12 votes

Stossel video: Creating Libertarian States

The Free Cities Project is encouraging developing countries to emulate successful economic examples of Hong Kong, Singapore, and Dubai's financial sector. It also is encouraging American sovereign native peoples to develop their own free cities without onerous regulations, to optimize financial development.
The ultimate goal is the educate people about better economic models than highly regulated states, and to encourage competing models of governance so people of the whole world have many choices and far more opportunities:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/index.html#/v/1191...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

This is being tried: The Free State Project was all about....

Liberty in our Lifetime...The difficulties are primarily due to NH's media (mostly from Boston!) and the lack of agreement from Free State Project on where to move.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

I say Texas. Seems to be

I say Texas. Seems to be working good there so far, and it isn't freezing cold and full of Yankees!

It does, however, have a delightful excess of shapely young Latinas.

You forgot to mention...

Fraud.

The original vote of where pledgers would move to was to be when there were 20,000 who pledged to move to a certain state.

Jason Sorens and some other east coast, university-educated, effete libertarians on the board moved the vote up to 5000 pledgers.

And in doing so, they completely missed the r3VOLution.

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

John Stossel, not doing his

John Stossel, not doing his research as always. Got to love it.

Singapore is a socialist state. They collect (slightly) less in taxes than the US; this is true. The government literally controls several companies, and the government has a HUGE influence on education as well as the welfare state.

All the land in Hong Kong is owned by the government. They tax corporations at about 3 times the effective tax rate (of the US). They do overall collect fewer taxes as a percentage of GDP, but many Hong Kong people owe taxes to China because they do business there.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Luckily for Hong Kong...

...they didn't have to deal with most of that garbage until 1997.

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

reedr3v's picture

In my OP I carefully phrased the examples

as models of more economic success than most cities today. It is true they fall far short of freedom in many ways; but there does seem a predictable correlation between economic success and variants of economic freedom.

The Free Cities project is a quite early work in progress; there are no developed examples showing its influence. The founders have excellent ideas worth tracking, IMO. It is all part of the great mix and diaspora of people seeking freedom and experimenting with new, better ways and paths to true liberty.

Let me make two points: 1)

Let me make two points:

1) Success doesn't exist in a vacuum. Iceland has a tremendously succesful economy. That is because they have so many natural resources to exploit. The same goes for so many Scandinavian countries or the UAE. Such models cannot be used everywhere.

2) If anything, Singapore and Hong Kong have achieved economic success with less freedom, not more.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

reedr3v's picture

Dr. NO, to answer:

1) Natural resources, while a factor have never been an adequate provider of economic success. You are cherry-picking. Look at much of the mid-East sitting on all that oil, and Venezuela etc. Many resource-rich areas have puttered along with dismal economic success except for the elite. In Hong Kong, Dubai, and Singapore, the lifestyle for average people is substantially higher compared to comparable regions.
2) How can you explain why so many expats and top financial investors flock to these cities? Again, I was speaking of economic success, not personal liberty. Although many business people find the oppressive load of regulations in the U.S. far greater than those in the examples I cited -- despite their political systems.

It is a paradox, maybe the inefficiency of socialism provides more cracks in the system than our corporatism which, newer, still efficiently rewards political bedfellows?

Dr NO...

Where, then, would you suggest are the best examples of libertarian / small government / economically free cities / states?

None. There are many examples

None.

There are many examples of economically free states. But all of those are culturally very restrictive and/or are pracitcally anarchist.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

I wonder if the good Doctor...

would be willing to give some examples of those states he considers economically free (for educational purposes).

Would you? I'd be very interested to hear.

Your own state

had liberty, free markets before. Now there is no example globally. Some come close to a free market but there the rule of law is lacking to protect the rights of an individual.
Hundred years ago would be were the USA should go back to, with the hindsight and knowledge to never let tyranny/corporatism take over again. Start by closing the central bank. That is the root of the problem.

I don't think this is the

I don't think this is the answer. Americans are far, far, FAR better off today than they were one hundred years ago. Go back to what we had in the 70s and 80s is enough.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

What is 'better off'?

