Free State Project Forum

FSP -- General Discussion => Prospective Participants => Topic started by: Bama Sam on January 01, 2004, 12:54:08 pm

Title: I have.....
Post by: Bama Sam on January 01, 2004, 12:54:08 pm
some issues with some strains of logic on here. You see, I feel that everything that I posess is mine. (property, land, etc)
I believe that people that start businesses own them (grocery stores, etc.) Not the people that shop there. My wife is my only collective partner.

I just want everyone (the government and the non-working parasites) to get their hands out of my pockets. When the hands are out of my pockets, I will cheerfully give and help any who need it.

You can probably tell that I just got my last pay stub for the year.
$18k worth of armed robbery under the guise of "taxes and deductions".

I am not a communal type, but I help my neighbors and they help me.

This is the kind of guy that I am. My question is...Am I in the wrong forum here?
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Stumpy on January 01, 2004, 01:01:06 pm
I (and probably most everyone here) agree with what you said Sam.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Jhogun on January 01, 2004, 02:35:45 pm
Bama Sam, I'm sure you'll find virtually everyone here is of like mind.  Don't hurt anyone else and don't mess with anyone else's property (that includes government).
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Reaper on January 01, 2004, 02:48:32 pm
I'd say anyone who disagrees is in the wrong forum.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: <Patrick> on January 02, 2004, 01:00:40 am
I'd say anyone who disagrees is in the wrong forum.

Exactly.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: <Patrick> on January 02, 2004, 01:02:13 am
Quote
some issues with some strains of logic on here. You see, I feel that everything that I posess is mine. (property, land, etc)

You are in the right place. What's mine is mine and what's yours is yours! Anyone who says otherwise is a thief!
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: thewaka on January 05, 2004, 03:47:28 pm
Bama Sam, are these strains of logic you have a problem with coming from the GeoLibs (BillG, for example)? If so, you can see from the previous replies that view is not representative of FSP members. I would say they are a very small minority of folks here. Though many of us disagree with their views regarding ownership and taxing of land, I do believe they agree with the rest of us on most issues. If you have any specific concerns, please post.

Diana
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Mike Lorrey on January 05, 2004, 04:17:04 pm
Depends on what Bama Sam means by 'whats mine is mine'. Some people think owning something means the right to destroy it and spread the results all over everybody elses playpens. Even anarcho capitalists recognise the individual responsibility for negative externalities.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: thewaka on January 05, 2004, 04:25:38 pm
Some people think owning something means the right to destroy it and spread the results all over everybody elses playpens.

Mike, if someone thinks this way, then they don't believe that absolute ownership applies to everyone, b/c if they did, they couldn't put their stuff (destroyed or not) in anyone else's playpen without permission of the owner. I doubt Bama Sam thinks this way based on the whole post.

Diana
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Dawn on January 05, 2004, 10:28:53 pm
While there may be posts on these boards at time that make you scratch your head, remember, these posts are by individuals, not by the FSP. I just ignore the posts that are not in alignment with the FSP goals. Anyone can post anything here - whether or not it is agreeable to the FSP philosophy.

You ARE in the right place!
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Bama Sam on January 11, 2004, 05:41:06 pm
Man, I see every little statement parsed and dissected ad nauseum. I am starting to think that the FSP may be its' own worst enemy. I don't know who is in the FSP. I don't know how you get into the FSP. I thought that anyone on this board had already subscribed to the basic FSP platform.
I am not planning on moving to NH. Does that mean that I am not FSP? If anyone is not FSP, shouldn't the FSP'ers give us the boot?
I have read posts from some of the most pompous, blowhards that I have ever seen. Pin headed intellectuals was the term George Wallace used.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: FreeBoB on January 11, 2004, 06:48:13 pm
Bama Sam,
I agree with your views as stated - welcome.  You're welcome to be here if you find it interesting.  There are threads and topics that I don't find of interest, so I just don't read on.  Like all media, we can change the channel...
Brian
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: mark on January 12, 2004, 01:52:32 am
I am not planning on moving to NH. Does that mean that I am not FSP?


