of their company.
Apple certainly does much MORE than their fair share, why the fuck are you slacking off?
You know the truth, which is that people don't like oil companies because they don't like paying for gas and for government oil companies are always an easy scapegoat - the evil 'speculators'.
Never mind that they are doing an amazing job of pumping out the stuff, shipping, refining it and delivering it without too many glitches to EVERYBODY EVERYDAY.
Cash is completely irrelevant, only more production can pay for other increase in production.
When a consumer buys an iPhone, it either means he is going to under-consume elsewhere or he has to produce more of something else himself.
Every new business that creates new stuff adds more wealth, doesn't extract it from anything else.
Cash is only meaningful in the sense that it represents store of value, medium of exchange and unit of account and given a stable amount of it in the system, the prices for any new goods must fall, as they do when there is no inflation that is created mostly by the government.
So do you find yourself responsible for all the killing that is done in your name with some of your money, when your government goes to fight whatever wars it chooses this week? All the people killed, do you have common responsibility?
- this is my last comment as a response to any of yours regardless of the topic.
There's still no reason why a municipal government should not be able to provide this to its citizens should the private market fail. And there are many, many, many documented cases of the private market failing.
First: I said it's a local matter in the original comment.
Second: there are no market failures, market never fails. The consequences of market FIXING a problem that government creates can be unpleasant or even terrible, but it's not a failure of a market, it's market at work.
Government does not own any resources, it does not produce any resources, it does not process any resources, it's all people who do so. Wealth is not created by government, it's created by people.
Government can confiscate it, likely steal it and redistribute it according to whatever plan.
All of the things you listed are a violation of human rights if they are done by government without people giving permission to the government to do so, that's why there are supposed to be jury in the court room - people judging people, not government judging people.
Correct, if one individual murders another individual, it's not the same situation as with government and individual.
It's not the 'right to life' that's violated, but it does not mean it's not a criminal offence - a contract between people, which may require punishment.
The right there is your right to liberty etc., so before a government can take away your right and put you to jail, it requires that the people act on this situation, it's not the government that is taking your right to liberty, government is not allowed to do so - it's the people who can take your right away, but then the people must do so in court.
So once again, before your right to freedom and maybe right to property and right to life is about to be violated, it is not government that is going to violate it, it up to people to give government the permission to violate it or not, thus jury.
Correct, food and shelter are never anything close to being a 'fundamental human right'. You got it.
As to liberty - it is.
People have to work, they have a fundamental right to 'pursue happiness' and that means they have the fundamental right not to have government stand in their way while they are looking for work or doing a business, growing their food, or whatever they do. Government must not be allowed to violate the fundamental human right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and so while a person is earning an income and is using part of the money to pay for shelter, government cannot prevent that from happening.
Agree, and that's a violation of human rights in case of capital punishment. As to imprisonment - federal government is not even authorised to do it, it's a State issue in US, but it's perverted, especially with the racist drug war and racist wars around the globe.
Sure, but we recognise that liberty is part of the fundamental human right and the fact that some governments support slavery just shows that those governments are not in support of human rights.
Also if you want to see an example of the first amendment right (and various other rights as well) being violated, watch this video.
A right is not something that applies in a relationship between you and your neighbour, it's only a meaningful construct in relation of an individual and the collective. Individual has fundamental rights, and the government is not allowed to violate them, that's the purpose of the concept, not something that defines your relationship to any other equivalent to you entity.
No, power, clean water and 9/11 are not fundamental human rights, so why would I need to explain that they are?
Fundamental human right is something that human has fundamentally and something that government is not allowed to steal and destroy - life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.
The entire concept of what a 'right' is of-course only is meaningful in the relation between an individual and the collective, not an individual and another individual, or individual and a business or a business and a business.
A human right is only what government cannot take away.
Slashdot Mirror
The real State of the Union is very weak. The US debt is bigger than ever, the liberties of people are weaker than ever, the government is more powerful in terms of what it can do to individuals (and even citizens of other countries) than ever.
The economy of USA (and Europe) are weak and getting weaker, the inflation is higher and getting higher, the wars are long and getting longer, the corruption - meddling of government in business and as a corollary meddling of business in government is enormous. Iran and India are now trading oil for gold, and in USA people who show the obvious illegitimacy of government power are thrown to jail - political prisoners.
Do not forget.
Government is supposed to be there to protect your liberties and freedoms, but this does not mean to protect your liberties and freedoms against other non-government civilians.
Government is inherently evil, but it must exist to occupy the space where otherwise the evil would exist that didn't have public legitimacy on its side.
The point of government is to exist to occupy space of where the inherent evil lives and to protect the individuals from the inherent evil that occupies that space. Now, whether it is realistic to expect some entity to occupy space of evil and not turn evil itself ... (and my argument goes further, but I am not going there in this discussion), but basically government exists to protect people FROM ITSELF.