Is it measured by the amount of people who conform to federal dictates?

Or maybe it could be measured by the percentage of the population imprisoned at state and federal levels?

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

I don't know; I thought

I don't know; I thought people understood the general sense of this. We are more literate, more educated, earn more in real wages, have much more spending power, live longer, enjoy a much higher standard of living all-around, worry less about basic necesities, etc.

We are more diverse and more culturally and ethnically tolerante.

We've lost some economic freedom (or transferred our dependency from corporations to government), but socially we have gained much freedom.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Nice way to dodge the incarceration rates!

Literary rates are actually down. High school seniors learn far less than they did in say, the fifties. Professors from places like Harvard are mad that they now have to offer so many remedial courses.
Tocqueville wrote of the vast amount of knowledge residing within the Americans, and this was before Prussia came up with the compulsory state indoctrination centers (for training the masses to submit to the warmongers) that the US implemented en mass before the War of Northern Aggression, or the failed War of Southern Independence, or as the government indoctrination centers call it, the civil war.
Rising wages and buying power are a result of efficiencies, and as mentioned about Hong Kong, such efficiencies are a result of economic freedoms. That is quite the opposite of centralized control, which in areas like education, have become dictated more and more from DC.
The same applies to the rest of your list.
We have many federal regulations that have turned into laws re: social freedoms. The most obvious example would be the Insane War On Drugs, which also removed medications from the sphere of Liberty, and placed their control within centralized agencies. And that happened within the past 100 years, BTW.
And like it or not, Civil Liberties go both ways. Or at least they are supposed to. But here's an example of a state indoctrination center quelling any thoughts not approved by the Central Committee: http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Freshman-suspended-for-commen...

PS we are certainly 'more educated' now. But I answered your statement as though you really meant to imply Americans are 'more knowledgeable' now.

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

Literary rates are actually

Literary rates are actually down"

Literacy rates have always been high, but literacy rates for females have gone up about 15% in the century; rates for males about 10% (http://gongol.com/research/economics/growthstages/)

"High school seniors learn "far less than they did in say, the fifties"

The 50s were not 100 years ago.

"that the US implemented en mass before the War of Northern Aggression, or the failed War of Southern Independence, or as the government indoctrination centers call it, the civil war."

Or as historical revistionists like to call it, the War of Northern Aggression. It is called a civil war, because it was a CIVIL WAR. It is neutral in language, as it should be.

"Rising wages and buying power are a result of efficiencies, and as mentioned about Hong Kong, such efficiencies are a result of economic freedoms>"

Well, as aforementioned, Hong Kong really isn't free. No private ownership of land, limited free speech and information control, not being a democracy; tough regulation of the environment, food, drugs, and safety. They have high fractional reserve banking, regulate their currency, and have government stimulus.

In fact, in America, the rising wages and buying power directly correlate with government cracking down on child labor, introducing things like the minimum wage, social security, workplace safety, etc.

"That is quite the opposite of centralized control, which in areas like education, have become dictated more and more from DC."

True, but I think people overstate the impact of the federal government on education. Most federal outlays to education are just the government giving cash to states. States have bungled up their own education, keeping inept teachers and not adapting to the digital age. Moreover, students are lazier and less motivated in general. Talented students are forced to go to weaker schools due to rising prices and fewer government subsidies.

Countries with the best education in the world all heavily invest in their education, publically.

"The same applies to the rest of your list."

How so?

"We have many federal regulations that have turned into laws re: social freedoms. The most obvious example would be the Insane War On Drugs, which also removed medications from the sphere of Liberty, and placed their control within centralized agencies. And that happened within the past 100 years, BTW."

What I am talking about is more about social attitudes in regards to drugs. A lot of those federal regulations would surely have been done at the state level because of social attitudes. The War on Drugs was done federally because it was convenient and because it was popular...the reason people are against now, for the most part, is because it is unpopular; few care about the whole "states vs. federal/central regulation".

"PS we are certainly 'more educated' now. But I answered your statement as though you really meant to imply Americans are 'more knowledgeable' now."

