No Private Property = Socialism = Communism = No Liberty
Posted October 21st, 2009 by TraditionalGOPer
These videos explain how nonprofits and the government acquire private property and turn them into public lands. By saying the the property is potentiality refuge land, the land owner can no longer use their private property. The owner loses rights and then many times sells it to the non-profits for cheap which then sells for a profit to the government.
I was shocked when I watched these videos. Please take the time to watch them and pass them on to others. I think it explains a lot. Cap and Trade is just a piece of the puzzle.
This will affect all of us if we don't stop them.
Behind the Green Curtain (Environmentalism used for Land Grabbing)
http://video.google.com/v...
Also,
Agenda 21 for Dummies
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
Corporations should not get special treatment either
Too often we see instances were corporations benefit from government interference in the market place, whether it be through farm subsidies or some other credit like cash for clunkers. In the end, the consumer suffers, while the corporation benefit hugely.
Personally, I would like government out of the marketplace altogether and go back to a true "free market" and the motto of let the buyer beware. I also think that if the government needs to tax, it should be in the form of tariffs. This would stop some of the exportation of jobs to cheap labor markets. While prices might rise a bit, thing would balance out in the long run and Americans would still have jobs.
As for the videos on the taking of land, if we look at other countries, One of the first things done in a communistic/socialist takeover is that private property gets confiscated. We need to not get fooled by the environmental movement. Right now we are fighting the "Food Safety Bill" and "Cap and Trade" among others.
History is repeating itself.
Corporate property is private private property too.
Just thought I'd remind some here of that.
Some here apparently think that if property is owned in shares by investors (in corporation) that it should no longer enjoy protection from regulation. They say corporations shouldn't have rights. This is where we see the divide between true Ron Paul advocates and socialists who believe government should regulate corporations for the "public good."