It is the government force that we are all vulnerable to. Other individuals and companies - that's a private matter.
Now governments failed people completely, including the court system, the Supreme Court in USA as well, so this just shows how inherent the evil is and how it permeates into whatever entity that is occupying that space.
But the Constitution is law above government, and government broke that law long ago and it continues to brake it every day. Government protecting people from government does not mean that government must protect people from other people.
The theory of government and understanding of government is completely flawed.
The system that exists to supposedly protect people from crime should not be the same and must not be conspiring with the system that exists to occupy the space of evil government power.
Once you mix together the system of government, which is supposed to provide you with freedoms from itself, and you mix it with system that may be set up to provide you with security from other individuals, you end up with a government system that has the tools and the will to destroy your liberties.
The separation of power (legislative, judicial, executive) in government is not done correctly and that's where the fault in current government theory shows itself.
Repeal is another side of it, but here is what everybody should understand - the moral thing to do is this: when presented with any law that concerns an individual and the government on the opposite sides, always immediately assume that the government is wrong, and always strike down the law.
Always break the law where it concerns individual vs government, always pay no taxes where you can and try to pay no taxes where the government says you must. Avoid giving any money to the government, avoid agreeing with government on anything always.
Basically the only moral thing to do is always to put the individual above the government. Government is always wrong and the individual is always right.
As to laws that are related to entities that have nothing to do with the government, that is a different story, there it's basically - do no harm.
A tank. It's good to buy your kids a tank - it's not extremely fast and it's very heavy and the other car is always the crumple zone.
The most important right that a jury member has is the right to judge the law, and apparently it is very dangerous in USA to notify juries of their right to do so and judges are on the side of the government on this, so they actually place people to jail who notify juries of this, even though this is an extremely important power that common people have to fight unjust laws - just always find the defendant not-guilty because the law is unjust.
One of the cases of this is discussed in this interview (the interview starts at the minute 41).
Interview is with Bernard von NotHaus, founder of NORFED & the Liberty Dollar, on exhausting his appeals process and his forthcoming prison sentencing.
This is the information on how you can help show your support by writing the Judge in Bernard's case!
Of-course do not forget that there are other political prisoners in USA, Irwin Schiff is one of them, this is an interview with Irwin Schiff from 2004, where he talks about his books where he predicts the economic collapse, education collapse, housing crisis, debt crisis, eventual collapse of the dollar, destruction of the manufacturing base in USA. Irwin Schiff also talks about the reasons for the incoming problems and he is giving an interesting look at the history of US over the past 100 years and how economy was changing. Also throughout the interview (really, it has to be viewed fully to see all of the points), Irwin Schiff shows that the income taxes in USA are voluntary and are collected illegally. Of-course he is spending 12 years in prison even though all of the evidence shows that he should not have been convicted, but the judge in the appeal case is refusing to look at the evidence.
So my point with all this is that AFAIC it is a good thing for the jury to be able to get some information that they don't have, because too often it looks like they are selected specifically in a way that would prevent anybody with any knowledge of the problems with the system from being in jury.
Jury nullification needs to be taught in school on day one, and of-course in the government ran schools it's not.
By the way, now with the NDAA signed by Obama, Bernard von NotHaus can in principle be 'disappeared' by the military and held indefinitely in a military prison because he was deemed a 'terrorist' for selling silver 10-20 Liberty dollar coins (of-course there are no silver 10-20 dollar USD that are used, these cannot be confused with actual USD and anybody who owns Liberty dollars is making a profit in terms of USD, which is being destroyed.) So do we need jury that are knowledgeable of what the system is like today or not?
Nullification - this is what all juries must be told. Nullify all laws that government is using to convict people whenever it concerns individual rights, property rights, etc. Government is the evil today, nothing else, nullify all laws.
Can't just look at a symptom of a problem without realising and attacking the root cause of it. Abolish copyrights and patents.
And who is going to enforce that exactly and why would anybody sign under that?
Good thing Palin wasn't born there.
Apple has no duty of any kind to help anybody.
Apple is a company that is making money for its investors, so it's helping the people it's supposed to help - investors.
Apple is a company that builds products that apparently people like to use - it's definitely increasing the wealth and prosperity of people by allowing them the privilege to buy Apple products.
Apple is a company that creates tens or maybe hundreds of thousands of jobs, maybe even into millions, given all the supply chains, shipping routes, etc. Apple pays salaries and contract fees and it buys all sorts of materials. All kinds of taxes are paid with money that is generated by Apple.
Apple has done more for the economy and society than anybody can ever expect one company to do, so they are doing much more than anything anybody is doing, including all GOVERNMENTS combined.
You, on the other hand, aren't doing much at all, you are slacking off, not hiring people, not allowing others to participate in investments that you are leading, you probably don't create any products on your own that anybody cares about.
