8 votes

John Stossel: We have 50 State Laboratories (video)



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Nooo its 57 states!!!!

Don't you recall Obama visited all 57 states including the "state of denial" in his 2008 campaign.

hahaha :)

____

"Take hold of the future or the future will take hold of you." -- Patrick Dixon

Counterfeit Competition

A Democratic Federated Republic is designed as a Free Market of Government as claimed by the counterfeit libertarian Stossel.

In fact this country is Consolidated into one Nation State.

The People were warned, some listen.

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/ratification/elliot/vol3/...

___________________________________________

Mr. GEORGE MASON. Mr. Chairman, whether the Constitution be good or bad, the present clause clearly discovers that it is a national government, and no longer a Confederation. I mean that clause which gives the first hint of the general government laying direct taxes. The assumption of this power of laying direct taxes does, of itself, entirely change the confederation of the states into one consolidated government. This power, being at discretion, unconfined, and without any kind of control, must carry every thing before it. The very idea of converting what was formerly a confederation to a consolidated government, is totally subversive of every principle which has hitherto governed us. This power is calculated to annihilate totally the state governments. Will the people of this great community submit to be individually taxed by two different and distinct powers? Will they suffer themselves to be doubly harassed? These two concurrent powers cannot exist long together; the one will destroy the other: the general government being paramount to, and in every respect more powerful than the state governments, the latter must give way to the former. Is it to be supposed that one national government will suit so extensive a country, embracing so many climates, and containing inhabitants so very different in manners, habits, and customs? It is ascertained, by history, that there never was a government over a very extensive country without destroying the liberties of the people: history also, supported by the opinions of the best writers, shows us that monarchy may suit a large territory, and despotic governments ever so extensive a country, but that popular governments can only exist in small territories. Is there a single example, on the face of the earth, to support a contrary opinion? Where is there one exception to this general rule? Was there ever an instance of a general national government extending over so extensive a country, abounding in such a variety of climates, &c., where the people retained their liberty? I solemnly declare that no man is a greater friend to a firm union of the American states than I am; but, sir, if this great end can be obtained without hazarding the rights of the people, why should we recur to such dangerous principles? Requisitions have been often refused, sometimes from an impossibility of complying with them; often from that great variety of circumstances which retards the collection of moneys; and perhaps sometimes from a wilful design of procrastinating. But why shall we give up to the national government this power, so dangerous in its nature, and for which its members will not have sufficient information? Is it not well known that what would be a proper tax in one state would be grievous in another? The gentleman who hath favored us with a eulogium in favor of this system, must, after all the encomiums he has been pleased to bestow upon it, acknowledge that our federal representatives must be unacquainted with the situation of their constituents. Sixty-five members cannot possibly know the situation and circumstances of all the inhabitants of this immense continent. When a certain sum comes to be taxed, and the mode of levying to be fixed, they will lay the tax on that article which will be most productive and easiest in the collection, without consulting the real circumstances or convenience of a country, with which, in fact, they cannot be sufficiently acquainted.
____________________________________________

Joe

SteveMT's picture

We are headed in that direction, but we are not there yet.

There is still time to exert our 10th Amendment Right's and either nullify or secede.

Three I know.

1.
Events that brought about Magna Carte with Trial by Jury based upon sortition.

2.
The period in America between 1776 and 1788.

3.
The Icelandic Commonwealth
a. Ancient
b. Modern

There are also the examples of Ancient Greece, Holland at the time of the American Revolution, and Switzerland.

It can be done, as the people who know better act better, and the power shifts, the legal criminals run into their inevitable law of diminishing returns, a law they must know intimately, as their numbers swell, the numbers of parasites swell, and as their hosts grow fewer, and more costly to maintain, and they reach for their final solutions.

It can be done, it has been done, when the Legal Crime Business Psycho skips a beat, and the people find a way to disconnect, and stay disconnected from it.

It was really tragic at that time when the Central Bankers, Masters and Slaves, took over in 1788, really bad, really evil, so shed it, get rid of it, and force it out of business, and do so competitively, productively, honestly, morally, and with due process due everyone where the only exceptions to the voluntary rules are those who insist upon making their way through life by criminal means; at least take away their badges.

Joe

Why would you say that?

Stossel is a real live top of the Nolan chart Libertarian.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty" TJ

Are you Joe King

Ron Paul tops the chart, and you place Stossel on the top?

What is a Nolan chart?

Perhaps we do not share the meanings of words?

Joe