March 2013 Open Thread

By now, if you’ve been around here awhile, y’all should know what to do. If you haven’t, and if “open thread” is not self-explanatory to you, see explanations in the body of our past open threads, and the open threads themselves for examples of what we talk about.

And now, as I often do with these open threads, I’ll post a Rap News video to kick things off:

318 thoughts on “March 2013 Open Thread

  1. NewFederalist

    Well let’s start this month off with a rollicking debate on the causes of the Civil War (War Between the States, if you prefer); abortion (especially the part of when life begins) and top it off with another undercover story about intrigue in the LNC and who is shafting whom! Oh goody, goody, goody! I can’t wait! Or as Erik Viker might say… pass the popcorn! Let’s get at it!

  2. Andy

    “NewFederalist // Mar 1, 2013 at 3:08 pm

    Well let’s start this month off with a rollicking debate on the causes of the Civil War (War Between the States, if you prefer); abortion (especially the part of when life begins) and top it off with another undercover story about intrigue in the LNC and who is shafting whom!”

    You forgot the old anarchy vs. minarchy debate.

  3. Jill Pyeatt

    If we could only settle, once and for all, the conundrum of who came first–the chicken or the egg, I think we’d be in better shape to solve everything else.

  4. paulie Post author

    @5

    Some technical errors about Oklahoma and Michigan, but on the whole surprisingly fair and accurate.

    However, Stone gave away the game recently on facebook when he said he likes Rick Scott but just doesn’t want Charlie Crist back in office.

    Clearly, his involvement with the LP is to split opposition votes and get Republicans elected. It’s a time worn Stone strategy.

  5. paulie Post author

    #4, that’s easy. The egg came first. Another bird (very similar to the chicken, but a different species) laid the first chicken egg.

    Biblical literalists contend the chicken came first, hence the argument. But I thin you are correct.

  6. paulie Post author

    True but why would Col. Sanders want to make whoopie with a chicken?

    No, no. You got it all wrong. Go back and start over.

  7. paulie Post author

    Yes, and a sperm, which combined, at one time in his early development. But what does that have to do with the chicken?

  8. Jill Pyeatt

    Clearly, the sequester, coupled with the fact that we are popeless, has made us nuts.

  9. Concerned Citizen

    Gingrich (VA) – Barr (GA) Libertarian Party 2016.
    They will cut the debt, minimize government and end the two party problem. This will save our nation.

  10. Catholic Trotskyist

    Jill, thanks for bringing up the fact that we are popeless. Indeed this is a difficult time for the Catholic Trotskyist Party as our Holy Spirit guides us unto the selection of the next pope. May he be a person who works with our revolutionary leader Barack Obama to establish the New World Order of parliamentary democracy and Catholic Trotskyism. May all the angels and saints watch over IPR and all the chickens and eggs of this earth, during this season of Lent. Amen.

  11. NewFederalist

    Here is a serious question for Constitutionalists (by that I mean those who consider themselves supporters of the Constitution Party): now that the Constitution Party Discussion Forum (believeinamerica.com) has ceased to exist is there any other forum that has taken its place? Is there any other forum that is similar? I suggested posters there come over to IPR when the domain name was sold but I don’t see much evidence that it has happened. Thanks.

  12. NewFederalist

    I think at most 100. Probably at the end not more that a dozen which is why the owner sold the domain name.

  13. paulie Post author

    Well, even a dozen would be a good boost here. But maybe they aren’t comfortable with this format, or with being in a discussion forum where they are not in the majority.

  14. NewFederalist

    Cody used to post over there but not all that much. I have yet to see anyone from that site post here but I am still looking.

  15. Concerned Citizen

    Please stop posting these stupid videos. Let’s discuss how we can take back our country.

  16. paulie Post author

    via email:

    All,

    Thus far I have votes from the following states and individuals to fill the vacant region 7 representative position with Gary Johnson from Texas:

    Texas: YES (Pat Dixon)
    Louisiana: YES (Adrien Monteleone)
    Mississippi: YES (Danny Bedwell)
    Alabama: YES (Leigh LaChine)
    Oklahoma: No response

    I believe we can forgo the phone conference tomorrow and announce that Gary is formally appointed by our region to this position.

