Dr Mark Thorton and the "new" DP Lunacy
Thorton and Rockwell are Rothbardians
There is an impossible rift between Rothbard and Mises; though I have no doubt that Mises liked (maybe even) loved his "student."
Nevertheless, Mises and Rothbard both advocated toward Indivdiualism (which is the root of Anarchy). Though Mises (and Paul) argued for a Minarchist Transition.
Mises said the Individual is the Consumer and should have Sovereignty (meaning no laws created to work against him).
Rothbard said the Individual was the Propertarian
Thorton and Rockwell are Propertarian-Individualist.
For Big Gov't to exist there must be "perpetual war" (or revolution) as Trotsky and Marx both pointed out.
The "war" you ask?
Worker-Individualist vs. Propertarian-Individualist
----both with voting and lobbying leverage (unionism)
If you "vote" or "lobby" -- You are either a Propertarian or a Prolitarian; if you are blind to this you have probably voted on both sides ignorantly or by party loyalty (unionism).
It's easy to figure out "who" the Individualist is.
It's the one who foots the entire bill.
If Workers Lobby - Vote for Laws (protectionism -- higher wages/benefits)?
=====Costs pass onto the Consumer
If the Propertied-Owner Lobbies/Votes for Laws (protectionism -- regulation/tax breaks/fiat credit)?
=====Costs pass onto the Consumer
Students Lobby/Vote (Fiat Credit Loans - Housing)?
=====Cuts over-all Consumer Spending
Therefore the INDIVIDUAL (just as Mises said - "the last Economist of Mises Institute") is the Consumer!!
1 Rep per 30K Civilians = Increase in the Cost of Gov't
Thornton is NOT IN FAVOR of Term Limits
As it stands now "senior" politicians control the votes of most all junior politicians -- how?
---By Control of the Party (re-election) War Chest
---By Control of Special Committee Seats (Lobby Profits)
---By ZERO Term Limits (Tenure)
535 - Congress/Senate get paid ~ $135,000 (per year)
535 - Congress/Senate get a budget of ~ $1,000,000 (per year)
535: #1 Salary ~ $72,225,000 -- #2 Budget $ 535,000,000
1 Rep per 30K = ~ 10,000 Congress/Senate Seats
10,000 - Congress/Senate get paid ~ $135,000 (per year)
10,000 - Congress/Senate get a budget of ~ $1,000,000 (per year)
10,000: #1 Salary ~ $1,350,000,000 -- #2 Budget $10,000,000,000
BIGGER GOV'T
Do not Listen to this "new" Mania coming out of the laugh Factory.
Out of 300,000,000 people -- maybe 154M actually voted (max)
Maybe 3% voted for Ron Paul -- I bet "most" of the RP community is against this Bigger Gov't Model proposed by Thornton; but for giggles let's say it's "half."
That's 1.5% of the total voting populace that would be in favor of making gov't bigger.
The SILLY notions that we would cut their salary to the median $45,000 is not PROPOSED by Thornton -- so the community of half-wits promoting Bigger Gov't is already divided.
Can we NOT waste our time on non-traditional time-wasters.
Voting and Lobbying is PERPETUAL WAR (have's vs the think they have not's)
Octobox
bump for indivdiualism
Free yourself.
Repent, for the reign of YaHUaH is near!
I really enjoy your posts
It appears my neurons have become individualists. Can't string a thought together, and I have a headache..It MIGHT be your fault, though I didn't have to read your posts.
No comment today, other than that.
"I don't endorse anything they say"
~Ron Paul On the 911 Truth movement.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGyhlNY0y1k
hahahaha "individualist neurons"
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
Sorry had to edit this
Replied to the wrong thread at first.
Octobox another good post. I must take issue with your constant berating of voting, and of generally taking action in the avenues available.
Thoughts, ideas, generalities, and economic truths are all well and good but we have tools of change available to us TODAY, well, in November anyway.
Stop telling people they are "abdicating self-rule" by voting, that's about as true as saying I am "abdicating my shoes" by driving. In our Corpratist - Free Society self - rule is not purely existent, thus the closest thing we have to the ideal action IS voting, running for office, or getting appointed into office. Of course I am excluding the obvious tools of Counter - Economics, so many of which are impossible to access due government cronyism.
How does one not pay taxes without getting the IRS on them?
How do you withdraw financial support from the wars?
How do you Counter someone Economically when they are running for an office that will have direct control of your life in some (even tiny) way?
How do you live in America with out financially SUPPORTING your municipality and their corporate enforcers?
