It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Having trouble viewing the video but I just want to say that Anarchy is wrong and will never work
Here's an example
There's mass anarchy in govt. and it's not in your favor
Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
Ron Paul will never win because of his comments about Medicare/Medicare/Social Security.
It's a pipe dream to think that'll play outside of a very small minority.
He only looks sane in a field that chooses Bachmann... put him against Obama, who will say, "Ron Paul says the program millions use to afford medicine is illegal".
He won't win.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Having trouble viewing the video but I just want to say that Anarchy is wrong and will never work
Here's an example
There's mass anarchy in govt. and it's not in your favor
I take it you believe (Dont you mean Republic?democracy and constitutionally limited government "work".(It did before, that's how we became a superpower, ooh and the invention of the Blast furnace thanks to Bessemer...
Regardless of how many wars, regulations, and victimless crimes they create.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
Ron Paul will never win because of his comments about Medicare/Medicare/Social Security.
It's a pipe dream to think that'll play outside of a very small minority.
He only looks sane in a field that chooses Bachmann... put him against Obama, who will say, "Ron Paul says the program millions use to afford medicine is illegal".
He won't win.
Ron Paul could not single handedly abolish medicare and social security as president. I think most rational people realize this. So his stance on those programs is pretty much irrelevant. What is relevant is that he would be able to end the wars immediately.
edit on 18-8-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by mnemeth1
I take it you believe democracy and constitutionally limited government "work".
Regardless of how many wars, regulations, and victimless crimes they create.
Originally posted by GenerationXisMarching
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
see, the thing is at you wouldnt need medicaid because you SS checks would come and they wouldnt lose it all on taxes, all kinds of beurocratic garbage. you dont need medicaid if you lose that giant burden. thats just not how things work now, so it seems inconceivable that people will actually get to spend their money rather than send it to a government we arent convinced even cares about us. sales tax alone is enough to fund us (when we arent spending like the ship is sinking) and people actually have money to spend. you know, the money they pick out of your check every week etc.
Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Originally posted by mnemeth1
I take it you believe democracy and constitutionally limited government "work".
Regardless of how many wars, regulations, and victimless crimes they create.
Ummm...
How many wars did constitutionally limited Govt. create?
Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
The U.S currently has a constitutionally limited government. U.S government ignores the constitution but the constitution still limits it from doing these things. The constitution simply can't enforce itself. It was a great idea, but it doesn't work in practice.
Originally posted by GovtFlu
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
Part of me believes Dr. Paul, along with alex jones, beck, limbaugh, hannity.. all those people on TV/radio are placed in the media, to a certain extent, for the sole purpose of articulating "our" relative rage.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
I love this video showing the statements by Ron Paul that demonstrate his commitment to voluntary government.
Beautifully done.
All Austrian economists who believe in their work are anarcho-capitalists.
Voluntarism, Anarcho-capitalism, and Agorism, all mean roughly the same thing. I like to use the term Anarchism because it is such a volatile reaction provoking word. No rulers. It's much more powerful than voluntarism.