You should plan on helping some of us blow-hards.  :D
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: vermass on January 12, 2004, 12:20:11 pm
     Welcome, but I must ask that you reconsider moving with the FSP. There are a few people with the FSP that I do not believe I would get along with. You seem like someone I would get along with (All the leadership also seem to be people I would get along with). I've had 32K extorted from my paycheck this year!
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Morpheus on January 16, 2004, 02:31:50 am
Quote
Man, I see every little statement parsed and dissected ad nauseum.

It is called communication. And "ad nauseum" is elitist. You cold-hearted Leftists are always trying to hurt my brain...

Quote
I am starting to think that the FSP may be its' own worst enemy.

What in Hell gives you that impression? Where is all of this coming from, anyways??

Quote
I don't know who is in the FSP.

Evil, evil people...

Quote
I don't know how you get into the FSP.

There is a main page. All it takes is a little effort.

Quote
I thought that anyone on this board had already subscribed to the basic FSP platform.

Basically speaking, anyone can post on the Forum. Liberals, Socialists, Communists, Conservatives, Theocrats, Fascists {Left and Right, alike}, Nazis, White Supremacists, etc etc, have all visited the Forum. Most come and then quickly go, leaving the Libertarians and the Moderate Libertarians to talk among themselves. I fall into the former persuasion.

Quote
I am not planning on moving to NH. Does that mean that I am not FSP?

No. Not only are you NOT the Free State Project, but you are not even a MEMBER of the Free State Project. Nor am I, for that matter- on either count- although I do intend to move to New Hampshire someday.
Why aren't you?

Quote
If anyone is not FSP, shouldn't the FSP'ers give us the boot?

Read above. Also note that if this were done, the chances of recruitment would be greatly reduced.
As to whether your kind should be booted.. that is up to the actual owners of the Forum to decide. Personally, I wouldn't boot you, and I don't think they would either so far.. but you'd have to consult them. Do you want to be booted??

Quote
I have read posts from some of the most pompous, blowhards that I have ever seen.

Am I one of them? You should get rid of the comma...

Quote
Pin headed intellectuals was the term George Wallace used.

I don't think that you'll earn much respect here by citing the words of a White Supremacist/Segregationist. You certainly haven't with me. Maybe you will from Robert of Texas {Although I think that I scared him off}, and the now departed Fenris, but no one else.
To be honest with you, I cannot help but to be rather flattered whenever a redneck insults me. While their southern drawl and limited vocabulary is evidence enough of their intellectual inferiority, their "common man" insults pour even more water onto the already low fire.
Surely you are not one of those "Neo-Confederates", or "Flaggots", as Neal Boortz would say? If so, I'm not impressed, and would suggest that you grow up- especially being that you hail from Taxachusetts. HA.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Mike Lorrey on January 16, 2004, 02:54:03 am
Frankly, if MY tax bill was $18k, I'd be packing up and heading for the Free State ASAP. Maybe bama sam likes paying taxes. Not me...
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Morpheus on January 16, 2004, 03:20:24 am
Exactly...
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Bama Sam on January 16, 2004, 09:15:45 am
Acuallly moving to NH would only decrease the taxes by a couple thousand dollars. Which would be promptly devoured by a higher cost of living. It would be a net loss for me.

Yes Morphy, you would be one of the blowhards that I spoke of. I had the decency to not name anyone or sling insults. That is called manners. You must see yourself as a blowhard, you acted insulted and started name calling. Leftist? me? I am the champion of champions concerning personal liberties and states rights. You sir, strike me as an idiot. People of your ilk will doom this movement.

Redneck is a state of mind, not a state of residence. You and people like you give yankees a bad name.
FYI....George Wallace ALWAYS won with the black vote.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Mike Lorrey on January 16, 2004, 09:50:50 am
zactly HOW is NH a higher cost of living than massholchusetts????
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Mike Lorrey on January 16, 2004, 09:55:10 am

Redneck is a state of mind, not a state of residence. You and people like you give yankees a bad name.
FYI....George Wallace ALWAYS won with the black vote.