Pipe dreams all of it. Spend your money locally and on independent stores, get involved in your local political arena and seek nothing but a balanced budget. Once the budget is balanced shrink it. That is all we can do in our lifetimes without a full blown bloody revolution. That being said, bring on the Revolution!
JamesC: Valid questions one-and-all
My "feeling" is people on Daily Paul and on other forums that I frequent genuinely want freedom, but they are approaching the same avenues that has NEVER worked (ever in all human history).
I'm offering another solution -- Given the fanatical nature and posting frequency of Daily Paulers, when the obvious-to-me becomes obvious-to-them this will be the group to make counter-economics a reality.
Also, by giving them alternative solutions when the wheels come off the ballot-box-bus they wont turn to their guns if there is a bit of logical-obviousness in their own community.
So, I must I must -- I must speak Mathematical Truth.
Nope!
Let's say I vote for Prop A and you want Prop B -- We both believe that Prop A or B benefits us the most, respectively. If we lose we feel as though we have less liberty, right? Thus voting is perpetual-war.
How can there be "freedom" in perpetual-war?
Lobbying: This is where we actually "invest" in the candidate who offers us more perceived freedom -- however, whatever we win someone else feels as though they lose; they pool their money so next time they win.
Ron Paul talks about the business cycle being a "false oscilator" created by Gov't and the Fed -- how does the Gov't do it? By voting / lobbying.
How do they get their power? By our voting / lobbying.
Work more and more as a sub-contractor -- claim less and less. That's how most self-employed peole do it -- I know I worked for years as a Financial Analyst.
Buy Local -- Hire Under-the-Table Workers -- Buy local products and services where possible.
Develop Entrepreneurial Clubs where you help one another develop your business and additional passive income streams.
You can't imagine what this would do if just 10,000,000 people did it.
Refuse to buy from corporations who lobby -- make them dependent on consumer-purchases rather than Gov't Bailout.
This is definitely not a pipe-dream.
It is how Mises said we "maintain" a free-society.
There's more to it than I just explained, but that's the jist.
You need to develop a very sticky social network dediticated to cross training, innovation, business development etc etc. Additionally you need to have local / regional support; once you reach groundswell it's impossible to stop.
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
I think I see whats going on here
I cant help but think of Atlas Shrugged as I read this. The individualist-worker becomes the consumer becomes the propertarian. That's why big government and fiat financing does not fit an individualist-propertarian because they will have not accumulated anything for there hard work but worthless credit (the ghost of wealth). So where is the incentive for productive achievement? Yes.. the fact of even entertaining larger government is completely off the wall if you want to achieve individual liberty. It would be down right stagnating as it is now.
For instance," My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute" quote- Atlas Shrugged. So to.."Can we NOT waste our time on non-traditional time-wasters." I can see your point and agree." Why ask useless questions? How deep is the ocean? How high is the sky? Who is John Galt?"
Ardentscientist: I see what you did there sir -- well played
I agree with you.
My comment "can we NOT wast our time on non-traditional time-wasters," was a humorous way of saying "yet another distraction"
-- as if "traditional time wasters" was a good thing: like Chemtrails, Birthers, Truthers -- etc.
Regardless if I agree with them or not -- they are a waste of time and can only lead to larger gov't.
Birther (if proven) gives us a "different colored collectivist" -- net effect (no change)
Truther (if proven publically) gives us "trillion dollar reparations" -- net effect (U.N Oversight -- IMF Banking) to control "evil America").
Chemtrail (if proven publically) will not lead to consumer-individualism, let's put it that way -- a new agency to protect us from other agencies.
Voting / Lobbying is Perpetual War (revolution)
Think of the 10,000 hours -- probably 100,000 hours per year wasted on Daily Paul alone -- (let alone e-mails or debates with friends and family) over these issues and all the other countless issues that do not drive us toward a resolute and mathematically obvious conclusion: Counter-Economics.
Mises said -- Counter-Economics is how you "keep" a free-society and I've proven it is the ONLY way to get into one; it is fact.
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
counter-economics
I believe more and more people are starting to wake up. To make this a success, there would have to be a majority that understand this. Some people may shun this as it is so close to the term anarchy and is associated with chaos. So how do you get the individual to refuse to accept as guilt the fact of there own existence? Which is what this big government instills in the individual and thus keep's them down with fair.
