"You keep reaching for institutionalized perfection"

More lies.  I do not!  When have I ever called for "institutional perfection"?

Ultimately, in the long-term, complete deregulation of markets and complete individual freedom is the objective.  That being said, the reality of the situation in the world is that governmental institutions and regulatory intervention in the marketplace tends to perpetuate itself ad-nauseum.  It is by design rather than ineptitude that they are so inefficient and ineffective, for their constant, repetitive inadequacy they blame on being underfunded, and use it as justification for yet further allocation of their tax-dollars to improve their services.  Yet because it is by design that their public service is perpetually inadequate, no amount of funding increases will remedy their failure.

This cycle can be broken, however.  Instead of governments working to raise their prominence over their citizenry like that of aristocrats over serfs; instead of working almost exclusively to keep or increase their funding / public sector jobs, they must operate in the opposite fashion whereby they work to raise the prominence of the citizenry relative to themselves; where they are the serfs under the aristocracy of the citizenry; where they work in such a way as to decrease funding / public sector jobs; where they implement innovation to render themselves redundant; where government works itself into unemployment. 

Unemployment should be the goal of every police officer, every lawyer, and every judge, in their effort to SOLVE crime rather than profit from its perpetual prevalence; unemployment should be the objective of every politician, who works to instate as much DIRECT democracy as is feasible so that the number of legislators and administrative staff required for government to function can be decreased.  Every doctor and nurse should aspire to increase the health of the citizenry by their services vis as vis preventative, proactive, self-directed health care measures, rather than profit by the continued perpetuation of poor health among the citizenry with reactive medicine; every teacher, every education program, should be taught in such a way that individuals learn to educate themselves just as well without a teacher's guidance.  And what of the military?  lol...don't get me started.

Any any publically-funded institution that doesn't strive to diminish itself is being irresponsible to the citizenry it is supposedly there to serve.

"Learn how freedom and limited government are good for everyone."

I know this.  I don't need to

"More lies.  I do not!  When have I ever called for "institutional perfection"?"

It's a generalization for your constant calls for perfectly equal opportunity. Or equal incomes. Or equal wealth.

Magic doesn't make these things happen.

I'm not interested in you ignoring my points about limited government and free markets, repeating vague nonsense about equality and corruption without any suggested alternatives, and later denying you said what you repeatedly said.

> Acolyte wrote:

> Equality is a dangerous and vaguely communistic notion, in the context of the political arena.>

Equality of opportunity or equality of outcome? Or both?

I don't think anyone claims that perfect equality of opportunity is attainable. Rather, that it is a worthwhile value to consider in public policy.

Kemp,

General Lee complained that the limited government of the Confederacy seriously impaired his ability to adequately supply the necessary provisions for his troops to fight the North.

Both, Justinian I. Aristocrats don't distinguish between them. They start talking about one and quickly blend it into the other. The promise of equal outcomes requires more power. So it's always the destination. Duh.

The Confederacy was hastily constructed. Given time, the states could have agreed to a more appropriate level of funding. Or maybe Lee was wrong. In any event, the government today would just show up, tell your kids that homosexuality is perfectly psychologically healthy, tax you whatever they damn-well pleased, and confiscate your property while they were at it.

And they'd tax you to pay for cowboy poetry festivals in other states. And Congressman's subsidized rent. And all kinds of other things which would make for a tedious list and others which I've never even heard of.

Mr. Yell,

You should read about the Confederacy. Most of the intellectuals and leaders of the South were against slavery. They clearly articulated their objections to unchecked federal power--power prohibited by the Constitution.

State sovereignty was intended by the founders to be a bigger check on federal power than the 2.5 branches of federal government. It was obliterated as a check on federal power more than a hundred years ago. How did the Supreme Court do to uphold the law of the Constitution this week? Are you satisfied with our current checks on the unlawful acts of Congress? Anyone who is is an idiot and a pansy willing to give up liberty for security. Not only do they deserve neither, but they'll get neither. Believe it or not, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, and Barack Obama are neither brilliant nor valiant. They're not on a crusade to make things right.

Our lack of checks is what has gotten us to this tyrannical state of government. The EPA can regulate you breathing out. They can declare your property a wetland and evict you if a water pipe nearby breaks. Oh, and tax you hundreds of thousands of dollars for it too. They can wage war without the approval of your representatives. They can fine you for failing to buy a product they said you need--and they'll tell you what models are approved, because it's irresponsible for a man to not pay for contraception! He might get pregnant! Oh, wait...

You argue constantly that we need to achieve perfect equality of opportunity.

You're not making any sense. You got excited that somebody said that perfection is not achievable, as if anybody argued otherwise? (Except that you have on numerous occasions, which you're now overly-defensive about) How petty and clueless.

Why would we be banned for you saying retarded, incoherent nonsense?

"I HAVE ONLY EVER BEEN CALLING FOR A DECENT ENOUGH LEVEL OF EQUALITY OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO FULFILL THEIR BASIC HUMAN NEEDS: FOOD, SHELTER, CLOTHING, ETC.  And for this I have been accused of being a communist by Einstein and Kemp?  "

You've repeatedly argued for massive government control (loss of liberty) and redistribution of both wealth and income. Those are communist means of achieving "equal opportunity."

"Today, however, people like you, Einstein and Kemp, accuse me of being a communist simply because I call for more economic opportunity in the world for people to simply be able to attain the fulfillment of their BASIC human needs, far less than the middle class "American Dream".  No I am calling for people to be capable of attaining SHELTER, CLOTHING, FOOD, and for this you call me a communist?  SHAME on you.  How UTTERLY UN-AMERICAN of you."

I call for freedom. That's pretty American of me. You call for massive government control and redistribution of wealth. That's pretty un-American of you.

Venereal Kemp?

They already get their basic human needs of food, shelter clothing. its called welfare. There is even programs for obama phone, free electricity, gas, water, etc. Free cable..... i guess the swung that saying thats how they can find a job. I see 33% of my check gone just in all my deductions, no im not single .

People cry its not fair its not fair... well ill tell you what i dont think is fair, i work 60-70 hours a week while some shanika lays on dn back spitting kids getting everything for free and wanting more.

Mega rich wont pay more, its the middle class thats gonna get dragged on down to the slum to support all this crap.

Mr. Yell,

"Who do you think you're kidding?  Seriously?  How come no free states came to that same understanding of overarching federal power?"

Who cares? Your question misses the point. The fact is we have overarching federal power now, far beyond what the Constitutional lawfully permits. The fact is that founders intended state sovereignty to be a bigger check on federal power than splitting up federal power into branches. The fact is that many educated Southerners articulated this position on why they waged war.

At the time, most northern state were going to get what they wanted out of the new tyrannical federal power. It's been biting them in the ass ever since, more so than ever today.

The fact is that many educated Southerners were against slavery. Many Union generals owned slaves. Lee said, in 1856:

> Bacchus wrote:

> They already get their basic human needs of food, shelter clothing. its called welfare. There is even programs for obama phone, free electricity, gas, water, etc. Free cable..... i guess the swung that saying thats how they can find a job. I see 33% of my check gone just in all my deductions, no im not single .

People cry its not fair its not fair... well ill tell you what i dont think is fair, i work 60-70 hours a week while some shanika lays on dn back spitting kids getting everything for free and wanting more.

Mega rich wont pay more, its the middle class thats gonna get dragged on down to the slum to support all this crap.

I totally agree with you except for one thing: the middle class are the ones I am saying can't fulfill their basic human needs here.  And they don't get welfare.

One's basic needs are not met if they don't own their own home OUTRIGHT without a mortgage, don't have a car (paid off), don't have a decent, regular, secure means of income, be it a job, business, or investment income, that ensures they will have enough to pay for food, clothing, education, healthcare, for their kids as well as themselves.  In other words, I am not talking about welfare recipients, I am talking about the vast majority of people, even in developed countries.  THEY are the ones who cannot fulfill their basic needs human needs.  They shouldn't have to pay a penny in taxes until their house, car, children's education fund, health-care insurance / funds are secured.  For, let me make this clear: debt is not an asset, and imho the total outstanding debt a person has, including mortgage debt should be deductible each and every year - a reasonable amount, that is, perhaps the average amount of debt held per capita.

Xeno, in a perfect world that might happen but tbh if ppl wouldn't spend outside their needs buying bigger houses than they need or hummers instead of a cobalt ( if their finances justify than get the Hummer) jewelry, clothes, the list can go on and on.  But, majority of ppl get a little bit of extra cash and they spend it instead of actually paying down their debt. No matter how much they make or given they will always be broke.

Majority of you guys hate unions. Granted some shit is shady with things they do, but all in all it puts a check and balance on the company to not take advantage of the worker. safe working environment, prevailing wage, fair working practices, and job safety where you cant get fired for wearing a purple shirt.

Too many entitlements, too many freebies and loop holes, too many favors at the congressional level, too many lazy ppl. Honestly if amish lifestyle didnt shun technology like it did, and lessen its strict guidelines on one specific religion, or really religion in general, I would be part of it in a second. Community gets together and helps each other out, the lazy no good  POS s that take take take is left out to fend for themselves.

People really need to reread the story of the grasshopper and the ant....... there is WAY too many grasshoppers nowadays.