From: Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Actually the venue has a contract which states I will be the only > promoter for all events at this location.
In your incorrect and non-applicable analogy. > 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. That is they way things are now. It is an immoral situation. And if the US ever broke up or was wiped away it would change. > 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. The unconditional moral right to private property. Proved over and over again. > 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. No you have disputed my right to move my property on my property. Which is a limit that you impose on my right to property. I proved that as well. > 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. You have actually failed to provide any sort of logical and cogent argument of any kind to support you case. > 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). No you have not. Not once ever. > 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. And I will say put up or shut up. Give your logical argument that the way things are do not represent an initiation of force. Just saying "It is because I say is not enough" nor is saying "It is right because the constitution says so", give a coherent and logical argument instead. 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/
