patrick.net

We are overpopulated, and no, immigration is not the solution. Family planning and eliminating tax incentives to have more than two children is the ethical solution. And please don't go off on me on how the government shouldn't control how many children a person has, and please like the housing bulls on this site assuming I don't own a home because I am for lower home prices, please don't assume I don't have children. I say this because I think overpopulation is a real threat on many levels, and it is because of my fear of government intervention on who has children, and on how many, that makes me for eliminating tax breaks for children. Why should a single childless tax payer be paying for my child? My child will suck on plenty of tax paid for programs before he gives back to the system, like all children. That's enough of a gift to the parents for making a little citizen.

We the thinking minority have to stop fighting each other and start fighting the real danger. “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.” - Thomas Jefferson. Fast forward, President Abraham Lincoln, “The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.” And a letter written 1864, “We may congratulate ourselves that this cruel war is nearing its end. It has cost a vast amount of treasure and blood … It has indeed been a trying hour for the Republic; but I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless.” Fast forward to all their worst nightmares a reality. We the great inheritors of the republic must wake-up and stop fighting the wrong battles. We need campaign finance reform, or a complete elimination. We must dispose of Citizens United and WE must put sanctions on the empire living within our Republic. The empire is the Federal Reserve and the corporations. The two party system is meant to distract and divide. Voting is no longer our great power, so focus on where we still have power. Put sanctions on them. Everyone, just say no to buying from any of the major corporations that have abhorrent human rights records (which are a large majority), do your job as a citizen of a free republic and educate yourself on who those are, buy only necessities, buy fair-trade, and best of all don't buy at all unless it truly is a need. Don't purchase a home at artificially inflated prices meant to make you a debt slave. Protect our right to protest and form unions before both rights get abolished. Let us honor our admirable presidents and framers by having the courage and strength to save our Republic. We can save our republic, it's just going to mean sacrifice and work, and the empire within our fading republic is counting on our ignorance and laziness. A hero in this era is not going to be one in shiny pants with a gun or arrow, it's going to be regular people like us sacrificing and becoming educated on the system. Pass on the good news that we still have the power. No one can force us to buy a non-necessity. It's time to starve the empire within our republic out.

Vicente says

U.S. natural birth rate is below replacement levels.

True, but that's not a bad thing. The U.S. population has doubled over the past 50 years.

Meanwhile, the U.S. consumes a large percentage of the world's oil supply.

And produces a large amount of CO2 per capita. Yes, we're not the worse, but we certainly are right up there.

A smaller U.S. population would be a very good thing for the environment. It would give some relief until technology advances enough for us to maintain our energy consumption rates without polluting.

If the U.S. population were to half over the next 50 years, it would not be a bad thing.

World population is also a problem, but more so because of starvation than over-consumption and pollution.

zzyzzx says

Overpopulation is a serious environmental problem and isn't likely to be solved if you take your approach and do nothing to stop it.

True, but that's not why you're against immigration. You really are motivated by the "I got mine; fuck you" principle. Vincent was right in calling you out on that.

edvard2 says

I suggest taking a road trip across the US. I did when I moved across country. 90+% of the land I drove through was almost completely devoid of people.

And the ocean is even more vast. That doesn't mean we can't over-fish it, pollute it, alter it's feedback systems.

The problem with overpopulation has never been the physical limitations of space, but rather the physical limitations of resources and the stress on the negative feedback mechanisms in local and the global ecosystems.

The world will collapse into a barren planet incapable of supporting human life long before we run out of space to put human bodies.

Automan Empire says

It takes more than raw land to sustain a population

True. One third of the world's population does not have adequate, clean drinking water. That's one in three people endanger of health risks for lack of water, the most basic ingredient in life.

Even in many sections of the U.S., there is a water shortage and such shortages are likely to get worse. And water is just one of many depletable resources.

edvard2 says

if every office job in the US would embrace telecommuting.

Management has spoken. Telecommuting is only for outsourcing. Why make life more pleasant for the employee?

Russia has always had an authoritarian history. In a way, they have not been sufficiently prepared to handle democracy especially considering the unique blend of authoritarianism and corruption that they demonstrate. If a democracy experiment were to be fully conducted over there, it would result in a middle-east lite outcome. The only improvement would be lack of suicide bombings....sans the chechens of course.

