You have the right to buy property. You have the right to bring your property into America for your own use. You do not have the right to bring that property within the borders of America for the purpose of selling it. This is not immoral. It's not aggression. It's not an "uninvolved" property.
The valid role of the government (and it does have a valid role) includes protecting AND REGULATING commerce. But in case you haven't actually read the U.S. Constitution, you may want to read Article 1, Section 8, clause 3 which grants Congress the legitimate power to... "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes" If you bring goods from another country into this one for the purpose of selling it in American markets without notifying the American government or paying tariffs associated with it, you are trespassing against every single other citizen in America. There is such a thing as public property, there is such a thing as borders, there is such a thing as sovereignty, and nothing you say will change the fact that you do not have the right to bring goods into America for the purpose of selling them without notifying the government or paying any associated tariffs. I don't have a right to just show up in Australia and start selling American made goods, and they don't have the right to come here and sell Australian goods. The goods have a tariff on them and it has nothing to do with your property rights, and it has nothing to do with how you choose to dispose of your goods. You keep trying to make it about your property rights when it has nothing to do with that. You are assuming you have the right to import goods into America simply because you own them, and you don't have that right and no matter how many times you repeat it, you will still not have that right. --- In [email protected], <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > So then you are saying that the right to property is > > conditional. > > Interesting position. Still not a libertarian one, but interesting > > none the less. One would also have to wonder which other rights you > > consider conditional - life maybe, or liberty? I am just curious. > > > > > > BWS > > > > > > > > > It's amazing how you consistantly attempt to put words in my mouth > > that have absolutely nothing even remotely similar to anything I've > > actually said and expect to get away with it. > > > > Please show me exactly where I said or even suggested that owning > > property is conditional. Bringing property into America for the > > purpose of selling it is conditional, owning it isn't. > > If I own it I should be able to do with it what I choose, as long as I do not violate the equal rights of others. That is the right to property. To bring my property, that I own to a place to sell it, is my right. If I secure permission of the associated property owners, I am operating in a perfectly moral manner. If anyone interferes that is not involved in the transaction (such as the Mafia, terrorist or a government) then they are operating in an immoral manner. My right to dispose of my property in any way that does not transgress against the property rights of other INDIVIDUALS (caps for emphasis) is unconditional. There are no moral group rights or unless they have agreed to a partnership or have ownership specificly in common, no group property rights. > > Now if I owned an access to the ocean, a water right of way and a store on the land that was next to the ocean, MORALLY I could bring in anything I wished and sell it to whomever would buy it and no one not involved could morally interfere. It was your direct implication that I should need the permission of an uninvolved 3rd party to move my property on my property. And while that is the current law of the land, it is very very very wrong and immoral and very very un-libertarian and anti-liberty. > > And if you are not saying that it is a condition of me being able to move my property to receive permission from someone not involved to exercise my rights, then what are you saying? And what right do you have to tell me what i can and can't do with my property? And by what mechanism can you cede that non existent right to a government? > > BWS > 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/