Sorry bub, but slave mentalities will always vote for their master. When the KKK is manning the polling stations, they know they don't have any other choice.

Redneck is a state of mind indeed. Favoring a world where slavery is possible ain't redneckism, such a foold would just be a dumb hick. Either freedom exists for all men, or it ain't freedom, and it aint a right.

Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Bama Sam on January 16, 2004, 10:34:42 am
zactly HOW is NH a higher cost of living than massholchusetts????

You are not very bright are you? I call myself Bama Sam, I am listed as living in Cullman, ALABAMA. How did you and the other blowhard come to the conclusion that I live in Mass.? KKK manning the voting places? Idiot! You two sound like you came straight from the democratunderground website. I am amazed that you two idiots could even turn on a computer, much less connect to the internet.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Mike Lorrey on January 16, 2004, 02:23:45 pm
I apologize for stating you are from massholia. I had read someone else say it, and assumed they were basing the claim on some fact. Sorry bout that.

I do note, however, that the Constitution of Alabama recognises:
a) the emminent domain power of the state
b) the property tax authority of the town, county, and state (with limitations on the extent of said taxes).

Property tax limitations in Alabama total $16.50 per thousand dollars valuation, which is about $5.00 lower than the NH average. NH in turn has no income tax, nor sales tax.

AL income tax is 5% on income over $3,000. State sales tax is 4%, and local sales taxes are also allowed.

AL also charges a 5% gross receipts tax on contractors in the mountain lakes area, and 4% elsewhere in the state. 6% on all communications services. 2% on gross receipts of dry cleaning operators. 4% utilities tax. 2.2% on owners of utilities gross receipts.

What was it you were saying about 'owning your stuff'????
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Bruce_Morgan on January 16, 2004, 02:45:47 pm
Looking back at Bama's original post, it appeared to me that he was remarking on the $18K missing from his paycheck due to federal extortion.  

Bama, if that is so, then I challenge you to show me legislation being considered in Montgomery that is congruent to:

HB1193 (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2004/HB1193.html) AN ACT establishing a committee to study the constitutionality of the federal income tax and constitutional abuses in the collection of the income tax and its effects on New Hampshire citizens.

or HB1245 (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2004/HB1245.html) AN ACT nullifying the Sixteenth amendment to the United States Constitution
 
or CACR25 (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2004/CACR0025.html) A Constitutional Amendment prohibiting an income tax PROVIDING THAT: no tax on personal income shall be levied by the state of New Hampshire.

These are being considered in Concord right now, without the support of 20,000 Porcupines!  Is there a politician in Alabama who would even consider submitting bills such as these?

This in itself is reason enough for me to start packing for the move.  I will never feel the loss of those warm Texas winter days knowing that my interests are being represented by the heroes who sponsor these bills.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: LeopardPM on January 16, 2004, 08:47:37 pm
Looking back at Bama's original post, it appeared to me that he was remarking on the $18K missing from his paycheck due to federal extortion.  

Bama, if that is so, then I challenge you to show me legislation being considered in Montgomery that is congruent to:

HB1193 (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2004/HB1193.html) AN ACT establishing a committee to study the constitutionality of the federal income tax and constitutional abuses in the collection of the income tax and its effects on New Hampshire citizens.

or HB1245 (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2004/HB1245.html) AN ACT nullifying the Sixteenth amendment to the United States Constitution
 
or CACR25 (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2004/CACR0025.html) A Constitutional Amendment prohibiting an income tax PROVIDING THAT: no tax on personal income shall be levied by the state of New Hampshire.

These are being considered in Concord right now, without the support of 20,000 Porcupines!  Is there a politician in Alabama who would even consider submitting bills such as these?

This in itself is reason enough for me to start packing for the move.  I will never feel the loss of those warm Texas winter days knowing that my interests are being represented by the heroes who sponsor these bills.


