Are you for open borders?

[LibertyEagle]

That's not my argument. I have stated numerous times in the past that I disagree w/ the "anarcho-capitalists" on this point, and have articulated arguments against it. That you're attempting to ascribe an argument to me that I do not own, however, comes as no surprise. I think it's Monday morning and you're jumping the gun on me.

You know, constituent, I read a ton of things from a number of people and as hard as it may be for you to imagine, I have not memorized every word that you have typed. Which probably is the reason why most of my post is made up of questions; as opposed to yours in which you state flat out that I am attempting to "ascribe an argument to you" and then go on to the judgement phase by saying it "comes as no surprise", etc. I comment on what was typed, constituent. If you don't like that, well, change what you type, or grow a bit thicker skin.

Is this an example of voluntaryist thought?

 

[constituent]

Is this an example of voluntaryist thought?

This is what I'm talking about...

You know, constituent, I read a ton of things from a number of people and as hard as it may be for you to imagine, I have not memorized every word that you have typed.

Listen to yourself.

I said I figured it was a Monday morning thing that lead you to jump to conclusions about my argument. Even put a smilie so you'd know I was just ribbing you. But examine your tone here.

Seriously.

judgement phase by saying it "comes as no surprise", etc.

Funny how you skip the next sentence entirely.

I comment on what was typed, constituent. If you don't like that, well, change what you type, or grow a bit thicker skin.

Change what I type? This is like the tenth time in the past three days you've tried to dictate to someone what they should and should not type. It's a long-term trend with you. Nothing personal, but seriously, some introspection might not be a bad thing.

And talk about needing a thicker skin. [note: I'm ribbing you here ]

 

[scottish devil]

No open borders, the game

I'm going to set aside the fact that it is totally unhealthy on every level for America to have open borders. Any child can see that.

But I want to see how well immigration amnesty and open borders subscribers feel about fairness, and National Autonomy. The rules are simple and there are only two.
They are as follows:

1.) I would ask any supporters of open borders to list the countries whose residents they want to immigrate here freely.
2.) Then along with that list you must supply the immigration policies of the country they are immigrating from.

That's it plain and simple. All of you supportes of open borders now have the chance to teach us closed border dummies the lesson you've been dying to do.
It really is that simple IMO.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Change what I type? This is like the tenth time in the past three days you've tried to dictate to someone what they should and should not type. It's a long-term trend with you. Nothing personal, but seriously, some introspection might not be a bad thing.

What I was saying is that I will respond to what you say IN YOUR POST and I said it because you seemed to be thinking that I should be remembering everything that you had said in the past, in order to formulate what you meant in your current post.

Now, you take that and infer that I am dictating to you what you should or should not type.

Do you even understand how ridiculous you are being?

 

[Cowlesy]

I'm a Barnes & Noble fan myself, but suit yourselves.

 

[constituent]

Do you even understand how ridiculous you are being?

I was about to ask you the same thing.

Oh yea, and f* Barnes and Noble, Half Price Books ftw.

 

[Mini-Me]

I'm a Barnes & Noble fan myself, but suit yourselves.

Yeah, I erected a fence around my local Borders and closed it down.

 

[constituent]

Yeah, I erected a fence around my local Borders and closed it down.

Hey, public property: you own it.

 

[Met Income]

I'm going to set aside the fact that it is totally unhealthy on every level for America to have open borders. Any child can see that.

But I want to see how well immigration amnesty and open borders subscribers feel about fairness, and National Autonomy. The rules are simple and there are only two.
They are as follows:

1.) I would ask any supporters of open borders to list the countries whose residents they want to immigrate here freely.
2.) Then along with that list you must supply the immigration policies of the country they are immigrating from.

That's it plain and simple. All of you supportes of open borders now have the chance to teach us closed border dummies the lesson you've been dying to do.
It really is that simple IMO.

It's not really open borders, but private borders. If you don't want someone on your property, keep them off. You don't have a right to keep them off someone else's property.

