[Vision2020] So, This is What Being a Libertarian is All About . . .
Joe Campbell
philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Sat Jun 30 02:54:06 PDT 2012
I don't disagree with much of this, other than the claim that our economy won't suffer if we lose the illegal workforce. And there's no solution here either. What do you think we should do about whatever problem it is you think we have? Joe
On Jun 30, 2012, at 3:11 AM, Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Joe,
>
> I agree with you that primary reason many hard working Americans cannot get proper documentation for US Citizenship in this country is because they are Hispanic. It is obviously the reason because this nation is not prejudiced against hard workers or cheap labor.
>
> The undocumented Hispanic population does have social and economic problems, but that is mostly because they face bigotry and poor wages. Any race or group would have these problems if the country treated them this way.
>
> I do however disagree that raised wages of seasonal farm workers would significantly increase the costs of food and produce in the United States. The wages and benefits of these hard workers are so low that a doubling or maybe even tripling of these wages would be a negligible increase in the total cost of production and delivery of our food supply.
>
> The wages are low because some businesses take advantage of these workers because they are unable to get the documentation that they need to stay here, and their options of better working conditions and pay are limited.
>
> The undocumented status hurts the wages and working conditions of not only those who cannot get documentation, but also poorer unskilled and semiskilled workers. No employer is going to hire a hard working US citizen at a fair market rate with full benefits when they can hire an undocumented one with no benefits at minimum wage. Even if an employer wanted to do so, they would be wiped out by their competition that would.
>
> Hard working Americans, documented or not, deserve better wages, better benefits, and better working and living conditions. Our treatment of Hispanics in this country is nothing less than inhumane and a disgrace to the country's claims of equality for all. This nation is a nation of diversity and equality. Hispanics are a part of this country, always have been. And if someone doesn't except that, they don't accept America, and they are not true Americans.
>
> Donovan J. Arnold
>
>
>
> From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
> To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> Cc: Moscow Vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 10:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] So, This is What Being a Libertarian is All About . . .
>
> Thanks for the post, Paul. These are some interesting points.
>
> Just a quick question: Don't you think it speaks badly of the Pauls
> that they both fall victim to these distractions? I don't mean to pick
> on them but a lot of people paint them as not your standard
> politicians but they seem pretty standard to me once you look into
> things more deeply. In the end they are no different than the others,
> more interested in getting elected than in honoring their own
> principles. We keep hoping for some politicians to ride in on a white
> horse and save the day but the Pauls are not those guys.
>
> Another issue that seems like a non-issue to me in this campaign:
> immigration. Let's suppose that it is correct that illegal immigrants
> are a drain on the economy and a source of other social problems. It
> isn't clear that any solution to that set of problems makes us better
> off. The role that illegal immigrants play in the economy is enormous.
> Take them away and you've got a whole new set of problems to deal
> with, rising produce costs just being one part of that new set of
> problems. Someone is going to have to give me a big picture solution,
> a way of getting rid of illegal immigrants that doesn't itself result
> in economic problems, before I'll think that it is something worth
> worrying about. And the fact that much of the worry is the result of
> good old fashioned bigotry, that politicians are playing on the
> prejudices of certain voters to get votes, is upsetting as well.
>
> Joe
>
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > It's an important issue. I'm just saying that it's one that has been used
> > as a distraction from issues those in power don't want us to be debating,
> > like a magician uses distraction to hide the details of how his card trick
> > works. What issues are they trying to distract us from? Anything that
> > gives them more power, like the Patriot Act, drone kill lists, etc. Who is
> > trying to distract us? Those currently in power, and most of those who are
> > trying to gain that power. What they don't really care about are issues
> > that have little to do with cementing their power base, such as the abortion
> > issue. It doesn't matter to those in power what is decided on this issue,
> > so they distract us with it so we won't ask them the hard questions.
> > Immigration is another one.
> >
> > Just my opinion. This has nothing to do with my views on abortion, which I
> > haven't shared here (at least recently).
> >
> > If you want any control back over what happens, don't get distracted by
> > these issues right now. Tackle them after the election. Research Romney's
> > and Obama's views on the Patriot Act and other such issues. You'll find
> > that they agree on way too much, for my liking at least.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Kris Freitag <kfreitag at roadrunner.com>
> > To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>; Joe Campbell
> > <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
> > Cc: Moscow Vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:18 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] So, This is What Being a Libertarian is All About
> > . . .
> >
> > "Yes, yes, I know, except that they want to take away
> > the freedom of women to have the choice to have an abortion, blah, blah,
> > blah. That's exactly the point I'm trying to make, this one issue is
> > gutting them right now."
> >
> > AS IT SHOULD. It's only the right of any woman to her own body. BLAH ,BLAH
> > etc.
> >
> > So only half the population gets civil liberties?
> > Kris
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Rumelhart" <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> > To: "Joe Campbell" <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
> > Cc: "Moscow Vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 9:27 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] So, This is What Being a Libertarian is All About
> > . . .
> >
> >
> >
> > Rand and Ron Paul *are* libertarians. They just have their panties in a
> > twist about this one particular issue. I wish they'd learn to leave it
> > alone while they are campaigning, though, because it opens them up to
> > criticisms like this one that ignore their other views that actually
> > *do* support small government and the protection of civil liberties.