I didn't know! EXCELLENT! geez, laying the foundation against the fed income tax is amazing! wooHOO!  paving the way for the FSP to really make a difference...
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: CaptiousDuality on January 17, 2004, 04:19:39 am

HB1193 (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2004/HB1193.html) AN ACT establishing a committee to study the constitutionality of the federal income tax and constitutional abuses in the collection of the income tax and its effects on New Hampshire citizens.

or HB1245 (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2004/HB1245.html) AN ACT nullifying the Sixteenth amendment to the United States Constitution
 
or CACR25 (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2004/CACR0025.html) A Constitutional Amendment prohibiting an income tax PROVIDING THAT: no tax on personal income shall be levied by the state of New Hampshire.


I love these people!
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Morpheus on January 17, 2004, 10:49:12 am
I was mistaken. It would appear that I was observing vermass's profile instead of yours, Bama.
Sorry, vermass.

Hey, Mike, would you care to prove your claim about the KKK having once infiltrated the Voting Booths in the South? I have read of that myself, but I would love to see the Neo-Confederate's reaction.
He called you an idiot, by the way...
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Mike Lorrey on January 17, 2004, 12:28:41 pm
It is/was so endemic that all you have to do is ask anyone who was involved in voting registration drives among southern blacks.

There is the classic story of a black fellow going to register to vote at the town clerks office. The constable is there, and when the clerk tells him that a black wants to register to vote, he comes out to administer a literacy test, which was SOP at the time.
Now the black fellow is educated, so he isn't concerned, until the constable whips out a newspaper to read. It is a Chinese newspaper.
Constable says, "Boy, can you read this newspaper?"
"Uh, yassuh, ah kin."
"Really, what does it say?"
"Sez no nigga gonna vote in this town."

Looking at the records of campaign speeches, any candidate who spoke against miscegenation was KKK. Current Senator Byrd is one such, an acknowledged past grand wizard.

See more:
http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/06/06_Blacks.html

http://www.ocoeeproject.com/overview.html

http://www.nota.org/washjm_nota.html

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/apr2001/flor-a09.shtml

especially:
http://www.geocities.com/__izzy__/Dengue/kkk/history.htm
"Early 1900's William J. Simmons, a former Methodist preacher, organized a new Klan in Stone Mountain, Georgia in 1915 as a patriotic, Protestant fraternal society. This new Klan directed its activity against, not just blacks, but any group it considered un-American, including any immigrants, Jews, and Roman Catholics. The Ku Klux Klan grew rapidly from here and had more than 2 million members throughout the country by the mid-1920's. Although the Klan still reverted at times to violence of previous years, burning crosses, torturing and murdering those who they opposed, most of the Klan acted through peaceful means. The KKK instead became a more powerful political force as it elected many public officials throughout the nation."

http://www.swkohio.org/history.htm
"When Hiram W. Evans was elected  Imperial Wizard, William Joseph  Simmons became the Emperor. The KKK had numerous members, upwards of 6 million people. The Klan also had  some prestigious members, such as Presidents  Calvin Coolidge and Woodrow Wilson, as well as members within the  Senate and other high ranking statesmen. "

http://www.africana.com/research/encarta/tt_026.asp
"Other Jim Crow laws did not specifically mention race but were written and applied in ways that discriminated against African Americans. Literacy tests and poll taxes, administered with informal loopholes and trick questions, barred nearly all African Americans from voting. For example, though more than 130,000 blacks were registered to vote in Louisiana in 1896, only 1342 were on the rolls in 1904.

Disfranchisement was often defended by invoking the mythology of Reconstruction, in which southern whites claimed that unsophisticated black voters had been manipulated by northern "carpetbaggers" who had moved south after the war. Jim Crow proponents also found ammunition in the incendiary propaganda of the Southern white press, which published sensational and exaggerated accounts of crimes committed by African Americans. As Woodward and other historians have pointed out, an atmosphere emerged of racist hysteria, which further fueled lynching, antiblack rioting, and the rise of the Ku Klux Klan ."


Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Morpheus on January 17, 2004, 04:16:24 pm
Thank you, Mike. This information is very enlightening.

What say you now, Neo-Confederate?
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Bama Sam on January 17, 2004, 04:18:28 pm
I would say that the original comments were directed at George Wallace. The genius gentleman from NH goes and collects info that would appear (at first glance) to have predated the Wallace era by more than a couple of decades. All of the race problems that yankees try to hang on the south are true, but also very old and have not been of any consequence for a very long time. Actually, I spent some time in Wisconsin and Michigan since the early 90's and have found both to be much more racially intolerant than anywhere in the deep south. I will apologize to Mr. Lorrey for the idiot comment. Morphy would appear to have cornered the market in that commodity.
To the gentleman about the taxes. I have not delved very deeply into Alabama's tax structure. I do know that I pay approximately $425 yearly on a quarter million dollar home, that would probably cost me a great deal more than that to build in NH.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Bama Sam on January 17, 2004, 04:25:31 pm
HB1245 (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2004/HB1245.html) AN ACT nullifying the Sixteenth amendment to the United States Constitution

I do think that some of those politicians have a real set on them. Alabama's politicians are about the sorriest buch of  good ol' boys ever to run for office.

Be sure to tell the folks in the NH statehouse that it takes 2/3 of the states to repeal the 16th ammendment. NH can't do it alone.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Bama Sam on January 17, 2004, 04:31:11 pm
Thank you, Mike. This information is very enlightening.

What say you now, Neo-Confederate?
I still say that you are not very bright. You are trying to insult me, but the FSP movement is trying to do basically the same thing as the Confederacy did.
You can't call me a neo confederate. I am a Confederate. I still believe in states rights and the smallest federal government that is required.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Mike Lorrey on January 17, 2004, 04:32:09 pm
While Wallace did lose one election to a KKK endorsed candidate, when he was finally elected Governor, it was he who spoke his immortal words: "Segregation then, segregation now, segregation forever!"

Bama Sam is correct that some northern areas are more intolerant than many parts of the south. These are primarily areas with high immigrant populations and a history of labor violence, where blacks were used as scab labor to break strikes. Michigan, Ohio, Massachusetts, etc. have a history of immigrant-black enmity that continued on into the forced busing era. Some of the worst racial violence has occured in Boston between irish and blacks over the busing issue.

On the other hand, states like New Hampshire and Vermont, which are some of the whitest states in the union, do not see many reports of racial hostility. Typically blacks who live here are accomplished, educated individuals who do not perpetuate typical racial stereotypes. While we do have our share of ignorant hicks, they are looked down upon heavily while most blacks here are extremely well integrated into our communities.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Mike Lorrey on January 17, 2004, 04:38:31 pm
Thank you, Mike. This information is very enlightening.

What say you now, Neo-Confederate?
I still say that you are not very bright. You are trying to insult me, but the FSP movement is trying to do basically the same thing as the Confederacy did.
You can't call me a neo confederate. I am a Confederate. I still believe in states rights and the smallest federal government that is required.

I've illustrated this before, the South seceded ONLY because they had overturned the states rights argument and established federal supremacy in order to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act in northern states. It was the north that had argued for states rights and lost in the Dredd Scott decision (read your history).

The south seceded because it recognised that with federal supremacy and an abolitionist in the white house that it could no longer retain its command over its labor force so long as travel between the states was unregulated. They recognised that arguing for their states rights to retain slavery when they had previously disparaged the very concept was going to be seen by the courts as hypocritical.

They saw that they needed to establish a border by which they could control emigration and protect against abolitionist raids like Harpers Ferry.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Bama Sam on January 17, 2004, 05:01:30 pm
I have read my history and studied long and hard on these things. I'll not keep arguing about it. The yankees won and were entitled to write the history as skewed as they needed it to be.
Lincoln was not an abolitionist, he was a politician in much the same vein as Wallace. Playing to his audience. Should you dig deep enough you will find that he was very much a racist. So what. None of this changes anything.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Mike Lorrey on January 17, 2004, 05:57:34 pm
Being an abolitionist does not make one not a racist.

Northern industrialists in need of cheap labor to break immigrant labor movements were for abolition but were in no way egalitarians of any sort.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: BlueLu on January 19, 2004, 12:56:26 pm
The south seceded because it recognised that with federal supremacy and an abolitionist in the white house that it could no longer retain its command over its labor force so long as travel between the states was unregulated. They recognised that arguing for their states rights to retain slavery when they had previously disparaged the very concept was going to be seen by the courts as hypocritical.

They saw that they needed to establish a border by which they could control emigration and protect against abolitionist raids like Harpers Ferry.
This is a questionable interpretation in my mind.  The fact is that the War Between the States started as an attempt by South Carolina to allow commerce into a port without paying certain taxes.  The feds came in to enforce the collection of the tax, and shooting broke out.  Speculate, as you want about all the forces in peoples minds leading up to this event, but the visible evidence says it was a tax revolt.  Three cheers for South Carolina!

As for Lincoln, he was not an abolitionist until it fit his purposes.  And a racist, he clearly was.  It was his plan to forcibly ship all Blacks out of the country.

As for Jim Crow Laws, the Klan, and rigged voter registration, they were all wrong, atrocious, and unjust.  But they are not at all surprising, given that Confederate veterans experienced the same treatment at the hands of Reconstruction governments, the looting carpetbaggers those governments protected, and, yes, at the hands of many Blacks who were being used as pawns by the Reconstruction governments.

It is curious that only in the US was a war necessary to end slavery.  All over the world in the 19th century, it was happening by a process of compensation to slave owners......
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Mike Lorrey on January 19, 2004, 01:40:09 pm
Well, I wouldn't say it was happening 'all over the world', because slavery exists today. What governments were doing was not allowing people to be newly enslaved, including the offspring of slaves. Objectively, the same approach could have been taken here. Of course, the Southern states knew this and took active measures against such changes, including banning technologies which would have made slavery uneconomical, and passing laws that stated a slave owner had a right to enslave the children of slaves. In addition to bans on educating slaves, it was evident that the south had no intention of abandoning slavery even if compensation were offered.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: vermass on January 19, 2004, 01:50:23 pm
   Morpheus, thank you for your apology and your pity! We plan on moving in summer of 05'. I hate this state.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: BlueLu on January 19, 2004, 05:08:55 pm
...the Southern states ... took active measures against such changes, including banning technologies which would have made slavery uneconomical....
Do tell.  I need more information in this area.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Sean Coven on January 28, 2004, 10:24:58 pm
Hmm. If NH gets away with exempting itself from the 16th Amendment, what's to stop states like Massachusetts or Rhode Island from exempting themselves from the 2nd?

Or Mississippi from the 14th?

Or any state from the 5th?

What if one state chooses to nullify the two-term Presidential limit? Hmm? Could we see the state of Texas going to Reagan in 2004?

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights have to be respected even if we don't agree with parts of it. We have criticized liberals for trying to override the 2nd Amendment by simply ignoring it, so we can't do the same to the 16th without being hypocrites.
Title: Re:I have.....
Post by: Blefuscu on January 29, 2004, 12:47:47 am
The 16th amendment is irrelevant.  A state exempting itself from it would have no effect on taxation.  The 16th did not give Congress the right to tax income.  That right already existed prior to the 16th.  The problem is that the income tax is misapplied.  The constitution does not give the Federal government the right to tax the income of citizens that is derived from sources within the United States.  This has been covered in several other topics, so I won't repeat the citations.

That said, states can't exempt themselves from any part of the constitution anyway.  Some majority of states would have to agree to repeal it, or perhaps to create another amendment to nullify a previous one.  For example, the 21st was passed to repeal the 18th (prohibition of intoxicating liquors).