Ok, so I say the yard is not yours, and your answer is "nuh uh, the yard is mine". I say, "The right to property does does not include the right to transport it across national borders" and you say, "nuh uh, it does too" or "national borders are imaginary", I say, "Tariffs are not an initiation of force because you CHOOSE to import goods knowing the tariff will apply if you do it" and you say, "nuh uh, because I can bring anything I want anywhere on earth I want regardless of what the people of that particular nation want."
Facts are facts, and the fact are it's not your yard, your right to ownership does not mean you have the right to transport goods across national borders which are indeed very real, and tariffs are not an initiation of force in even the slightest way. The truth is I'm not asking for a piece of your profit, and could care less whether or not you make a profit. If you want to bring YOUR foreign goods into MY country, you must pay for it. The people of America have setup legitimate laws to protect our borders and markets and you don't have any right to violate them. Your entire argument (as before) amounts to nothing other than "nuh uh" Your pathetic attempts to make an argument are laughable and a horrible waste of time. I'm tired of going in circles and tired of proving you absolutely 100% wrong and showing everyone that you have failed miserably to prove that tariffs are any use of force at all, let alone an initiation of force. --- In [email protected], <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have shown and proven that tariffs are an act of aggression. It was done logically. You have never shown the slightest inclination to logical discourse. The yard in question is my yard and I do own it. That is the right to property and is a libertarian concept. I have never disputed the current situation, I have however correctly judged it as being immoral and a violation of my rights to move my property on my property or where I have secured the right of way. And the right to property is an absolute right that contains in it the acknowledgement of the equal rights of others. Those equal rights do not contain the right to interfere where there is not legitimate interest. You Paul do not get a cut of my profits for simply existing. You need to be a participant to receive benefit. And in this case you are not in any way whatsoever. If you do have a justification that is libertarian, non-authoritarian, or even logical you have yet to give it and all you have said is "it is because I say so." > > And by what right do you have to tariff goods that are not brought over for resale. Previously you stated that tariffs were for goods to be resold. The trees are for my personal use. The fruit is my personal property produced in this country and not imported. There is no basis using your logic in this case (or in any other using logic) for a tariff. > > BWS > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sunday, April 9, 2006 8:34 pm > Subject: [LOP-General] Re: [Libertarian] Re: Libertarian Party 2008 Presidential Poll - P > > > I'm not going to respond to you if you intersperse your weak retorts > > among my posts. Make your own post in response to mine without making > > it hard to read or it's not worth reading. > > > > I've been giving you logical arguments and nothing was because "I say > > so". I'm guessing you don't own each and every single square inch of > > the United States. That being the case, it's owned by a group known > > as "We the people of the United States" and they appointed the U.S. > > government to oversee all imports and exports into and out of the > > country. A similar arrangment has been made with pretty much every > > single nation on earth and thier respective governments. > > > > Since the borders of the United States are owned by "We the People" > > and protected by their agent, the U.S. government, "We the People" > > have granted authority to the government to charge a tariff on goods > > imported here to be sold in any location within our borders. > > > > Neither you, nor anyone else on the planet earth (or any other planet > > for that matter) is born with the right to bring foreign goods past > > the borders owned by "We the People" without paying the price of > > admission. > > > > If you buy goods in another country, you own those goods. Your > > ownership is absolute but your ownership does NOT come with the right > > to bring those goods past national borders. If you doubt me, feel > > free to try it and see what happens. Most likely, the U.S. Government > > (the agent of "We the People") will use DEFENSIVE force to stop your > > trespass and aggression of bringing foreign goods into American > > markets. > > You say that in the ebay situation, sometimes the seller pays and > > sometime the buyer pays, but then you say that the only 2 parties > > involved are the buyer and seller. That's not the truth though. > > There is another party involved, the shipper. The shipper handles > > crossing the border, and makes sure the governments are satisfied. > > If > > you've bought something from the UK, the shipper makes sure that "We > > the People" are paid for the PRIVILEGE of bringing those goods into > > America. > > > > I've proven with evidence, logic, reason, and even broken it down into > > analogies for you to better understand, but you disagree because > > you > > know I'm right and you don't like the answer. > > > > Nothing I've said is the least bit authoritarian. You have suggested > > it is, and you've claimed to have rights you don't, but you have > > nothing to back up these assertions. > > > > Tell me how hiring a security guard to stop people from selling > > lemonade in your yard is infringing on your rights? It doesn't > > matter if you own the lemons, you own the table, you own the sugar, > > and the pitcher. You do NOT own the yard, and your claims of such > > hold no water. "We the People" own the yard, and have hired "US > > Government" to provide the security. > > > > There is not even a tiny bit of aggression with tariffs, and you have > > yet to prove any. You CHOOSE to buy goods in another country. You > > CHOOSE to bring them into America knowing there is a tariff to do it. > > Then you want to try to suggest aggression against you which is > > laughable. There is no aggression to prevent you from exercising your > > rights, and you don't have a right to bring your goods over national > > borders. No matter how many times you repeat it, it will continue to > > be untrue. Repeating it will never make it true. > > > > Borders are NOT imaginary lines. They are real and they are tangible > > and they are a good thing. Borders compartmentalize governments and > > keep them limited in scope and size and keep tyrrany localized > > when it > > occurs. > > > > MOVING YOUR GOODS ACROSS NATIONAL BORDERS IS NOT YOUR RIGHT AND > > NOTHING YOU SAY WILL MAKE IT YOUR RIGHT. > > > > If you buy lemon trees from another country, they may not be allowed > > into this one because they might have some sort of disease that could > > endanger our orchards, but assuming they are safe and you are allowed > > to bring them in, you'd pay a tariff on the tree itself. Then all the > > lemons you grow are yours to do with as you please. > > > > My logic has not failed, but yours has in this conversation. > 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/
