The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: Democratic Federated Republican Solution

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: At what point(s) did our Founders (see in situ)

Democratic Federated Republican Solution

If you have time and energy for some learning on this subject I can offer a good source and some words quoted from it, and then I can try to briefly explain what is happening to solve this Despotism Problem with the Democratic Federated Republican Solution.

Here is the source:

Here is a quote:

Second, federalism permits the states to operate as laboratories of democracy-to experiment with various policies and Programs. For example, if Tennessee wanted to provide a state-run health system for its citizens, the other 49 states could observe the effects of this venture on Tennessee's economy, the quality of care provided, and the overall cost of health care. If the plan proved to be efficacious other states might choose to emulate it, or adopt a plan taking into account any problems surfacing in Tennessee. If the plan proved to be a disastrous intervention, the other 49 could decide to leave the provision of medical care to the private sector. With national plans and programs, the national officials simply roll the dice for all 284 million people of the United States and hope they get things right.

Experimentation in policymaking also encourages a healthy competition among units of government and allows the people to vote with their feet should they find a law of policy detrimental to their interests. Using again the state-run health system as an example, if a citizen of Tennessee was unhappy with Tennessee's meddling with the provisions of health care, the citizen could move to a neighboring state. Reallocation to a state like North Carolina, with a similar culture and climate, would not be a dramatic shift and would be a viable option. Moreover, if enough citizens exercised this option, Tennessee would be pressured to abandon its foray into socialized medicine, or else lose much of its tax base. To escape a national health system, a citizen would have to emigrate to a foreign country, an option far less appealing and less likely to be exercised than moving to a neighboring state. Without competition from other units of government,the national government would have much less incentive than Tennessee would to modify the objectionable policy. Clearly, the absence of experimentation and competition hampers the creation of effective programs and makes the modification of failed national programs less likely.

That book does not cover the Legal Money Monopoly angle to the Nationalization of what was once a Confederated group of Sovereign, and constitutionally limited, states.

Image how much better Legal Money might be, compared to the ONE Fraud Money, were each State in competition with each State for tax payers willing to give up a few precious coins?

How many States do you know, in America, where the people are working to make their own sovereign money legal?