So... in other words everybody will have to grow a pair to make this work. If you go it with a minority you will be labeled as a criminal and it will come to a screeching halt by force. However the majority would make this right and effectively rid the true fiat establishment. Yes, there is safety in numbers. So yeah.... If everybody could stand up at once this could work or just get back to the constitution would be a good start. Geez..they made the constitution criminal.
Stay the course. LOL.. just one more.. this is fitting.
"In the name of the best within you, do not sacrifice this world to those who are its worst. In the name of the values that keep you alive, do not let your vision of man be distorted by the ugly, the cowardly, the mindless in those who have never achieved his title. Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. Do not let your fire go out, spark by irreplaceable spark, in the hopeless swamps of the approximate, the not-quite, the not-yet, the not-at-all. Do not let the hero in your soul perish, in lonely frustration for the life you deserved, but have never been able to reach. Check your road and the nature of your battle. The world you desired can be won, it exists, it is real, it is possible, it's yours." - This is John Galt Speaking
The election process is more than this
The election process is subjugated at PARTY nomination commitees, which those in power tend to control ..This is why the Republican party will never hand over the reigns to RON PAUL...
BUT here I am in limbo land..The principles are all in place, but where is my candidate & platform ? Ron had a good thing when he brought all thirds together .. Take all the best from each & let's get it together ..
The Constitution itself is a comprimise amoung good people...That is my opinion for the day..
Good people do Good deeds
Good people make it happen
Impailed: Send me 50-bucks and I'll send you a map to the PARTY
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
LIES
Paul has been interviewed about what he thinks of anarchy\voluntarism by the Motorhome diaries.
Paul laughed and said he thinks that approach is great.
So you're trying to claim that Paul dislike anarchists, which is false.
the real truth is that YOU dislike them.
Invalid10: "LIES" -- Wow, don't be a Dramatist
I know the video.
Ron Paul was a Misesian Scholar -- Not a Rothbardian.
He quotes Mises and Austrian Economics.
Rothbard is not an Austrian Economist nor a Misesian.
Now Mises and Dr. Paul support a transitional Gov't: RP spelled it out during the debates (what he'd cut) -- that's a transition.
Mises-Minarchism and RP's Minarchism and my Minarchism are all based on Consumer-Sovereignty.
Consumer-Minarchism leads to Consumer-Individualism
-AND- Individualism is Anarchy.
The transition is needed because we have 18,000,000 highly trained 1st Responders and Military that have NO CLUE as to how to gain employment in the private sector -- regarding their specialty and we need to support them during a transtion.
The other reason is that we have MASSIVE Naval Arsenal -- MASSIVE Army Arsenal -- and MASSIVE Air Force Arsenal. The question is, "which de-throned big banker or corporatist do you want to 'buy-up' that arsenal in a Rothbardian Propertarian-Anarchy (Anarcho-Capitalism)?"
Think about it -- I have for nearly 20 years (woke up in '88)
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
Sometimes I think you just
Sometimes I think you just make it up as you go along.
"Rothbard is not an Austrian Economist nor a Misesian."
Bash Rothbard if you must but at least provide grounds for it. You have provided nothing to prove your allegation.
All Austrians, beginning with Menger and including Mises and Rothbard, accept the subjective theory of value based upon the principle of marginal utility. Although the Austrian school is no longer distinguished from other schools in its acceptance of the subjective theory of value, Austrians do maintain a different approach to economic analysis: 1) Austrian economic analysis is carried out on the basis of theoretical, deductive reasoning. It does not rely in empiricism. Additionally, 2) Austrians adhere to methodological individualism, that is, the economic process can only be understood by looking at the actions of individuals as opposed to some vague entity like "society" .
Rothbard's major economic work, Man, Economy and State, is a thoroughgoing exercise in deductive reasoning, which builds on principles of human action (methodological individualism), as does Mises' work of the same name.
In Man, Economy and State Rothbard states, "The distinctive and crucial feature in the study of man is the concept of action. Human action is defined simply as purposeful behavior...The first truth to be discovered about human action is that it can be undertaken only by individual 'actors'". Thus clearly Rothbard's economic analysis is fully consistent with the two main features of Austrianism.
Not only was Rothbard an Austrian economist, he was one of its leading theoriticians and is accepted as such among leading Austrian economists. It is not a requirement of Austrianism that one march in lockstep with Mises. All the great Austrians added to and differed on some points with their predecessors. But they all held to the fundamental Austrian approach.
Accordingly, your anti-Rothbardian zeal has exceeded the evidence.
marlow
marlow
Marlow: The difference between you and me is that I never
"attack" you -- only your logic.
I've never labled you "anti" anything.
