Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wouldnt total freedom/liberty = Anarchy? Ya really want to live in a place where every one has the freedom to do whatever they wish with none of those dastardly rules and regulations getting in the way?
lib·er·ty/ˈlibərtē/
Noun:
The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life.
OP give some examples of some of the oppressive restrictions you having problems with?
Yes, complete liberty would be anarchy, but as you pointed out, you do not have the morals to live in a liberated state.
But, then again, it is all about you, cause liberty is all about you.
Gosh, Americans are so self-absorbed that it is disturbing. It is always about me, me, me. No wonder many Americans are incapable of talking about politics and ideals. They are incapable of thinking beyond themselves. Simply disgusting.
And people wonder why Americans are self-serving, narcissistic *******s.
While many like to pontificate on how our Founding Fathers did things, most of them feel they must overlook the overriding theme of our Founders.
Liberty.
Many more want freedom for themselves but regulation for others.
Neither of the two major parties promote liberty. They want more and more of our personal lives regulated.
Have you ever stopped to think about how many restrictions and regulations are currently placed on your personal liberty at the local, state and national level?
In the past, I have voted Dem because I didn't care for the proposals of the GOP to continue infringing on my social liberties. The Dems, of course, infringe upon my economic liberties.
What gives? When will this end?
Congressman/Dr./Vet Ron Paul has taught me so much this election cycle.
FREEDOM IS POPULAR!!! Seize it!
The GOP & DNC don't want us to have personal liberty. They can't control us when we have true liberty.
How can we stop this out-of-control train??
I agree with a great deal of what you say. I don't think Paul is the answer, because he doesn't represent the American people in even a majority on major issues, like social security.
Paul has stated, that if he had his way, social security would end. This simply isn't following what the American voter wants, and the American voter is supposed to elect people that represent their wishes when they run for office.
Now, Democrats have failed to do anything on social security to fix its issues, and Republicans just want to end it by allowing people to "opt out", which would end the program.
But I agree with Ron Paul on foreign policy, many economic issues, etc.
In poll after poll, questionaire after questionaire, the American people want 4 things.
1. Save social security, no changes to it
2. Save medicare, no changes to it
3. Cut defense spending
4. Raise taxes (mainly on the wealthy) to make up the difference after defense cuts to save the first two.
Thats it, and 70% of Americans support those actions.
Benjamin Franklin said it best: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Whether the nation should lean toward safety/security, or freedom, was the fundamental question in setting up our government. Our Founding Fathers chose to go heavily on the side of freedom, and designed a small, unobtrusive government at the federal level that was too starved of funds to destroy individual freedom (the personal income tax was illegal, and the feds were only allowed money from tariffs and levies on international trade).
Unfortunately, it is far too easy--and tempting--to simply vote for the pollitician who says he'll provide "programs" and "security" and "social safety nets"--great ideas until YOU get the massive taxes to pay for it all, and yet neither you nor anyone you know ever benefit from the endlessly growing numbers of give-away programs. That's where we are today, trying to emulate a European socialist ideal that doesn't exist and never did.
Prosperity for a nation only comes from a large percentage of productive citizens--and it NEVER comes in the form of transfer payments. The first makes the economic pie bigger for everyone; the second simply takes the same sized pie and makes smaller and smaller slices for everyone. And the smallest size slice goes to those who work hardest and longest and smartest--they are the only ones our government can target to pay for not only the programs and give-aways, but also the immense cost of the government itself and the waste and fraud inherent to immense institutions.
Every time we vote for government to start or expand a program to provide more safety/security for whatever Special Interest group, we ALL necessarily give up a chunk of personal freedom. We give up our earnings; we give up any voice in government (as the Special Interests now own the politicians), we give up the time and effort to get licenses and fees and tickets and required training "safety" courses. We can't even keep our own, paid-for houses, unless we can pay a semi-annual tax bill so large that it often dwarfs the mortgage to buy the home and property in the first place.
In chasing safety and security provided by the worst possible means--government--we destroyed the freedom that made America great.
I agree with a great deal of what you say. I don't think Paul is the answer, because he doesn't represent the American people in even a majority on major issues, like social security.
Paul has stated, that if he had his way, social security would end. This simply isn't following what the American voter wants, and the American voter is supposed to elect people that represent their wishes when they run for office.
Now, Democrats have failed to do anything on social security to fix its issues, and Republicans just want to end it by allowing people to "opt out", which would end the program.
But I agree with Ron Paul on foreign policy, many economic issues, etc.
In poll after poll, questionaire after questionaire, the American people want 4 things.
1. Save social security, no changes to it
2. Save medicare, no changes to it
3. Cut defense spending
4. Raise taxes (mainly on the wealthy) to make up the difference after defense cuts to save the first two.
Thats it, and 70% of Americans support those actions.
Yes Memphis, but Paul has to deal with Congress. He knows that he can't just end social security just like that. Saying that if he had his way, and actually doing it are 2 different things. Hell, you and I want to end the prohibition of marijuana right now, and if we had our way that ban would end overnight, but it doesn't mean that it is going to happen. I also don't feel it's necessary to raise taxes on anybody, and in fact they should enact a flat sales tax, so that everybody is paying their taxes. People receiving benefits aren't paying income taxes, while working folks are. How is that fair? I have a real tough time with healthcare issues, but Obamacare is certainly NOT the answer!
Yes, complete liberty would be anarchy, but as you pointed out, you do not have the morals to live in a liberated state.
You need someone to protect you from yourself.
What morals would i need to live in a liberated state? Sounds to me you are already laying on rules and regulations for your liberated state (Must have Morals)..
and You need someone to protect you from yourself? you mean like a nanny to make sure i dont do anything wrong in your liberated utopia? (must have protection).
Not sure you are grasping the full concept of freedom and liberty..
Yes Memphis, but Paul has to deal with Congress. He knows that he can't just end social security just like that. Saying that if he had his way, and actually doing it are 2 different things. Hell, you and I want to end the prohibition of marijuana right now, and if we had our way that ban would end overnight, but it doesn't mean that it is going to happen. I also don't feel it's necessary to raise taxes on anybody, and in fact they should enact a flat sales tax, so that everybody is paying their taxes. People receiving benefits aren't paying income taxes, while working folks are. How is that fair? I have a real tough time with healthcare issues, but Obamacare is certainly NOT the answer!
Just my 2 cents.
MJ prohibition can be ended directly from the executive office. Simply don't enforce that law federally. The executive branch has that power.
Social security is a different animal, but if Paul managed to get a republican house and senate, its likely they would end it. Can't take that risk.
I agree with you on the affordable care law, I disagree with the mandate specifically. But as far as taxes, I can discuss that with you with dm, since its off topic.
The republicans and democrats have royally screwed things up, and we need a third party or independent to step up. I fear that this will never happen because of the electoral college mess, it essentially locks out any viable third party candidate. I'll keep preaching the gospel of limited government with you, but until 75% of Americans agree with us, its never going to change.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(must have protection).
