First I wasn't shouting. I typed in caps for emphasis, so you would pay attention. The last time I checked, we were typing, and not speaking.
Buying 1 camera for yourself is not the same as buying 10,000 cameras for the purpose of selling in Americans markets and nothing you say or do will make it the same. Your claims that I'm supporting the initiation of force are utterly false. I support using force against those who violate the rights, person, or property of non-consenting others. Whether you like it or not, we have borders, and we have a government and our government is a legitimate one. The valid scope and role of the government includes defending our person, property, and rights from infringement by others. The flaw in your logic is that you keep referring to bringing goods from another country into America as a "peaceful activity" when it is no more a "peaceful activity" than is trespass. If I choose to camp out in your front yard without your permission and I refuse to go, is that a "peaceful" activity? I'd say it isn't. It violates the property rights of the owner. In the case of America, the American people are the owners, and the government has been entrusted in securing our borders and keeping out those who would trespass by selling goods within our borders. You asked where we "draw the line" when it comes to "peaceful" activities. The lines are already drawn and they are on pretty much any map you can get your hands on. The borders of America are where we draw the line. If you want to bring foreign goods into America for sale in American markets, you may request permission for this PRIVILEGE. Bringing goods into America for sale is no more your right than is bringing American goods into a foreign for sale in their markets....which you don't unless they allow you the privilege. If you want to brew alcohol in your garage, and you can do so without endangering your neighbors, you're free to do that. If you want to sell that alcohol inside any American state, you can do that. I consider any laws regarding the percentage of alcohol in each state to be illigitimate. If you want to export your alcohol out of the country, I don't think the American government has any legitimate say about what you're exporting or how much you export BUT the country where the goods are going DOES have a legitimate say. They can require a tariff on your part, and if you refuse to pay the tariff and smuggle your goods into the country, you are trespassing against all the people of that country. --- In [email protected], Cory Nott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry Paul, but shouting doesn't make lend any evidence or support to your argument. I haven't been on the list very long, but every argument I've seen from you up until now has had some logical basis or factual evidence to back it up (even if I disagree). Now it seems that you want us to accept your word just because you say it is so. That generally only works with small children and animals. Is that what you think of all of us? > > Whether I buy 1 camera in Japan or 10,000 cameras in Japan, they are still my property. If I get investors to help me make the purchase, then each investor has a share in that property. > > In another thread you said that no Libertarian can support the initiation of force, but what you argue below is exactly that - the initiation of force, by the government, to prevent me or anyone else from engaging in the sale of property unless we abide to certain arbitrary laws (rather than contract.) > > In order to see if I can get some clarity on your ideas here, I'll ask. Is it initiation of force if the government prevents me from brewing alcohol in my garage and selling it to my friends and neighbors? How about if I bottle it, label and sell it to local restaurants? What if a person outside the USA is interested in purchasing some of my alcohol? Where exactly do we draw the line between peaceful activity, and my initiation of force against you (that means you can regulate what I do with impunity)? If it's the border, why that arbitrary line? Can you explain or will you just raise your voice some more? > > > > Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'll phrase it very clearly so there is no mistake. > > YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO IMPORT GOODS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES FOR THE > PURPOSE OF SELLING IT COMMERCIALLY HERE AND NEITHER DOES ANYONE ELSE! > > Is that clear enough for you? > > Let me break it down even further. > > If you're on vacation and buy something, and you come home with it, > you are free to sell it. If you buy 10 thousand units of something > specifically to sell them in America, you are not free to sell them > unless you pay for that privilege. > > Let's say you're on a vacation in Japan and you buy a camera. You use > the camera while on vacation, but when you come home you realize it > won't work with out power. You are free to sell it on eBay to others > who might want it. > > This is entirely different than going to Japan and buying a thousand > cameras to ship them here so you can sell them to stores....or even on > eBay. > > You do have the right to dispose of your property as you see fit as > long as you haven't purchased that property in a foreign country > specifically to sell here. > > BRINGING GOODS FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY INTO AMERICA FOR THE PURPOSE OF > SELLING THEM IS NOT A RIGHT..... IT IS THE OPPOSITE OF A RIGHT. IT > IS A PRIVILEGE. > > Using force to prevent people from bringing foreign goods into America > is the same as using force to prevent people from stealing or > trespass. You can call trespass a PEACEFUL activity all you like, but > that doesn't make it any less of a crime. > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Cory Nott <corynott@> wrote: > > > > To reshape your argument so that I understand it better, you are > saying that the property that I OWN, that may have come from offshore > or another country or wherever, I cannot SELL without someone granting > me the PRIVILEGE to do so. Therefore, I do not have the RIGHT to > dispose of my property in the manner I see fit. I can be prevented, by > legal FORCE, from a PEACEFUL activity. Is that correct? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul <ptireland@> wrote: > > If you buy property somewhere else you have the right to bring it here > > for your own use, but not to sell it here. If you want to bring goods > > from foreign countries into America, that is a PRIVILEGE, not a right. > > > > I can't speak for other countries. Perhaps, like America, you could > > sell the goods you bought in the country in which you bought them > > without a tariff, but the standard procedure for our country and every > > other country is that when you bring foreign goods into a local > > market, you pay for the PRIVILEGE. > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Cory Nott <corynott@> wrote: > > > > > > You mean something I bought and paid for overseas is not my property > > and I don't have any right to sell it here or elsewhere? > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul <ptireland@> wrote: > > > Selling foreign goods in America IS NOT A RIGHT....it is a > > PRIVILEGE. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "terry12622000" <cottondrop@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Buying and selling is a right if both the buyer and seller agreed, > > > > the government has no right to say the seller can not sell or the > > > > buyer buy goods and services that do not harm non contractual > > > > parties. Now true if every property owner has the right to secde > from > > > > the government a tax could be a membership fee and actually a users > > > > fee not a tax. If there was a fee on both imports and exports if > the > > > > secding merchant wished to trade with people in the US they would > > > > still be paying the tax, if they traded only with foreign companies > > > > yet the foreign companies traded with the US the seceding merchant > > > > would be paying the tax indirectly but if they did not trade > with the > > > > US or their trades with others can not connected with the US then > > > > they will not pay the tax. > > > > Outside trade may not be a problem with those that live on the > > > > border or on the coast but it might for landlock property > > > > owners. > > > > Still it could be argued that the US or a state has no > right to > > > > landlock a property owner unless the property owner is a clear > > > > security risk. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No. That isn't what I said. Perhaps you should read it again. > > > > > > > > > > I will go on record as saying, "Not all taxation is theft and not > > > > all > > > > > taxation is force." > > > > > > > > > > I consider any tax on your rights to be an act of force. I do not > > > > > consider extremely low and flat rate tariffs that do not > hamper the > > > > > ability of people to trade in America to be initiating force. > You > > > > can > > > > > speak to any nobel prize winning economist you like to see if 3% > > > > > hampers their ability to trade. People do NOT have the RIGHT to > > > > bring > > > > > goods into America to sell in our markets. This is a PRIVILEDGE, > > > > not > > > > > a right. > > > > > > > > > > Usage fees & excise taxes can be avoided by not using those > services > > > > > and tariffs can be avoided by purchasing goods made in America. > > > > This > > > > > means there is no force what-so-ever. If you CHOOSE to buy > imported > > > > > goods, you CHOOSE to willingly pay the extremely low tariffs > > > > > associated with it. The overall price of the product does not go > > > > up, > > > > > and in fact compared to our current tariffs, it would most likely > > > > go down. > > > > > > > > > > I say using tariffs and excise taxes (which are not the > initiation > > > > of > > > > > force) we can fund 100% of the Constitutional parts of government. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], <boyd.w.smith@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Paul <ptireland@> > > > > > > > Also, as far as funding a limited government, it can be funded > > > > > > > completely without taxing income, but not completely without > > > > taxation. > > > > > > > This is the true dilemma of real libertarianism (aka...NOT > > > > > > > anarchy). > > > > > > > > > > > > So then according to you, initiating a little force is ok if > it is > > > > > only a little force and for a good cause? > > > > > > > > > > > > BWS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian > > > > > > > > > > > > SPONSORED LINKS > > > English language Political parties Online dictionary > > American politics > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > > > > > > > > Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > > Service. > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian > > > > > > > > SPONSORED LINKS > > English language Political parties Online dictionary > American politics > > > > --------------------------------- > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > > > > > Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian > > > > SPONSORED LINKS > Libertarian English language Political parties Online dictionary American politics > > --------------------------------- > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > > Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > --------------------------------- > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