Dan8267 says

A smaller U.S. population would be a very good thing for the environment. It would give some relief until technology advances enough for us to maintain our energy consumption rates without polluting.

If the U.S. population were to half over the next 50 years, it would not be a bad thing.

World population is also a problem, but more so because of starvation than over-consumption and pollution.

. He is absolutely right.

Dan8267 says

If the U.S. population were to half over the next 50 years, it would not be a
bad thing.

So dumb it hurts.

How pray tell are we going to continue to prop up our Ponzi Scheme entitlement programs if our population is cut in half over the next 50 years?

Look how fucked our entitlement liabilities are now just trying to deal with the Boomer population. Look at all the bankrupt cities in California (let alone Detroit) who are suffering as their towns are hollowed out by generational Democrat mismanagement and there is no one left to pay the pensions.

Do Libs have even a basic grasp of simple math?

Dan8267 says

The problem with overpopulation has never been the physical limitations of
space, but rather the physical limitations of resources and the stress on the
negative feedback mechanisms in local and the global ecosystems.

The world will collapse into a barren planet incapable of supporting human
life long before we run out of space to put human bodies.

The Malthusians Chicken Littles have been predicting this shit for over 50 years and have been shown to be completely wrong by history. Not just wrong. Spectacularly wrong!

Look up the insanity of Paul Ehrilich and "Population Bomb" which my environmental engineering professors were raving about when I was in school.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Population_Bomb

Humanity still finds a way to thrive despite our increased population numbers where we have less war, less famine and less poverty.

socal2 says

Dan8267 says

If the U.S. population were to half over the next 50 years, it would not be a

bad thing.

So dumb it hurts.

How pray tell are we going to continue to prop up our Ponzi Scheme entitlement programs if our population is cut in half over the next 50 years?

Look how fucked our entitlement liabilities are now just trying to deal with the Boomer population. Look at all the bankrupt cities in California (let alone Detroit) who are suffering as their towns are hollowed out by generational Democrat mismanagement and there is no one left to pay the pensions.

Do Libs have even a basic grasp of simple math?

True, but that's why we have to do away with an entitlement/retirement system that is based on endless population explosion (aka ponzi-scheme).

dublin hillz says

Russia has always had an authoritarian history. In a way, they have not been sufficiently prepared to handle democracy especially considering the unique blend of authoritarianism and corruption that they demonstrate. If a democracy experiment were to be fully conducted over there, it would result in a middle-east lite outcome. The only improvement would be lack of suicide bombings....sans the chechens of course.

America is authoritarian too, same damn thing here, just dressed up differently.

Vicente says

(abortion and premarital sex are effectively against the law in the name of the free market)

This fragment reveals that the author is full of shit.

zzyzzx says

CL says

We have plenty of unpopulated land.

True, but where is the water and oil going to come from?

Were they not going to need water or oil where they were born? Or are we only worried about "ours"? Or are we worried that as a poor person becomes more prosperous that they will inherently use more of these resources?

Where do we get our oil and water now? What will we do about shortages? Annex Canada?

And if you were really worried about it, why not just have a one-child policy since native-borns will also consume those resources?

CaptainShuddup says

That's not how you get support or acceptance from those who you claim are intolerant, as it were.

Is support something that a citizen has to ask for from the majority? Do they have to do it a certain way, and say please? Yes ma'am?

Put another way, if this were a majority gay country and you were a hetero minority, would you feel that it would be acceptable for you to be straight, but only in the way the gay majority proscribed? What if they didn't want you acting all hetero in public....dressing THAT way, holding hands, kissing.

FortWayne says

America is authoritarian too, same damn thing here, just dressed up differently.

Indeed, but not in the way you probably mean. See above.

FortWayne says

dublin hillz says

Russia has always had an authoritarian history. In a way, they have not been sufficiently prepared to handle democracy especially considering the unique blend of authoritarianism and corruption that they demonstrate. If a democracy experiment were to be fully conducted over there, it would result in a middle-east lite outcome. The only improvement would be lack of suicide bombings....sans the chechens of course.

America is authoritarian too, same damn thing here, just dressed up differently.

Where he's right, he's right.

mell says

True, but that's why we have to do away with an entitlement/retirement system that is based on endless population explosion (aka ponzi-scheme).

