Actually the venue has a contract which states I will be the only promoter for all events at this location.
I've proven dozens of times that it's not a property rights issue. I've never disputed your property ownership even once. Your ownership of foreign goods does not give you the right to transport those goods into America and sell them inside America, even if you own property here. Your ownership of property does not entitle you to move it across the borders owned and controlled by "We the People" or MY property. Nothing you claim will change that FACT. You must pay for the PRIVILEGE of bringing those goods across the American borders. You have repeatedly failed to prove that you have a right to bring those goods into America or any other country unwilling to have you. You have falsely claimed that borders don't matter. You have falsely claimed that it's a property rights issue when I've never disputed your property ownership and your property ownership does NOT grant you the right to transport and sell your foreign goods within the borders of America. You have repeatedly made the false claim that only the buyer and seller are involved despite the fact that I've proven otherwise by showing that the markets also involve the government which protects both the buyer and seller from fraud, theft, coercion, etc. and which supplies the markets. All you're doing now is repeating the same arguments I've shown down over and over. I've proven the libertarian position to be that no force or coercion is being used when tariffs are made, and that your ownership of goods is completely irrelevant when it comes to bringing those goods across the borders of soveregn nations (which are absolutely relevant). Your repeated denial that I've proven these things are empty and hold no merit. If you don't come up with something new to say, I'll just take my moral and intellectual victory and ignore you. --- In [email protected], <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- In [email protected], <boyd.w.smith@> wrote: > > > > > > > The right to property is an absolute right. I can move my property > > where I own or have secured the right of way. If I own the property, > > then I own the right of way. If you come on to my property and > > interfere with the movement of my other property or try to take some > > of my property then you are guilty of trespass, and theft and > > attempted theft. > > > > You have not "secured the right of way". The "right of way" belongs > > to the American people. If you own land in America, it does not grant > > you the "right of way" to bring foreign goods into America and nothing > > you say will change that indisputable fact. You want to cross MY > > borders, you must pay a toll. If you claim I (and other Americans) > > don't own the borders of our own country, you deny national > > sovereignty and our conversation is over. > > > > > I deny other people sovereignty over my body and my real property and my movable property and my intellectual property. It is mine and I claim absolute (and moral) authority over it. And when you deny that I own the right of way over my property you are trying to make an absolute right conditional. > > > > The markets are created by specific individual buyers and > > sellers. Your introduction of countries and borders are a red herring and a > > diversion form the topic at had, property rights. > > > > If you want to say America doesn't own the markets, that's fine, > > America owns "access" to the markets and you've got to pay a toll to > > get in. If I am a concert promoter, I don't own the venue, I don't > > own the band, but I am the one putting on the show, and if you > > want to see the concert, you've got to pay to get in. > > > In this analogy I would along with other be in the band, own the venue and be the promoter. If you are a promoter and I choose to self-promote you are uninvolved, and if you try to take money from me for the concert you are an extortionist. > > Now re the markets: how can you own access to something that is created by me and another person(s). We create the market by OUR actions. It disappears when our transaction is concluded. You neither participated or helped or were even there. Why do you have a right to control access between me and another person? > > > > > I believe you said exactly that in a previous post. Could someone > > find that in the archives to verify that, my access to those is > > limited by my work Internet access. > > > > Feel free to look it up. I never said it. > > > > > > > > For you to have ownership in the American markets without the > > constitution to state it, you would have to have a logically provable > > interest or a documented provable ownership interest. You have shown > > neither in this discussion. > > > > > > BWS > > > > > > > > > I have proven each and every single thing I've ever written in this > > and every other messageboard I've ever posted on. > > Not that you own the market. Not that this is not a property rights issue. Not that borders are relevant. Not that you have the right to interfere in a commercial transaction between two other individuals. All things that you have claimed and failed to prove. > > 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/