And again, free travel doesn't matter if the welfare state ends. If you put up a wall and don't end the welfare state, we still have a gigantic problem on our hands.

 

[Lord Xar]

And again, free travel doesn't matter if the welfare state ends. If you put up a wall and don't end the welfare state, we still have a gigantic problem on our hands.

You infuriate me with your inability to think logically. WE HAVE A HUMONGOUS PROBLEM RIGHT NOW WITH THE WELFARE STATE AND OPEN BORDERS. WTF you talking about closed borders and no end of the welfare state??? We are NOT EVEN THERE YET. You are setting up roadblocks on a road that isn't even built yet.

Close the friggin borders, end the welfare state - then lets talk about productive immigration levels.

Right now, this country - as we know it - will be gone in a few decades. You desire change, well -you are gonna get it. You are condoning the suicide of america, and I think that sits well with you.

 

[bobbyw24]

Israel is Not-it's building a fence to keep illegal aliens out

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=226178

 

[revolutionisnow]

It's not really open borders, but private borders. If you don't want someone on your property, keep them off. You don't have a right to keep them off someone else's property.

And again, free travel doesn't matter if the welfare state ends. If you put up a wall and don't end the welfare state, we still have a gigantic problem on our hands.

So if a group of people wanted to buy a few cheap airplanes, a field of land, and parachutes they could open their own immigration service. Wonderful.

 

[Met Income]

You infuriate me with your inability to think logically. WE HAVE A HUMONGOUS PROBLEM RIGHT NOW WITH THE WELFARE STATE AND OPEN BORDERS. WTF you talking about closed borders and no end of the welfare state??? We are NOT EVEN THERE YET. You are setting up roadblocks on a road that isn't even built yet.

Close the friggin borders, end the welfare state - then lets talk about productive immigration levels.

Right now, this country - as we know it - will be gone in a few decades. You desire change, well -you are gonna get it. You are condoning the suicide of america, and I think that sits well with you.

Why is the freedom to travel wrong if the welfare state is gone?

 

[JustinTime]

So if a group of people wanted to buy a few cheap airplanes, a field of land, and parachutes they could open their own immigration service. Wonderful.

Yeah, but they cant immigrate off the land owned by the service. Fine by me.

 

[JustinTime]

Why is the freedom to travel wrong if the welfare state is gone?

Invasion.

 

[Met Income]

Invasion.

"The man who would choose security over freedom deserves neither."

 

[JustinTime]

"The man who would choose security over freedom deserves neither."

The man who said that risked his life trying to set up borders and national boundaries where none existed before.

 

[Met Income]

The man who said that risked his life trying to set up borders and national boundaries where none existed before.

And he had slaves, too. So clearly, his quote was hypocritical. Freedom is freedom, even if you don’t agree with it. That’s the game the Dems and the Repubs play. Morally, we should not be able to deny voluntary actions between other people. Using force to deny this actions are wrong.

 

[JustinTime]

And he had slaves, too. So clearly, his quote was hypocritical. Freedom is freedom, even if you don’t agree with it. That’s the game the Dems and the Repubs play. Morally, we should not be able to deny voluntary actions between other people. Using force to deny this actions are wrong.

Freedom means different people willhave different ideas about everything under the sun, including the meaning of freedom itself and how much of little government we need.
They will naturally group together to live under those ideas, this, in a nutshell, is ho wthe USA was born. That necessitates a border. Any state, or stateless territory without one will die, incorporated by others.

 

[Met Income]

Freedom means different people willhave different ideas about everything under the sun, including the meaning of freedom itself and how much of little government we need.
They will naturally group together to live under those ideas, this, in a nutshell, is ho wthe USA was born. That necessitates a border. Any state, or stateless territory without one will die, incorporated by others.

People can put borders up on their own private property. Or, they can hire someone to defend it. Like anything else, private companies perform services better than the State. Property defense is no different. If we truly want to defend America, public property needs to go. The State doesn’t protect its property as well as it should because it doesn’t have the incentives to do so. If it’s my land and it’s worth anything, I’m absolutely protecting it.