View Single Post
Old April 7, 2010, 01:21 PM   #3
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 6,771
It isn't reasonable to suppose that when Tryrrell professes admiration for 18th century america, he really means he wants to be a slave owner.
I didn't get the impression the author really thought Tryrrel wanted to be a slave owner; rather he was just emphasizing his point that the freedoms Tryrrel wished for were denied to many people of that time as well.

Where people complain about a federal government that grows larger at the expense of its citizens, and appropriates for itself really enormous amounts of individual productivity, they complain about stolen labor, one of the greivences of slaves and indentured servants. By this measure, I am less free in a very practical way than americans one century ago.
I guess it depends on which American you would be one century ago, as well as to what extent local governments were doing things that the federal government is now villified for.

The idea is to remove the tumor rather than manage it.
My point was that abolishing federal agencies has had zero success. At best, an agency is swallowed whole by another agency and the bureaucratic inertia increases. Concentrating on what government has the power to do seems to me to be a better focus. A useless government agency employing 1,000 people that does nothing of value irritates me; but not nearly so much as a useless government agency employing 1,000 people that interjects itself into my daily life AND also takes money from my pocket to do it.

I suppose that depends on whether you are an orator or a thief.
Not really. At least I don't recall any libertarian arguments that you should be able to redistribute private property to yourself unilaterally and at will
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Page generated in 0.03713 seconds with 7 queries