So, now I'm "anti-Rothbard" -- why make this statement, to bolster a weak argument, to "rally" the troops.
You are wrong about Rothbard -- there is a rift and has been a rift (even though it is a cordial one) at the Mises Institute since Rothbard started shifting the "view" of Austrian Economics toward his Anarcho-Capitalist model.
According to Robert Murphy "Rothbard disdained Mises use of the term Consumer-Sovereignty..."
Google: Mises vs Rothbard
Google: Consumer Sovereignty Mises Rothbard
For your Education
You logic errors (as do others in this regard) because you do not place importance on indentifying "who" the individual is within society.
Prolitarians (Marx) argue it's the Worker
Propertarians (Rothbard) argue it's the Owner
Consumer-Individualist (Mises) argue it's the Consumer
This distinction flavors every single remaining argument -- it also, results in non-sensical path toward liberty.
Mises has stated what we need to do to maintain a free-society -- Oddly, it looks just like the Counter-Economics model I've painted many times here on DP.
Marx and Rothbard -- Prolitariate vs Propertarian are in favor of "rights" (laws) protecting their individual. Rights / Laws are created by force: They are Unionized Over (voted / lobbied).
Thus Perpetual War (Revolution)
However, Mises -- Viewing the Individual (correctly) as the Consumer -AND- given that the Consumer is EVERYONE
Mises creates a model of Perpetual Equality
No Laws (Rights) for Workers
No Laws (Rights) for Owners
No Voting / Lobbying for Workers
No Voting / Lobbying for Owners
Consumers vote Daily with their Dollar
Think about it ;-)
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
I think you are wrong to
I think you are wrong to equate my pointing out your disdain for Rothbard as a personal attack. You may deny any antipathy towards Rothbard but in several of your posts you make claims about him clearly indicating your disapproval of his views and accusing his views of what you call "propertarian" as favoring property owners at the expense of others, and believing Rothbard's view would entail perpetual war. Finally you would even deny him a place at the Austrian table. I don't doubt he'd consider that an insult even if it may not amount to "bashing".
Personally, I don't see how you can conclude Rothbard's view pits worker against property owner since workers property rights would also be protected in a Rothbardian world. (Are there no rights in a Misesian world)? Rothbard was entirely opposed to government granting special privilages to anyone thus no cause for resentment would occur and no basis for conflict. He believed law should protect rights to property, to be sure, and would have the law apply equally to all.
You say, "Marx and Rothbard -- Prolitariate vs Propertarian are in favor of "rights" (laws) protecting their individual. Rights / Laws are created by force: They are Unionized Over (voted / lobbied)."
Tell me, how is it that Rothbard favored laws that are voted on and lobbied over when he was an anarchist who desired a society wherein there would be no voting nor lobbying?
Let me point out I demonstrated Rothbard's adherence to the fundamental methology of Austrian economics. That is what prompted my post. He certainly deserves his Austrian credentials.
What I find curious is that we both accept a moving from today's world towards minarchism, then towards anarchism but I consider your terminology unclear and misleading. Specifically, your persistent reference to "who" the individual is in society: worker, owner or consumer. This language is misleading. Individuals are individuals no matter which of those categories they are placed in. Maybe you could re-phrase the distinction you are trying to make. That may make it easier to understand what you are trying to convey.
As to consumer sovereignty, certainly the consumer is king in a purely free market as entrepreneurs must satisfy consumers or go out of business. I don't know if that is what you mean by "consumer sovereignty".
marlow
marlow
Marlow: What does Marlow reference - a name, a city?
The Consumer is "king" if there are no hidden costs.
---Owner Protections (subsidies, bailouts, fiat credit, regulatory advantages, and tax loopholes)
---Worker Protections (judicial rullings, technological barriers, subsidies, wage hikes, etc)
The latter "costs" all pass on to the consumer and he has no way to know.
These "rights" come from voting and lobbying.
To say you will give owners rights and workers no rights -- will encourage workers to unionize (lobby and vote).
Thus perpetual war between owners and workers. At consumer expense.
Workers -- Are Consumers
Owners -- Are Consumers
Students -- Are Consumers
Seniors -- Are Consumers
Children -- Are Consumers
The Infirm -- Are Consumers
Thus "consumers" is the one we protect (the individual).
I explained this already.
Owners "vote / lobby" -- They get rights / laws to protect them from consumer-will and against worker-unions
Workers "vote / lobby" -- The get rights / laws to protect them from owners.
In the Rothbardian world how do you "gurantee" owner's rights and not worker's rights?