Yeah, we're more knowledgable, simply due to the progression of science. I absolute terms, at least.

I didn't address your point about incarceration rates because while you have a point there, you are forgetting everything else. It isn't like society's progression is only measured by that one facet.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

. I must apologize for

.
I must apologize for implying that literacy rates are down based on 100 years ago. While they certainly could be better now than 100 years ago, they are declining now. Governments at all levels have become even more involved in education over the past 50 years, so couldn't one say that this has resulted in schooling becoming less effective? That is my opinion, and may prove 'true' if the correct study was done, at the university level, with taxpayers money, of course. And some would not believe this newest study, especially since it is so contrary to what government schools have taught. Anyways... "NEW YORK, June 1 // -- While the Obama administration has announced it will begin to tackle America's declining literacy and high dropout rates, an innovative reading kit is..." http://www.lexdon.com/article/readers_theater_kit_helps_tack...
and
http://sparkaction.org/node/3816

The fifties were however, 50 years ago, which is farther back in history than if we "Go back to what we had in the 70s and 80s...".

Civil War, as used for modern schoolchildren, is NOT neutral in definition. A failed battle of Independence is much more accurate. So if paying attention to details makes me one of many "historical revistionists", then so be it.

It could also be said that; In fact, in America, the rising wages and buying power directly correlate with the creation of professional baseball. Or, I could just as easily say that "students are lazier and less motivated in general" because of the 'crackdown' on child labor, or because young people are shut out of gaining any experience because of minimum wage laws.

The amount spent per child for education goes up yearly, and the claim the government (taxpayer) subsidies are fewer is incorrect. Anecdotal evidence, such as the fact that Denver public schools spend more per student than the better performing surrounding suburban schools help bear this out.

And home-schooled children perform better at the college level than union-educated children, despite having less resources available, and absolutely NO government (taxpayer) funding.

And the "how so?" question you asked? Capitalism.

I agree that most ill-informed government educated people far outnumber the "few (who) care about the whole states vs. federal/central regulation". Could that be why alcohol prohibition required 2 constitutional amendments to deal with perceived harms, yet prescription as well as so-called illicit drugs magically did not require any amendments?

And yes, societies progression should not be measured by only that one facet. And that is not what I said. You assert that government has made society better off, and I assert that our government has destroyed the concept of Individual Liberty, or what the left refers to as Civil Liberties (why do those folks hate Individualism so much?). Furthermore, I also assert that what you may perceive as good (mob rule) others may not find so appealing. And lastly, all societies of mob rule self-destruct

But remember, the terrorists hate us because we are free.

THE MORE I LEARN ABOUT GOVERNMENT
THE MORE I LOVE MY GUNS
FourWindsTradingPost

Fair enough....

But, I agree with the original premise (that Hong Kong is the best example). I have heard Ron Paul refer to it, as well.

I was interested in hearing Dr No's opinion.

But if you actually look at

But if you actually look at Hong Kong, they are actually very socialistic. No land ownership, etc. Decent welfare state, etc. They are also a little lucky since they benefit indirectly from the Chinese expansion of infrastructure.

In any case, a city-state's model's is hardly one that America can copy.

As aforementioned, there are plenty of very "free market" economies, but they lack the rule of law that is very vital to a free market succeeding.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

I accept that

... it is not perfect but I am still yet to see a specific better example.

I am saying that Hong Kong

I am saying that Hong Kong doesn't qualify as an example. State ownership of land, central economic planning, etc. are the complete opposite of a free-market. Plus, Hong Kong is a city-state, not a country.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

good suggestion

in fact i think Ron and other Libertarians should focus on one state and run it according to Libertarian principles. then the difference in the economy, crime and drug policies will be visible to people of other states and the media would not be able to spin it as it does now. i was in fact wishing that Ron ran for Texas Governor and won it and then used his policies to make Texas even better. that would have given his philosophy more weight.

----------------------------
Dr.Ron Paul's 2002 Predictions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

That is the plan!

But first you have to remove the federal control over the states. Without that it can not be achieved.

Bump

Bump

Bump!

John Stossel makes sense.