    [...]

    Yours in Liberty,

    Pat Dixon
    Chair, Libertarian Party of Texas
    http://www.LPTexas.org

  17. Zapper

    Paulie, nice to have you back. Hope things are going better for you.

    Petitioning is a tough biz. When they need you, they want you, and then they don’t need you and dump you. Then they’re back again and they need you.

    So, this is for you … a them for petitioners …
    (among others)

  18. Jill Pyeatt

    Wow, I get sick one day and have to stay in bed, and all this fun erupts on IPR??? Wow!!!

  19. Zapper

    @44 One of those hot chicks is a libertarian with degrees in Biotechnology and Microbiology working in clinical research at a major phamecutical company in addition to bits of acting, modeling and this music video.

  20. Jill Pyeatt

    Zapper–sincerely–I’m truly awed that a smart woman also has the looks and body to be in a video.
    Good for her! I hope she’s ble to make the most of all her attributes. (Sharon Presley and I had a whopper fight about this on FB. Of course, I’m convinced I won, if only because I resisted the urge to unfriend her).

  21. Andy

    “Zapper // Mar 2, 2013 at 8:37 pm

    Paulie, nice to have you back. Hope things are going better for you.

    Petitioning is a tough biz. When they need you, they want you, and then they don’t need you and dump you. Then they’re back again and they need you.

    So, this is for you … a them for petitioners …”

    What you said here reminds me a lot of Virgil Goode. He seemed OK when he still needed signatures to get on the ballot. Then once the last petition drives were over and money was still owed his demeanor changed. He came up with a bunch of excuses to not pay, and then went out of communication.

    The petition drive in Alabama ended on September 6th, and we are now in March, so it has now been almost 6 months and I still have not received all of the money I’m owed for getting Virgil Goode on the ballot. Some folks from the national Constitution Party have acknowledged that I’m owed the money, and have said that they intend to pay, but as of now I still have not received anything. There are two other people whom I aware of who worked on petition drives to get Virgil on the ballot in two other states who also say that Virgil cheated them out of money, and neither of them have received anything either.

    I’ve been owed this money for 6 months, so really at this point I don’t think that it is unreasonable to say that I should receive an interest penalty/late fee.

  22. Nathan J. Hetzel

    Go to http://www.venturadebates.com and sign the petition if you want to see Gov. Jesse Ventura run for President in 2016. If you go to the website; they also have a FaceBook page.

    This all came about when Gov. Ventura said during the 2012 election cycle on Alex Jones’s show; and on a variety of other t.v. and radio talk shows that he would consider running for President if there was a grassroots effort able to get on the ballot in all fifty states; and get into the Presidential Debates.

  23. Andy

    “Nathan J. Hetzel // Mar 3, 2013 at 3:03 pm

    Go to http://www.venturadebates.com and sign the petition if you want to see Gov. Jesse Ventura run for President in 2016. If you go to the website; they also have a FaceBook page.

    This all came about when Gov. Ventura said during the 2012 election cycle on Alex Jones’s show; and on a variety of other t.v. and radio talk shows that he would consider running for President if there was a grassroots effort able to get on the ballot in all fifty states; and get into the Presidential Debates.”

    I wonder if Jesse Ventura knows how difficult it is to get placed on the ballot in all 50 states plus Washington DC as an independent candidate.

  24. NewFederalist

    “I wonder if Jesse Ventura knows how difficult it is to get placed on the ballot in all 50 states plus Washington DC as an independent candidate.”

    I think not. He is a bit of a dufus IMHO.

  25. Andy

    “NewFederalist // Mar 3, 2013 at 7:49 pm

    ‘I wonder if Jesse Ventura knows how difficult it is to get placed on the ballot in all 50 states plus Washington DC as an independent candidate.’