So you can shove that attitude where the sun don't shine.
Thumbs up.
The problem with you conservatives is that you only care for yourselves. You can't even comprehend the idea that people might care for another. The idea that I can look at a guy on the streets, and see a human being, not just some cockroach to be (at best) ignored is utterly alien to you. You're fucking sociopaths. Gee, wasn't that fun and productive?
- by the looks of it it's you, who only cares about himself, you want others to give you stuff you clearly didn't earn.
Apple provides the world with products people want, jobs people do and wealth that it creates, so much of that goes into the economy, in all ways, from taxes, to just purchasing power and new business opportunities and investment for people who want to participate in Apple's success by buying shares of their company.
Apple certainly does much MORE than their fair share, why the fuck are you slacking off?
So? The most important thing to an individual is his liberty from the collective forcing itself upon him. Life doesn't matter without liberty at all.
You know the truth, which is that people don't like oil companies because they don't like paying for gas and for government oil companies are always an easy scapegoat - the evil 'speculators'.
Never mind that they are doing an amazing job of pumping out the stuff, shipping, refining it and delivering it without too many glitches to EVERYBODY EVERYDAY.
Cash is completely irrelevant, only more production can pay for other increase in production.
When a consumer buys an iPhone, it either means he is going to under-consume elsewhere or he has to produce more of something else himself.
Every new business that creates new stuff adds more wealth, doesn't extract it from anything else.
Cash is only meaningful in the sense that it represents store of value, medium of exchange and unit of account and given a stable amount of it in the system, the prices for any new goods must fall, as they do when there is no inflation that is created mostly by the government.
Abolish copyrights and patents - government regulations at work,
and that's all I have to say on this topic.
So do you find yourself responsible for all the killing that is done in your name with some of your money, when your government goes to fight whatever wars it chooses this week? All the people killed, do you have common responsibility?
Whatever you say, screwball.
- this is my last comment as a response to any of yours regardless of the topic.
There's still no reason why a municipal government should not be able to provide this to its citizens should the private market fail. And there are many, many, many documented cases of the private market failing.
First: I said it's a local matter in the original comment.
Second: there are no market failures, market never fails. The consequences of market FIXING a problem that government creates can be unpleasant or even terrible, but it's not a failure of a market, it's market at work.
Now, fuck off.
Government has no resources, none.
Government does not own any resources, it does not produce any resources, it does not process any resources, it's all people who do so. Wealth is not created by government, it's created by people.
Government can confiscate it, likely steal it and redistribute it according to whatever plan.
All of the things you listed are a violation of human rights if they are done by government without people giving permission to the government to do so, that's why there are supposed to be jury in the court room - people judging people, not government judging people.
Correct, if one individual murders another individual, it's not the same situation as with government and individual.
It's not the 'right to life' that's violated, but it does not mean it's not a criminal offence - a contract between people, which may require punishment.
The right there is your right to liberty etc., so before a government can take away your right and put you to jail, it requires that the people act on this situation, it's not the government that is taking your right to liberty, government is not allowed to do so - it's the people who can take your right away, but then the people must do so in court.
So once again, before your right to freedom and maybe right to property and right to life is about to be violated, it is not government that is going to violate it, it up to people to give government the permission to violate it or not, thus jury.
Correct, food and shelter are never anything close to being a 'fundamental human right'. You got it.
As to liberty - it is.
People have to work, they have a fundamental right to 'pursue happiness' and that means they have the fundamental right not to have government stand in their way while they are looking for work or doing a business, growing their food, or whatever they do. Government must not be allowed to violate the fundamental human right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and so while a person is earning an income and is using part of the money to pay for shelter, government cannot prevent that from happening.
Agree, and that's a violation of human rights in case of capital punishment. As to imprisonment - federal government is not even authorised to do it, it's a State issue in US, but it's perverted, especially with the racist drug war and racist wars around the globe.
Sure, but we recognise that liberty is part of the fundamental human right and the fact that some governments support slavery just shows that those governments are not in support of human rights.
Also if you want to see an example of the first amendment right (and various other rights as well) being violated, watch this video.
You are so off the mark...
A right is not something that applies in a relationship between you and your neighbour, it's only a meaningful construct in relation of an individual and the collective. Individual has fundamental rights, and the government is not allowed to violate them, that's the purpose of the concept, not something that defines your relationship to any other equivalent to you entity.
No, power, clean water and 9/11 are not fundamental human rights, so why would I need to explain that they are?
Fundamental human right is something that human has fundamentally and something that government is not allowed to steal and destroy - life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.
The entire concept of what a 'right' is of-course only is meaningful in the relation between an individual and the collective, not an individual and another individual, or individual and a business or a business and a business.
A human right is only what government cannot take away.