We The People / Aaron Russo video

[CNHT]

As the law stands now, you cannot meter my private well.

yes but we haven't reached the sustainable yield of the groundwater.

once we do you will be required to not use your well or have it metered.

if you can describe another way to protect the individual equal access rights of all others I'd be interested in hearing...

I'm glad you conceded on that fact

yes, I concede that we have not yet reached the sustainable yield of the groundwater (the amount that can be used up to the replentishment rate without harming the asset itself)

And when I sink the second well, and start using double, who will turn me in?

[FrankChodorov]

And when I sink the second well, and start using double, who will turn me in?

all those that you are stealing from...

[CNHT]

And when I sink the second well, and start using double, who will turn me in?

all those that you are stealing from...

<sigh> I am NOT stealing!

[Dreepa]

Make you life easier Jane... back to the ignore button.

[CNHT]

Make you life easier Jane... back to the ignore button.

Yes I think I've proven that Frank is a collectivist...no need to waste anymore time on that!

[FrankChodorov]

And when I sink the second well, and start using double, who will turn me in?

all those that you are stealing from...

<sigh> I am NOT stealing!

if you are infringing upon their equal access claim then you are and you will be if you are accessing the common asset beyond the sustainable yield....

[FrankChodorov]

Make you life easier Jane... back to the ignore button.

Yes I think I've proven that Frank is a collectivist...

a collectivist generally believes in the state ownership of the means of production (natural commons, labor, capital).

I only insist that the return on the natural commons (economic rent) be shared directly and equally as an individual equal access right.

where exactly have I argued for collectivism which is a group right?

[FrankChodorov]

Who the fuck is this guy, anyway?????

I happen to be a consulting editor of one of the links in your signature - that's who...

[Rebel Rob]

What a sinister quote.  It sounds like Lincoln wanted the government to have the "right" to force the populace to accept whatever currency it devised.  What's wrong with me and my associates issuing our own currency backed by our unencumbered hard assets and enforceable contracts?  Why can't we cooperate in turning our less liquid property into liquid currency and thus become our own lenders in effect?  Who needs a commons?

it was the quote used in the movie

nothing wrong with that...this is nothing more than an individualist anarchist's "mutualist credit bank"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_(economic_theory)

excerpt:
Mutual credit

Mutualists believe that free banking should be taken back by the people to establish systems of free credit. They contend that banks have a monopoly on credit, just as capitalists have a monopoly on land. Banks are essentially creating money by lending out deposits that do not actually belong to them, then charging interest on the difference. Mutualists believe that by establishing a democratically run mutual bank or credit union, it would be possible to issue free credit so that money could be created for the benefit of the participants rather than for the benefit of the bankers. Individualist anarchists noted for their detailed views on mutualist banking include Proudhon, William B. Greene, and Lysander Spooner.

Some modern forms of mutual credit are LETS and the Ripple monetary system project.

--------------

Ralph Borsodi did this in Exeter, NH in the early 70's calling the currency a "constant"

LETS and Ripple don't strike me as having much in common with what I was proposing, but they are quite interesting. 

"Banks are essentially creating money by lending out deposits that do not actually belong to them,"

But what they are doing is perfectly legitimate since the terms are fairly well known when you hand them your money.  The only sick thing is that government backs and regulates them. 

"Mutualists believe that by establishing a democratically run mutual bank or credit union, it would be possible to issue free credit so that money could be created for the benefit of the participants rather than for the benefit of the bankers."

That is what I had in mind, but of course it wouldn't be "democratically" run in the sense that anyone would have to be forced to do anything they didn't already agree to. 

Some auditors, suppliers, and managers would still benefit at the participants' expense, but it should still cost far less then the present banking system.  For one thing, you wouldn't have to spend very much on security and most of the cooperative's functions could be bid out on the open market. 

One neat thing about this system is that the cooperative could create different "grades" of currency and sellers would be free to select which "grades" they would be willing to accept.  Higher "grades" could be backed tenfold by hard assets with extraordinary multi-level auditing requirements on the participating "individual lenders", while lower grades like the Liberty Dollar would only be 40% backed by property. 

Regards,
A Bureaucrat

[CNHT]

Who the fuck is this guy, anyway?????

I dunno Scott but you'd better rethink some of those pages in your signature! If I hear the word 'common' or 'sustainable' one more time my head is going to explode.

[Dreepa]

I think that he is helping with the 2nd VT Republic.

It would be kinda cool if VT and NH both were independant.
Then it would be great because high taxes and socialism in VT and no taxes and capitalism in NH.
Wait 5 years and compare.

[CNHT]

I think that he is helping with the 2nd VT Republic.

It would be kinda cool if VT and NH both were independant.
Then it would be great because high taxes and socialism in VT and no taxes and capitalism in NH.
Wait 5 years and compare.

Nope he is listed on the Von Mises page, of all places....the VT site is just a bunch of left-wingers left over from the 60s...you gotta be careful what secession movements you support...also there are plenty of people calling themselves Libertarian but who are coming from the left (socialistic end) of things. In order to protect your rights they go full circle and end up being nannies. They may as well just join the NWO.

[FrankChodorov]

I think that he is helping with the 2nd VT Republic.

on the board of directors thank you

It would be kinda cool if VT and NH both were independant.

SVR is an explicit independence project while FSP is not.

Then it would be great because high taxes and socialism in VT and no taxes and capitalism in NH.
Wait 5 years and compare.

SVR is a left libertarian project while the FSP is a right libertarian project

[CNHT]

SVR is a left libertarian project while the FSP is a right libertarian project

I finally got him to admit he is a lefty.

AND AN IMPERSONATOR TO BOOT. I think I'll re-sign on as Betsy Ross? LOL

Case closed.

[FrankChodorov]

SVR is a left libertarian project while the FSP is a right libertarian project

I finally got him to admit he is a lefty. Case closed.

classical liberals were leftists...case open!