> > There isn't another Presidential contender, for example, that does more
> > than pay lip-service to "small government" other than Ron Paul. Every
> > other candidate out there wants to expand Executive powers, Paul wants
> > to reduce government down to the bare minimum allowed by the
> > Constitution. No other candidate is a bigger protector of civil
> > liberties, either. Yes, yes, I know, except that they want to take away
> > the freedom of women to have the choice to have an abortion, blah, blah,
> > blah. That's exactly the point I'm trying to make, this one issue is
> > gutting them right now.
> >
> > The Pauls have just fallen into the same trap that most everyone else
> > has fallen into; they have become distracted by an emotional issue that
> > is a political smoke grenade. If they would have set this issue aside,
> > no matter how important they feel it is, and stuck to their other issues
> > they would be much better off. As it is, they have fallen into a trap
> > in the same way that a bunch of ravenous dogs can be distracted by
> > tossing some red meat at them. Trust me, the people throwing meat at the
> > dogs know exactly what they are doing, and the dogs fall for it every time.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > On 06/27/2012 08:00 PM, Joe Campbell wrote:
> >> Personally I'm not incensed. But the guy is NOT a libertarian. Someone
> >> who is fiscally conservative yet doesn't mind government interference
> >> in our private lives is not anti-government. He actually believes that
> >> the government can help solve problems, right?
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:54 PM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
> >>> Tom
> >>> I doubt that you would be as incensed about similar actions done by
> >>> liberals. They do it all the time. I don't like it regardless of who does
> >>> it. I would favor a law that says only amendments that are germane to the
> >>> main bill can be added.
> >>> Roger
> >>> -----Original message-----
> >>> From: Tom Hansen thansen at moscow.com
> >>> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 08:07:49 -0700
> >>> To: Moscow Vision 2020 vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>> Subject: [Vision2020] So, This is What Being a Libertarian is All About .
> >>> . .
> >>>
> >>>> Is this what the Libertarians' battle cry of "Less Government!" is all
> >>>> about?
> >>>>
> >>>> Courtesy of Outside the Beltway at:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/rand-paul-trying-to-add-personhood-amendment-to-flood-insurance-bill/
> >>>>
> >>>> -----------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>> Rand Paul Trying To Add “Personhood” Amendment To Flood Insurance Bill
> >>>>
> >>>> WASHINGTON — Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) moved this week to hold a
> >>>> noncontroversial flood insurance bill hostage until the Senate agrees that
> >>>> life begins at fertilization.
> >>>>
> >>>> The bill, which would financially boost the National Flood Insurance
> >>>> Program on the cusp of hurricane season, had been expected to pass easily in
> >>>> the Senate. But since Paul on Monday offered an unrelated “fetal personhood”
> >>>> amendment, which would give legal protections to fetuses from the moment of
> >>>> fertilization, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is threatening to
> >>>> halt progress on the legislation.
> >>>>
> >>>> “I’m told last night that one of our Republican senators wants to offer
> >>>> an amendment — listen to this one — wants to offer an amendment on when life
> >>>> begins,” Reid said on the Senate floor Tuesday. “I am not going to put up
> >>>> with that on flood insurance. I can be condemned by outside sources; my
> >>>> friends can say, ‘Let them have a vote on it.’ There will not be a vote on
> >>>> that on flood insurance We’ll either do flood insurance with the amendments
> >>>> that deal with flood insurance, or we won’t do it. We’ll have an extension”
> >>>>
> >>>> Reid has allowed Republicans to attach unrelated amendments to other
> >>>> important bills in the past few months. Most notably, he let the Senate vote
> >>>> on a contraception-related amendment, proposed by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), to
> >>>> a transportation bill. But Reid called Paul’s measure “ridiculous” and
> >>>> “outlandish,” and asked Republicans to deal with him on “their side of the
> >>>> aisle.”
> >>>> Paul told reporters on Tuesday afternoon that he is “just trying to get
> >>>> a vote for people who elected me.”
> >>>>
> >>>> “Can you believe that they’re exasperated with me?” he said, responding
> >>>> to criticism of his attempt to attach the unrelated amendment. “If [Reid
> >>>> will] give me a freestanding vote, I’ll take a freestanding vote any time.”
> >>>>
> >>>> -----------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>> Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-NV) response . . .
> >>>>
> >>>> “I am not going to put up with that on flood insurance. I can be
> >>>> condemned by outside sources — my friends can say, ‘Let them have a vote on
> >>>> it.’ There will not be a vote on that on flood insurance. We’ll either do
> >>>> flood insurance with the amendments that deal with flood insurance, or we
> >>>> won’t do it. We’ll have an extension.”
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdw36CZSbeI
> >>>>
> >>>> ------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>> Seeya round town, Moscow.
> >>>>
> >>>> Tom Hansen
> >>>> Moscow, Idaho
> >>>>
> >>>> "If not us, who?
> >>>> If not now, when?"
> >>>>
> >>>> - Unknown
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> =======================================================
> >>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >>> http://www.fsr.net/
> >>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>> =======================================================
> >> =======================================================
> >> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >> http://www.fsr.net/
> >> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >> =======================================================
> >>
> >
> >
> > =======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net/
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > =======================================================
> >
> >
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net/
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120630/8f6f1c44/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list