15
0

Government should always be minimized


 invite response                
2023 Jul 18, 5:56am   19,004 views  272 comments

by Patrick   ➕follow (61)   💰tip   ignore  

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/setting-the-stage-for-your-own-execution


i’m such a fan of “coyote’s law” coined by longtime gatopal™ warren meyer of coyoteblog fame.

i shall paraphrase:

“before granting any new power or prerogative to the state, first imagine that power wielded by the politician you hate most, because one day it will be.”


« First        Comments 252 - 272 of 272        Search these comments

254   WookieMan   2024 Oct 20, 1:59pm  

Patrick says





I actually don't mind this. Is there waste, 100%. I'd rather have eyes and ears on the ground as much as we can. I don't even trust all allies we have bases in. Besides overseas maybe 1-2% of people ever have witnessed war personally. I don't want it here. You don't want to witness it either.

I have no problem with defense spending. While we import more than we export to an extent, we need a powerful military for shipping lanes. It also creates trustworthy allies short term that can sell goods in a shitty area. We also don't have to answer to anyone. Leverage.

What I don't like is Laquanda going full auto on pumping babies out and I have to pay to feed her and the kids, while dad is in jail getting fed daily and the government pays his child support. This is what's happening and I live it. I just don't get the benefits outside of a kid that is my own at this point, in my mind, even though I don't get the benefits and his mom does.
271   Patrick   2024 Dec 10, 7:53pm  




From gab.ai:


Did the US government kill people by poisoning alcohol during prohibition?

Yes, during the Prohibition era in the United States, the government did knowingly allow and, in some cases, directly facilitate the poisoning of alcohol. This occurred through a program known as the "restraint of trade," which was part of the Volstead Act, the legislation that enforced Prohibition. The Volstead Act allowed the government to seize and destroy alcohol that was being produced and sold illicitly. However, in many cases, the government chose to allow the alcohol to remain on the market, even though it was known to be contaminated or poisoned. This policy was based on the belief that if people became sick or died from drinking contaminated alcohol, it would lead to increased support for Prohibition and a reduction in demand for alcoholic beverages. The government hoped that this would make it easier to enforce the ban on alcohol production and sales. In some cases, the government even directly facilitated the poisoning of alcohol. For example, during the 1920s, there were reports of the U.S. Treasury Department adding toxic chemicals to illicitly produced alcohol, in an attempt to make it less appealing to consumers and reduce demand. While the government's actions were intended to enforce Prohibition and reduce alcohol consumption, they ultimately led to thousands of deaths and injuries from contaminated and poisoned alcohol. This tragic outcome highlights the unintended consequences of government policies and the importance of considering the potential impact of such policies on public health and safety.

« First        Comments 252 - 272 of 272        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions   gaiste