    I think not. He is a bit of a dufus IMHO.”

    I don’t think that he’s a dumb guy. He’s probably not familiar with all of the different ballot access laws around the nation, and it is likely that many of supporters are not familiar with these laws either.

    Getting on the ballot in all 50 states plus DC is far easier said than done, and even more so when it comes to getting in the Presidential debates.

  26. NewFederalist

    I believe Jesse Ventura’s intellect is tremendously overrated. His instincts may be reasonably okay but he is far from the sharpest tool in the shed.

  27. Andy

    “NewFederalist // Mar 3, 2013 at 8:30 pm

    I believe Jesse Ventura’s intellect is tremendously overrated. His instincts may be reasonably okay but he is far from the sharpest tool in the shed.”

    I don’t think that the guy is stupid. I’d certainly rather have him than say Obama or Romney.

  28. NewFederalist

    I don’t disagree. But I would far prefer a true libertarian or even a Ron Paul.

  29. Andy

    “NewFederalist // Mar 3, 2013 at 8:47 pm

    I don’t disagree. But I would far prefer a true libertarian or even a Ron Paul.”

    I can see where you are you are coming from on this comment. I like a lot of things about Jesse Ventura, and I think that he’s good on the issues for the most part, but I’m not so sure that he is really that well versed in the hardcore libertarian philosophy. If he were to run I’d like to see him go to a seminar at the Ludwig von Mises Institute (or something like that) before the campaign kicks off.

  30. Jill Pyeatt

    DWP: I wouldn’t take it too seriously. They’ve got Ron Paul’s face in their cover photo. Who knows whe these guys are? I haven’t heard of any of them.

  31. Dennis

    @63
    I agree. Most of these folks seem to view ‘libertarian’ and ‘conspiracy theorist’ as synonyms…none presented any reason why they gawked at your site…so ignore them.

  32. William Saturn

    As reported on the February open thread, Minerva Village Councilman and Boston Tea Party presidential candidate Phil Davison was considered for the position of Stark County Administrator.
    Unfortunately, he did not receive the job, which went to Brant Luther.

  33. George Phillies

    As forwarded to the Starchild Reflector list, a highly thoughtful and sensible letter from Chuck Moulton on what the LSLA is not. (Note that they are not an organization of the state chairs; they exclude the Oregon State Chair.) Moulton wrote:

    “Essentially the problem is as follows:
    The LSLA was created to run a yearly conference and an email list. A lot of people seem to think that somehow entitles the LSLA executive board to speak or negotiate on behalf of the state chairs, but that’s without foundation and it’s nonsense.

    The LSLA executive board cannot speak for the state chairs on this issue. Its bylaws have clear delegated authority, and this is not in it.

    The LNC can communicate with state chairs directly or through regional reps.

    Anyone can give suggestions for what to put in an affiliate agreement (including the members of the LSLA executive board). The danger though is that the LNC might be left with the mistaken impression that the LSLA executive board represents the state chairs and that by talking with the LSLA executive board they were talking with an agent of the state chairs. An even bigger danger would be if the LNC and the LSLA executive board actually voted on and approved an affiliate agreement, because state chairs would not be anywhere in that process.

    In contrast, at the state chairs conference (the LSLA conference) there will be a meeting of the state chairs. That meeting indeed does represent the state chairs and can provide feedback or vote on an affiliate agreement (though the state chairs in assembly can’t enter individual states into that agreement, they can just give a stamp of approval to language in the document).

    I think the LNC (perhaps through the affiliate support committee) ought to come up with an affiliate agreement in consultation with whoever it wants (individual state chairs, LSLA executive board members, etc.) but not vote yet on adopting it. Then let the state chairs at the LSLA conference make suggestions on it. After that the LNC could vote to adopt it integrating those suggestions as appropriate. Individual state chairs would then decide whether their states should sign on or not. That’s just my opinion on a process; there are other reasonable ways of going about it.

