Are you for open borders?

[The Patriot]

No, I own my body and my property outright. Any infringement on these rights are due to "might makes right" ie someone else has more guns. That doesn't mean it's moral, it just means they have more guns.



If the money belonged to me, the State wouldn't have it. You have a logical contradiction on your hands. The State steals my money and then decides what to do with it. All actions involved are clearly illegitimate.



You don't have to claim it. Actions speak louder than words. You would use guns to infringe my property rights, which is not your right to do. Protect your property as much as you want. Focus on getting people to stop stealing your money and then you don't have a problem on your hands. Theft is the problem, not freedom to travel.

Every state-sponsored atrocity that has ever worked has used your philosophy has a moral basis for its actions.

I would agree with your first statement up to the point where you harm others. That is the proper role of Government. To interject when the life, liberty and property of the people are being endangered.

All you are doing in your second statement is legitimizing the state. If you believed it to be theft as you claimed in your first statement, than you would believe the money stolen from you to be your money. Thus because it is our money we have the right to decide how it is used. We have the right to restrict use off and abolish public facilities and public services.

Wrong, as long as their are public services and public facilities, open borders are an issue. As long as one supports open borders now, they support the growth of the welfare state.

 

[Met Income]

I would agree with your first statement up to the point where you harm others.

Well, right. It's implicit since how can I have a right to my body and my property if you don't own you and yours? Ironically, you say you agree but you'd also agree with violating my property. Does not compute.

That is the proper role of Government. To interject when the life, liberty and property of the people are being endangered.

Only if I consent, which I do not. I can protect my life, liberty and property through voluntary means. You have no right to force me to accept your monopolistic solution.

All you are doing in your second statement is legitimizing the state. If you believed it to be theft as you claimed in your first statement, than you would believe the money stolen from you to be your money. Thus because it is our money we have the right to decide how it is used. We have the right to restrict use off and abolish public facilities and public services.

It WAS my money, and then the State stole it. Unfortunately, it's not my money any more because the State has it. If someone steals my car, it's not mine anymore. I can't control it. Maybe I can use it once and awhile if a bureaucrat says so, but it's still not mine. I need permission.

Wrong, as long as their are public services and public facilities, open borders are an issue. As long as one supports open borders now, they support the growth of the welfare state.

As long as the welfare state is the issue, the welfare state will be the issue. People using services is only the effect, not the cause. Even if you could end all immigration, Americans would still engage in the welfare state. Your solution is not only immoral, it's impractical. Strike the root of the problem, and the problem goes away. Strike at the effect of the problem, and you will play "Whack-a-Mole" forever. Your problem won't go away. Focus your energy on what matters. Cut off the head.

Strike the root, not the branch. Striking the branch will get you no where. If your car needs a new engine, you shouldn't be concerned with your rims. You should get a new engine.

 

[revolutionisnow]

Immigration and the welfare state are problems. Its immoral for you to make people compete in a global job market when you know they will lose.

 

[Met Income]

Immigration and the welfare state are problems. Its immoral for you to make people compete in a global job market when you know they will lose.

No, that's just competition, the essence of capitalism. It is wrong, however, for you to interefe with voluntary transactions.

 

[The Patriot]

Well, right. It's implicit since how can I have a right to my body and my property if you don't own you and yours? Ironically, you say you agree but you'd also agree with violating my property. Does not compute.



Only if I consent, which I do not. I can protect my life, liberty and property through voluntary means. You have no right to force me to accept your monopolistic solution.



It WAS my money, and then the State stole it. Unfortunately, it's not my money any more because the State has it. If someone steals my car, it's not mine anymore. I can't control it. Maybe I can use it once and awhile if a bureaucrat says so, but it's still not mine. I need permission.



As long as the welfare state is the issue, the welfare state will be the issue. People using services is only the effect, not the cause. Even if you could end all immigration, Americans would still engage in the welfare state. Your solution is not only immoral, it's impractical. Strike the root of the problem, and the problem goes away. Strike at the effect of the problem, and you will play "Whack-a-Mole" forever. Your problem won't go away. Focus your energy on what matters. Cut off the head.

Strike the root, not the branch. Striking the branch will get you no where. If your car needs a new engine, you shouldn't be concerned with your rims. You should get a new engine.

The Government has the right to prosecute you and/or protect me if you violate the life, liberty or property of me. Sorry, that is just how it is, you do not have the right to murder me, steal from me, or trespass on my property.

You are legitimizing state theft. It is our money regardless. Those services and facilities are our's because we paid for them, and we get to decide who has the privilege of using them and we get to decide if they are used at all.

You aren't striking anything. By supporting open borders you support the perpetuation of the welfare state and further violation of our national sovereignty.

 

[The Patriot]

No, that's just competition, the essence of capitalism. It is wrong, however, for you to interefe with voluntary transactions.

I agree, it is wrong to interfere with voluntary transactions, but it i perfectly justified to set an immigration policy.

 

[The Patriot]

America should set up an immigration policy where anybody who comes into the country should not be allowed to get on the government dole. That would be a good policy.

 

[Met Income]

The Government has the right to prosecute you and/or protect me if you violate the life, liberty or property of me. Sorry, that is just how it is, you do not have the right to murder me, steal from me, or trespass on my property.

I didn't violate you. Take it up with those who did. Ironically, you want to violate me and my property.