Don't think anyone is advocating "endless population explosion" just replacement level birth rates to maintain stable populations to support the tax base.

It seems like it is mainly Lefties who advocate "explosive population reduction" as seen by some of the dopey comments on this thread.

The future belongs to the people who bother to show up.

socal2 says

How pray tell are we going to continue to prop up our Ponzi Scheme entitlement programs if our population is cut in half over the next 50 years?

Don't. The longer Ponzi Schemes go on, the more damage they do.

socal2 says

Do Libs have even a basic grasp of simple math?

Honey, my math skills are beyond your imagination, much like my love making skills.

socal2 says

The Malthusians Chicken Littles have been predicting this shit for over 50 years and have been shown to be completely wrong by history.

Someone makes a claim that if exponential increases in CO2 levels continue indefinitely, eventually the world's climate will become inhospitable to human life. You call this claim false based on the fact that it hasn't happen yet. And I'm the one without basic math skills?

Socal2's "thinking":
Liberals say that wearing your seat belt keeps you from dying in a car crash. Well, I've never worn my seat belt and I'm still alive. Therefore seat belts are worthless.

Better thinking:
Pollution is a form of theft. It should be tolerated no more than any other form of theft. People who are pro-pollution are pro-theft by definition. The rest of us believe in law and order. We don't tolerate criminals that burn other people's houses down because it violates property rights. Pollution violates public property rights, no different from trashing your neighbor's house.

North Korea is the Democrat's paradise.

Somalia is libertarian paradise:

http://www.youtube.com/embed/7QDv4sYwjO0

zzyzzx says

North Korea is the Democrat's paradise.

Correction: North Korea is the paradise of the imaginary versions of Democrats in the heads of Republicans.

No Democrat has every advocated North Korea as a roll model. In contrast, the very first post in this thread was FortWayne says

At the rate we are going, Russia is winning.

zzyzzx says

North Korea is the Democrat's paradise.

There is more truth in Republican yearning for Nazi Germany than in that statement. Hell, there's more truth in Democrats yearning for Nazi Germany than that statement.

The Democrats believe in a slightly less laissez-faire free-market Capitalism than the Republicans CLAIM to. That's hardly command and control.

CL says

zzyzzx says

North Korea is the Democrat's paradise.

There is more truth in Republican yearning for Nazi Germany than in that statement. Hell, there's more truth in Democrats yearning for Nazi Germany than that statement.

Hell, there's more truth in Democrats yearning for three-way with Madeleine Albright and Helen Thomas than in that statement.

zzyzzx says

North Korea is the Democrat's paradise.

Paradise? Hardly, but a prime example of what unrestrained republican authoritarianism would turn into, yes.

You right wingers have tried numerous things already, such as:
Homeland Security
airport scanners and 'pat downs'
eavesdropping of every imagineable kind
the Patriot Act
Gitmo
waterboarding
questioning people's patriotism
etc., etc.,..................................

upisdown says

zzyzzx says

North Korea is the Democrat's paradise.

Paradise? Hardly, but a prime example of what unrestrained republican authoritarianism would turn into, yes.

You right wingers have tried numerous things already, such as:

Homeland Security

airport scanners and 'pat downs'

eavesdropping of every imagineable kind

the Patriot Act

Gitmo

waterboarding

questioning people's patriotism

etc., etc.,..................................

That's just Obamas partial accomplishment list.

FortWayne says

That's just Obamas partial accomplishment list.

Yawwwnnnnnnn.

upisdown says

FortWayne says

That's just Obamas partial accomplishment list.

Yawwwnnnnnnn.

No, FortWayne is actually right on that one. Granted, most of that stuff was also Bush's and Republican's agenda, but Obama has full-heartedly embraced and expanded on that agenda.

Dan8267 says

No, FortWayne is actually right on that one. Granted, most of that stuff was
also Bush's and Republican's agenda, but Obama has full-heartedly embraced and
expanded on that agenda.

While mostly true, it's the republican want for domination over others, just look at how they act here and when you put them in their place, they bitch and moan endlessly and take up their default victim routine.

Undoing their BS is a lot tougher than the initial resistance to their push for those things that I listed, especially when you factor in the numbers of their base and other gullible idiots that fall for their fear and hate tactics.

