Libertarians should oppose the Arizona Immigrant Laws

It's not wrong to break bad laws. People forget this a lot. Especially when the bad law appeals to the inner bigotry and xenophobia of voters.

 

i try to break one every day

 

Didn't the Civil Rights Act say, in so many words, that human rights are not subject to public opinion, therefore not up for a vote?

.

 

That's why homosexual adults can have spouses like everyone else and we who are members of Church of the Universe freely use canabis daily without interference.

 

Sometimes it takes a while for some people to get the idea. As we now see in N.Y., some people haven't fully absorbed the idea of religious freedom yet.

.

 

Heh, as soon as I read this I thought about so much trash that I see on Townhall and Human Events, both of which I read daily, usually for topics on my web site. The worst filth often comes in the comment section. In fact, I suggest everyone here read the comment sections of conservative new sites...when rank-and-file right wingers are blatantly honest, it's extremely unsettling.

From what I see, a whole lot of quasi-libertarians really do think that human rights should be up for a vote. It's insanity. And there's a lot of it.

I hope I don't sound like I'm exaggerating. But I really do think a large portion (I don't know if I should use the term 'majority') of right wing voters, in their fear and bigotry and desperate cling on the "power" they think they have, would absolutely be in favor of repealing the Civil Rights Act, without hesitation. They cannot stand that a black man is President. They hate America's changing racial makeup. At their most honest, their hatred and disgust with anything but "traditional white America" is obvious, not veiled in the least.

Again, it's not all right wingers. In my more moderate days several years back, I was Republican and a big fan of John McCain. In knowing and speaking to similar moderate conservatives and even a few libertarian-leaning people who could logically look at the faults of their own arguments, I think it's a disgrace what the Republican party and many conservatives in general have become.

And the word 'conservative' really describes them now, because these bitter rank-and-file Tea Baggers want like all hell to conserve what little (mostly perceived) power and status they have left. As for the leadership? Fuuuuuuuuuuck. Indescribable.

 

The right wing, as their mouthpiece Limbaugh reminds them every day, is about freedom. They believe in it strongly. In fact they're prepared to take up arms to preserve every American's freedom to be exactly the same as they are.

 

Meh. All the economic literature I read in university still supported wage-normalization as the dominant (but not the only) theory. If you really care, I can dig out my textbooks for literature and references... And really, it reflects both major wage-setting theories as well.

 

eek, please don't

mcgraw-hill publishes textbooks, big friends of the bushies, probably other stretchers of the status quo, wonder if they self-serve?

worse, textbooks in texas

even worse, the "church" of scientology publishes textbooks in california [though i don't know if they are in use anywhere]

bottom line, be very careful with theory in textbooks . . .

 

Thanks for that pearl of wisdom.

Did I ever say textbooks are one hundred percent true? No. But they do reflect the dominant academic view at the time. Which is what we are discussing.

Take the argument to the logical extreme - remove the border. What is guaranteed to happen? The wages of the two countries will meet somewhere in the middle. This is the same reason that much of the EU resents poorer members, and one of the reasons Turkey won't likely be allowed to join.

 

were we? i thought we were talking about reality, not bullshit academic views

the reality is that employers welcome undocumented workers, because they can then ignore the other laws --the ones that enforce worker safety and reasonable wages

if these undocumented workers were able to obtain legal documentation, then employers would no longer be able to exploit them, and their wages would rise to a reasonable level

[which of course libertarians would hate, as it smacks of government interference]

so, they ought to be in favor of the free-will, free-market situation as it stands

but we're talking about reality, something libertarians seem to have problems coming to terms with

[academicians too]

 

The borders, of the U.S., have been pretty much open for many decades now. What would you suggest, shuttle buses to bring in more illegal immigrants? How might you like a few hundred million Chinese immigrants arriving in short order?

 

the more, the merrier!

 

I noticed you new sig line "Give me control of a Nation's money supply, and I care not who makes its laws" - Mayer Amschel Rothschild

Doesn't that kinda blow all of your hype about capitalism?

.

 

I'll pass along the message.

 

Not at all. The fiat currency produced by the Federal reserve has no value of its own. It value is derived by the governments promise to back it with the labor of the citizens.
The Fed doesn't represent capitalism. Capitalism is the trade of goods and/or services freely in a way that both the provider and the consumer agree to. The Fed only provides an exchange medium by which business is easily carried out. If you look back in history, you'll find that the purchasing power of the dollar remained relatively constant up until the Federal reserve system went into effect in 1913.

 

na, it's only America they want. We're a socialist nightmare up here.

 

I hadn't noticed you are in Canada.

 

Absolutely not, the value is determined, as you have stated so many times, by supply and demand.

See above.

And, it's this carrying out of business that determines the value of the "exchange medium."

Just because the government created the system doesn't mean they have any actual control. The nation's money supply is controlled by the banks and Wall Street, that's why we're in the mess we're in now. The reason we can't get out of this recession/depression is because the economic models of government control do not work as theorized.

.

 

I blame Milton Friedman