He is an "anarchist" -- He coined Anarcho-Capitalism, right?
There is "no authority" (that is not voluntary) in an Anarchist Society.
How then does he lock in owner-rights in the long-run against non-voluntary opponents?
Owners (Capitalist) vs Workers (Prolitarians - Marxist)
Perpetual War (Revolution) is a Trotskist Axiom
Rothbard was in favor of Owner's Laws / Rights
It's an "involuntary" cost added onto the consumer (especially if the protection is against consumer-will.
If there's a right to vote / lobby -- then there is a have vs have not perpetual war
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
The illogic of splitting
The illogic of splitting libertarian hairs is something we will always confront. RP endorsed Murray Sabrin for Senate in NJ for example, and I remember threads here saying Sabrin's claim he would vote for McCain over Obama was a dealbreaker for supporting Sabrin. The presidency or bust is similarly fallacious, as is the haughty fussiness of the Cato crowd. And if you want to talk logic, I'll jump in on your's Octo if you jump in on mine. Example, I believe now is the time to pounce on the Afghanistan issue, size it for (small l) libertarians while the anti-war left is mute. See here:
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/105363
The first 5 million supporters of Dr. Paul are 'early adopters.' The next 10 million will require a modified approach.
RP -- Must contend with Political Largesse
My belief is if he was in the private sector he'd support; Counter-Economics and a Consumer-Minarchism.
RP - needs to support people running on a Liberty Ticket.
I think it is a mistake -- though I will help Rand become RP's successor.
In a Corporatist Society we need one (and only one) Public Educator.
No one can argue that Voting/Lobbing are NOT Perpetual War -- which is a Marxist / Trotskyist Axiom.
Propertarians vs Prolitarians
----Consumers Footing the Bill
----All are Consumers
----Circular Error Reference
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
So what you're saying is
We should all donate to Peter and Rand? Great Idea
Furlough-Buzz: Yes you live in a Corporatist-Free-Society
Go abdicate your Liberty - Self-Rule away.
Voting and Lobbying is Perpetual War (revolution) -- As Trotsky argued in favor for.
I do believe, however, as long as we are in a Corporatist Society keeping ONE public educator (and an heir / spare) is very righteous / wise.
Ron Paul
and
Rand Paul
That's It.
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
Just plain broke a smile on
Just plain broke a smile on this post, nice.
The first 5 million supporters of Dr. Paul are 'early adopters.' The next 10 million will require a modified approach.
Ugh! He may be right but
the thought of adding more of these crooks to the payroll upsets my ulcer.
Makes me want to be an anarchist. LOL
Prepare & Share the Message of Freedom through Positive-Peaceful-Activism.
Go with your Ulcer -- It got there during a Corporatist Regime
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
No one likes my threads -- hahahahahahaha
I think there's like 7 people on DP who are logical like I am -- however, seeing that they are individualist -- they are non-joiners for the most part and we don't support one another (non-unionist), hahahaha.
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
I think you like
yourself way too much. As an individual that does not claim to be all that smart, I just don't trust you. I am not a joiner nor a follower, and would rather _____ you. You are in my opinion an individual that thrives on dividing people or belittling them. Not educating them unless you look and feel important. Are you truly logical or are you a self important pompous ass. Are there truly, only 7 people on the DP up to YOUR standards, or are there only 7 people on the DP that thinks you are not an asshole or idiot.
Don't mind me I'm just an ignorant individualist - 7 = individual that thinks you are a divisive work of art. Just so happens I would not purchase your art. hahahahaha! (is that enough laughter for your self absorbed self)
You will reap the divisiveness that you sow. In my opinion no one should ever respond to one of your post. Rest assured I will not again, I just assumed you could, although I doubt it, see truth as an outside everyday person not scared to identify themselves sees you.
1976-1982 USMC, You can thank me for my service by voting for Dr. Ron Paul, President 2012
Doingsomething: Obviously the post you are referring to
Given the tone and heading is a joke -- if you've read my other threads.
I was being facetious.
I think there are more or less than the 7 I mentioned -- I getting Rand Corporation to come in next week for proper polling and statistical analysis.
*finger on nose*
Uh-Oh that might have been another jest -- Meaning I might not actually be having Rand Corporation coming in here to create a polling sample -NOR- to run statistical analysis.
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
which statement by Thornton
which statement by Thornton are you referring to?
Ventura 2012
Thornton was interviewed by Rockwell on the 30K Constitution
----thingy
Octobox
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality