• your comment is a red herring

    the local property owners don't want the invasion. maybe they do want some social welfare or hospitals. not for you to judge. what you support is the establishment overclass 1,000 miles away using force to prevent people from defending their own property and roads.

  • anyways

    someone below already corrected your economics. mexico's border to the USA is open from the mexican and the american side. if it means more people for one side, means less for the other. thusly, open borders don't mean more people. people don't just spawn in the desert between.

  • Politician-corporate overlord complex

    would not get its cheap labor / population replacement if it didn't provide enough goodies to make 6 dollars an hour attractive. We already have the welfare state, you guys are just supporting the establishment using force to prevent local communities from defending their roads and environs from invasion.

  • Will you finally admit

    that freemasonic pandas molested you, and stole your bike?

  • Those local property owners own the roads.

    Not you, not the owners of Monsanto, or John Mccain, or Obama, or Harry Reid, or your other compatriots.

    They can defend their local roads from invasion like anyone would. It's not my proposal, it's just common sense and property rights.

  • false on many counts

    an open border doesn't necessarily mean more people. mexico's border is open, and people leave.

    more people doesn't necessarily mean more productivity. more people could exist at the same level of productivity per capita. you seem to have no understanding of economics.

    if 15 billion people arrived in space ships willing to work at subsistence (15 dollars a day?), forever, then all wages would be depressed for hundreds of years.

    we'd be fully justified in saying, fly away home, that's not how we do things.

    think a bit, and you won't be confused.

  • You've made a false connection

    I didn't say illegals collect social security. I don't know if they do. I said they live off public services.

    I said that a person could be in favor of social security without supporting illegal immigration. A person could support some level of social welfare without supporting open borders.

    You implied that my comment was merely rebuking entitlements and not about immigration. I disagree. Sweden is a welfare state. That doesn't mean Sweden needs genital mutilating illiterates sucking off the public teet and parasiting on social capital paid in by citizens.

  • Proof enough

    for me. Good work as always john.

  • I didn't propose it

    But the property owners along the border, and volunteers, easily could. They are prevented from doing so by your friends in DC who want population replacement. It's the same strategy Stalin favored.

  • Nonsense

    You can support social security, for example. It is funded by the payroll taxes of people who work, legally, and receive income sufficient to live comfortably and contribute to pensions and taxes.

    This does not oblige you to support open borders, where people break the law, work for dimes and live off public services without contributing, so that rich people don't have to pay living wages for menial work, and so the state gets pliable barely literate new voters.

    Stop your support for easily controlled slave labor and political pawns, and for violating the desires of the property owners who pay for and fund the public spaces and roads being invaded.

  • Fraud is lying

    with the purpose of getting the deceived person to part with money or property, or sign something over on false pretenses.

    The victim always takes the action voluntarily because they were tricked or trusted the deceiver. No force is used, just cunning and deception.

  • Newsflash

    Consumption is not the end all, be all. Production is. People who drive down wages to live at slave / subsistence level and then pick up the slack by exhausting public welfare and services are not a good recipe for economic well being or liberty. A self sustaining population is not one that can only survive by depending on public services to which they contribute little or nothing, while selling their services at dirt wages since they're eating off the public dole.

    Wise up, kid.

  • Seems to me

    it's the politicians and you supporting the controlled invasion.

  • If someone purchases a bucket

    without checking if it contains apples - even if the seller lied - is not a victim of force or aggression.

    Fraud is lying, it is deceit, it is dishonesty, it is tricky, it is craftiness. This is not violence or aggression.

    Sales and marketing rely on trickery and craftiness, outsmarting the consumer, and the consumer falls for every trick on the book.

    Conflating fraud and sharp practices with force and aggression is simply false. Full stop, no question, false.

    You may think lying should be illegal, but that would be an example of when it is GOOD to use FORCE to punish people for non-force. Lying is not force. Therefore, we've found a new example of a situation where force is GOOD against behavior that is not aggressive, but merely wrong and selfish.

    NAP dies a thousand deaths.