Obama is no angel, and he's let a lot of people down by not undoing or reversing those things, but it's a hell of a lot better than going full throttle with more of the same with McCain and the moron, or even worse with Romney and his mini-me.

Dan8267 says

Hell, there's more truth in Democrats yearning for three-way with Madeleine Albright and Helen Thomas than in that statement.

Yeah, that's more likely to be my personal thing than ALL Democrats. A man can dream.

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

Wow, guys, now this is just getting strange.

And you know it is when you're the one wigged out!

corntrollio says

Somalia is libertarian paradise:

A country where the rule of law is not enforced has nothing to do with Libertarianism. If it has no laws at all to enforced then that is anarchy. So this is completely misguided, don't watch everything you believe!

Dan8267 says

Don't. The longer Ponzi Schemes go on, the more damage they do.

Well duh.

But how do you fix the existing Ponzi Schemes government entitlement programs when you advocate MASSIVELY shrinking the US population?

This is why I believe you have a very bad grasp of basic math.

Either that - or you just spout out shit without thinking things through.

socal2 says

Ponzi Schemes government entitlement programs

Many people misuse the label Ponzi Scheme. You have lots of company.

socal2 says

But how do you fix the existing Ponzi Schemes government entitlement programs when you advocate MASSIVELY shrinking the US population?

Let the Baby Boomers pay the check for the first time in their life.

Dan8267 says

Let the Baby Boomers pay the check for the first time in their life.

You mean pay for their own healthcare or something?

mell says

A country where the rule of law is not enforced has nothing to do with Libertarianism. If it has no laws at all to enforced then that is anarchy

Libertarianism taken to its logical extreme is anarcho-capitalism.

How do you propose enforcing the rule of law in a libertarian government, exactly? Reputation?

corntrollio says

mell says

A country where the rule of law is not enforced has nothing to do with Libertarianism. If it has no laws at all to enforced then that is anarchy

Libertarianism taken to its logical extreme is anarcho-capitalism.

How do you propose enforcing the rule of law in a libertarian government, exactly? Reputation?

http://laissez-fairerepublic.com/libertar.htm

" Libertarians are not anarchists. While it is true that some individuals favor a political system of competing vigilante committees, and refer to this position as "anarcho-capitalism" (a view formerly held by libertarian economist Murray Rothbard), this is a confusing misnomer based on an apparent failure to clearly distinguish between the nature of market institutions (which do not involve the use of coercion at all, either initiatory or retaliatory) and the nature of coercive entities (criminal or legal). Actually, libertarianism rests on the concepts of individualism, self-ownership, private property, & voluntary (market) exchange. Classical anarchism not only opposed the political state, but also some voluntary organizations of which it disapproved. Most importantly, true anarchists opposed private property - without which no voluntary relationships are possible. Today's libertarians are in the classical liberal tradition of Algernon Sidney, John Locke, Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Edmund Burke, Herbert Spencer, and Frederic Bastiat - not the anarchist tradition of Proudhon, Kropotkin, and Bakunin. Virtually all the major thinkers and writers which inspired the libertarian cause -- Frederic Bastiat, Herbert Spencer, Auberon Herbert, Henry Hazlitt, F. A. Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Leonard Read, Ayn Rand, George Reisman -- whatever differences they may have had, they all supported the libertarian position of advocating a general policy of laissez faire be imposed on government -- and they all opposed anarchy and anarchism as antithetical to liberty. "

You enforce the law with a police force that is strictly checked by the judicative branch and the constitutional rights.

corntrollio says

Libertarianism taken to its logical extreme is anarcho-capitalism.

If you want to understand principles behind anarcho-capitalism, I would recommend watching this long video. No country has this, and definitely not Russia by any stretch of imagination.

http://agoratelegraph.com/2013/02/22/anarchy-means-without-rulers-not-without-rules/

gsr says

If you want to understand principles behind anarcho-capitalism

Former Libertarian here, and it's all PoliSci college bullshit that is little different than Marxism. In the sense that it's a lot of theory that is largely divorced from PEOPLE and political realities. People are fickle, and want contradicting things. They say they want something then they get it, no they aren't happy with that, they want something else. They take your nice theories about Marxism and turn it into Leninism. Or more contemporary like Rick Santelli or Rand Paul they are "kind of Libertarian" except.... well except when it matters and then all the theory bullshit goes right out the window because they need money.