tjx

some questions war: if a country is attacked, as germany attacked poland. what is poland supposed to do? fiat currency: currency with value according to some authority. nickels, dimes and quarters are fiat currency. arrest: shall we have law enforcement or should we entirely protect ourselves? should there be no laws? yes, modern police have become militarized thugs. they have become violent oppressors. they have taken unlawful powers. the same as our socialist politicians. i have some issues with the constitution. eminent domain is the main one. but our politicians have discarded the constitution. obama is ruling mostly by fiat. the constitution never permitted things like 'the patriot act' or 'the war on drugs'. i think the founders made a big mistake when they made allowances for the constitution to be changed. it should have been fixed. unchangeable. peter schiff said that he wouldn't care if he didn't have the right to vote if someone was taking care of all his other rights. i agree with him. if our personal and property rights were always protected there would be no need to vote. no need to change federal laws. i'm arguing for states rights here. so was he. maybe i'm wrong, but i don't see how anarchy can work. i know there is spontaneous order. but there will also be spontaneous acts against that order.

i think it is unnatural for anyone to not want to learn, adult or child. but we have had the desire beat out of us in many ways.. regarding violence.. i wanted you to define it, not just give examples. if we can't define violence, then we don't have much hope to end it. an accurate definition should include everything that violence is, and exclude everything it is not. thank you for your reply also.

hi Desayers, my first day here and i'm just checking few threads and saw a couple of your answers. i have to say i completely agree with you. if your experience is like mine, then you probably find few people that agree with you. i can't think of anything to add to what you wrote above. it was great.

bravo Andrew! it is amazing how much exposure these guys get. we have people who don't have a clue about economics telling us 'what's going on'. he doesn't understand that innovation happens in freedom. he thinks it can be coerced, or tricked into happening with fancy double-speak. so glad you didn't buy into it.

i read all replies and they were good. i'll add a little. But, what happens when, say, manufacturing reaches near-total automation--will humans still find ever increasing ways of creating value for themselves? yes. our desires will always provide new things to value. I just mean, in theory/on paper, is it possible to have an economy that is purely service-based? no, a closed economy always needs production. services are just a function of increasing wealth. by a closed economy, i mean the world. could a country get by on a service economy? yes, but some country somewhere would have to produce something. the producers would have the highest standard of living and the servicers would have a lower standard even though there are many service jobs that pay more than producing jobs. still the producers would have the most benefit.