You are legitimizing state theft. It is our money regardless. Those services and facilities are our's because we paid for them, and we get to decide who has the privilege of using them and we get to decide if they are used at all.

If I don't control the money, how is it mine?

You aren't striking anything. By supporting open borders you support the perpetuation of the welfare state and further violation of our national sovereignty.

Traveling and working isn't violating you. Stealing is violating you. Stop the stealing and you'll stop the violations.

 

[Met Income]

I agree, it is wrong to interfere with voluntary transactions, but it i perfectly justified to set an immigration policy.

among individuals who consent. I do not consent, therefore, your rules don't apply to me. You can't enforce a unilateral contract without consent. Does not compuite.

 

[The Patriot]

I didn't violate you. Take it up with those who did. Ironically, you want to violate me and my property.



If I don't control the money, how is it mine?



Traveling and working isn't violating you. Stealing is violating you. Stop the stealing and you'll stop the violations.

Yes, illegal immigration is violating me, I never consented to have my money used to fund services and facilities for illegals. It is my money, thus the taxpayers have the right to determine how their dollars are used through their elected reps.

I support ending the welfare state. Stop Illegal Immigration, stop the open borders and further theft, and end the welfare state.

 

[The Patriot]

among individuals who consent. I do not consent, therefore, your rules don't apply to me. You can't enforce a unilateral contract without consent. Does not compuite.

Yes, you are an American citizen, the rules do apply to you, if you hire an illegal, you are facilitating fraud and crime by not turning him in. You are allowing him to commit theft of my money and the taxpayers money.

 

[Met Income]

Yes, you are an American citizen, the rules do apply to you, if you hire an illegal, you are facilitating fraud and crime by not turning him in. You are allowing him to commit theft of my money and the taxpayers money.

Where did I consent to being a citizen? You cannot unilaterally enforce contracts that I did not agree to.

 

[The Patriot]

Where did I consent to being a citizen? You cannot unilaterally enforce contracts that I did not agree to.

You can renounce your citizenship, go ahead.

 

[Met Income]

You can renounce your citizenship, go ahead.

You didn't answer my question. Please do. You've tended to do that in this thread when you didn't like the answer.

Anyways, you cannot renounce something that you were never a part of. You can call me the king of Mars, but it doesn't mean it's true or that I have to renounce it. If I reaffirm to the government that they do not own me, will they let me out of their theft and law system?

 

[The Patriot]

You didn't answer my question. Please do. You've tended to do that in this thread when you didn't like the answer.

Anyways, you cannot renounce something that you were never a part of. You can call me the king of Mars, but it doesn't mean it's true or that I have to renounce it. If I reaffirm to the government that they do not own me, will they let me out of their theft and law system?

I am answering this question. If you don't want to be part of America, renounce your citizenship. It is the simple.

 

[Met Income]

I am answering this question. If you don't want to be part of America, renounce your citizenship. It is the simple.

You know you didn't answer the question. Where did I consent to being a citizen? Don't be intellectually dishonest when you don't like the answer. It just exposes you lack of logic.

 

[The Patriot]

You know you didn't answer the question. Where did I consent to being a citizen? Don't be intellectually dishonest when you don't like the answer. It just exposes you lack of logic.

It doesn't matter, you are a citizen, thus if you don't want to be a citizen, renounce your citizenship, you can do so, Bobby Fischer did. You are coping out by ignoring the fact you are a citizen and ignoring the fact you can take a means to renounce it. You just like blowing smoke and ruffle feathers. If you don't want to be a citizen, renounce your citizenship.

 

[Met Income]

It doesn't matter, you are a citizen, thus if you don't want to be a citizen, renounce your citizenship, you can do so, Bobby Fischer did. You are coping out by ignoring the fact you are a citizen and ignoring the fact you can take a means to renounce it. You just like blowing smoke and ruffle feathers. If you don't want to be a citizen, renounce your citizenship.

No one can enforce unilateral contracts on my behalf without my consent. Doing so makes no sense. I can draft a contract saying you owe me $1,000,000 but you did not agree to it, therefore, the contract is not valid. Therefore, you are not bound by the terms. This is how the world works. The government isn't magical and shouldn't have separate rules.

I ask again, where did I consent?

 

[The Patriot]

No one can enforce unilateral contracts on my behalf without my consent. Doing so makes no sense. I can draft a contract saying you owe me $1,000,000 but you did not agree to it, therefore, the contract is not valid. Therefore, you are not bound by the terms. This is how the world works. The government isn't magical and shouldn't have separate rules.

I ask again, where did I consent?

It doesn't matter that you didn't consent to citizenship, you are a citizen. Where you are born is not a voluntary act on your part. You are obfuscating the issue. However, you have the contractual right to renounce your citizenship, no one is stopping you. If you don't feel you are a citizen, than renounce it. You are just dancing around the point that you are a citizen and you can put your money where your mouth is and renounce that citizenship.

 

[Met Income]

It doesn't matter that you didn't consent to citizenship, you are a citizen. Where you are born is not a voluntary act on your part. You are obfuscating the issue. However, you have the contractual right to renounce your citizenship, no one is stopping you. If you don't feel you are a citizen, than renounce it. You are just dancing around the point that you are a citizen and you can put your money where your mouth is and renounce that citizenship.

Given your logic, you owe me $1,000,000. Also, the government is not stealing from you, since they wrote it down a piece of paper. So stop complaining.