  • Hypocrisy

    That's just humans being humans. Libertarians may be a step up, but they're still human. It's like the early Christians who were engaged in faction and disputes over their supposed devotions to Christ, "going to law against each other" and forming status-conferring sub-groups within years of the crucifixion. It's scary, what we are as humans, and makes one question everything. As good as we can be, as high as we can reach in self sacrifice, in art, we are also dark... by our nature and essence. We are not redeemed.

    It's funny, it's like we're devoted to our views provisionally or half-heartedly. We claim to believe it, but we don't believe it quite enough to live it, whatever the consequences, come what may.

    It's like we have a secret doubt, and are hedging our bets. Sure, I believe in peace, I believe in non violence, I believe in forgiveness, I believe in turning the other cheek; but I'm not 100% sure on that, so I just believe it provisionally, and don't actually practice it. I don't practice it unto death, and not even unto inconvenience. I doubt, therefore I am. I doubt, therefore, I am still in my sins. And I am deep, deep in my sins.

    jrd, as far as going to other sites, I also cringe. I landed here somehow, it was just a blog in my RSS. I commented on some other sites, but it wasn't a community. Far be it from me to add another identity onto my existing three, three is quite enough.

    I sense something in your tone, a kind of fatigue with the internet. It brings us freedom, to be able to speak our hearts fully in anonymity, without the constraints of pledging our full selves to our words. We are liars, in a way, except for those who are all the way out there. The rest of us, liars, and we feel it. What good is the freedom from constraint if we don't get to be ourselves. It's really painful to have to be divided against oneself, to be more than one person. Even three. Pain pain pain, not free at all.

    I long for the day I can be me, entire, without worrying that my heart will cost me my bread, or that my freedom and wholeness will force me to give up my indulgence in the pleasures of anonymity.

    Well, celebrate with me that we are part of something that is partly true, even if somewhat unnatural and deformed. And forgive me for being me, in all my ugliness.

  • Don't forget to let us know

    what you see on the way. Always love your travel threads. Only hope you're taking a road trip.

  • Just...wow.

    What else is to be said.

  • I hope I understand it

    And I hope you know how much your praise means.

    I love this place.

    I'm sure there have been places like it, and maybe somewhere are. But none that I know of. There is plenty of fellowship and good vibes in the world, no doubt. But where do so many truth seekers come together and tell their truth, honestly, at odds with each other and often at peace, but really appreciating each other regardless, and sharing so much that goes far beyond anything just intellectual?

    Pat yourself on the back for attracting such a thing, and think twice before letting it go, no matter who comes and goes. Treat it like a wonderful garden to cultivate like a master gardener, knowing when to let it grow, when to prune it, when to box it in, when to water, when to sow new seeds, when to knock down all fences, when to grab the shears again.

    Be proud of your garden, and don't let anyone convince you it's not a great accomplishment, one that only a leader could bring to bear.

    In this modern mess of self selection, sorting, insular bracketing, regional layering, subculture multiplying, social de-cohesion, you have a little literary salon and riotous political coffee house of the highest order, where people ponder everything from the mundane of uhhh revolutonary politicians to the deep questions of soul, meaning, final questions, boring truths, thrilling possibilities.

    Sincerely,
    Bill3

  • I remember your story about your dad.

    He should get a poem too. Well, I don't know him, not that I know you. I'm flattered that you think I will be famous. With any luck, I'll be famous for never being famous, like all true writers.

    I am impressed with myself that I can piss you off, I never seen an angry jrd. As demographic groups go, none of us are representative of our group, that's why we're here. We're special. Like jrd says, let's celebrate each other.

    Smudge says different. Smudge says let's roast each other and clobber each other through the gauntlet of hazing and abuse. Smudge is the spiritual leader of Faction. Smudge's motto is not a chicken in every pot, but Taste the blade from Smudge pot.

    I really wonder if there's any place in all the internet world like this place.

  • I like it

    you kept with the maritime theme. Oh smudge, how I miss you.