    Another separate issue is that any contract must have consideration. Responsibilities that are already enshrined in the bylaws aren’t really part of an optional agreement (you can’t turn rights into privileges). It’s a good idea to clarify the required responsibilities for both parties. It’s also a good idea to offer a contract for services both parties can promise each other beyond that. Conflating those things can create misunderstanding though rather than making things clearer.

    Chuck Moulton
    Chair, Libertarian Party of Virginia”

  34. Jill Pyeatt

    George, do you know what prompted this letter from Chuck?

    I agree that the LSLA is not an organization of the state chairs. It seems to be an organization that happens to include a lot of state chairs, but it most certainly is not the former.

  35. Thomas L. Knapp

    Jill @ 67,

    From the context, it looks like there’s discussion of “affiliate agreements” a la the old UMP or whatever, and that some person or persons has at some point assumed that LSLA is a conclave of state chairs, empowered to speak for state chairs as a class on that subject, and that Chuck is correcting them.

  36. George Phillies

    I believe that there is a discussion of this in Starchild’s reflector, the file with the Digest that covers the last week in February. Geoff Neale seems to have argued in the past for the modest idea that the LNC should be more specific about exactly what it does to support affiliates, and other people I infer though they are less specific want affiliate agreements that would let the LNC take over annoying state parties like Oregon.

  37. paulie Post author

    Boston Tea Party presidential candidate Phil Davison

    You mean, losing candidate for the nomination of a party in a year when it appeared on zero state ballots and went out of existence. An achievement he and everyone around him is proud of, I’m sure :-)

  38. Andy

    “paulie // Mar 5, 2013 at 5:13 pm

    ‘Boston Tea Party presidential candidate Phil Davison ‘

    You mean, losing candidate for the nomination of a party in a year when it appeared on zero state ballots and went out of existence. An achievement he and everyone around him is proud of, I’m sure :-)”

    LOL!

  39. paulie Post author

    As mentioned on previous threads – Jesse Ventura said that a precondition for running would be appearing on all state ballots and being in the debates. However, the ballot access laws make it impossible to put someone on the ballot in some states until they agree to run, and where would the millions of dollars this would cost come from? Also, someone who isn’t even running will not be included in the polls, much less poll 15% in an average of national polls, so he couldn’t be in the debates either.

    In other words, he said he won’t run while appearing to say he might run, which is the same thing he did the last several times.

  40. Andy

    “paulie // Mar 5, 2013 at 5:21 pm

    As mentioned on previous threads – Jesse Ventura said that a precondition for running would be appearing on all state ballots and being in the debates. However, the ballot access laws make it impossible to put someone on the ballot in some states until they agree to run, and where would the millions of dollars this would cost come from? Also, someone who isn’t even running will not be included in the polls, much less poll 15% in an average of national polls, so he couldn’t be in the debates either.

    In other words, he said he won’t run while appearing to say he might run, which is the same thing he did the last several times.”

    If somebody formed a committee and started doing all of the work to make this happen, he might agree to run when it looked like a lot of the stuff was falling into place.

  41. paulie Post author

    Jill – if you are trying to post an image

    Change the square brackets to angle brackets (on the same keys as the comma and period on my keyboard) and include withing them img src=”that url” in quotes. Img src is the html tage for image source.

  42. Andy

    “NewFederalist // Mar 5, 2013 at 5:32 pm

    But just why would anyone do that, Andy?”

    Because they really want Jesse Ventura to run.

  43. NewFederalist

    “Because they really want Jesse Ventura to run.”

    With so many better potential alternative nominees I have to agree with Paulie… ain’t gonna happen.

  44. paulie Post author

    Jill

    Actually one other thing. The URL of the image itself is http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Chickens-motives-300×225.jpg not http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?attachment_id=41292

    NF/Andy

    Andy would know better than anyone why it won’t happen. Ron Paul, with all his support, still had to hire Andy and others (including at one time myself) to get on the ballot, and he had a lot less signatures to get than an independent who would be trying to qualify in every state.

  45. Jill Pyeatt

    Thanks, not that the image was necessarily worth it. Too bad I couldn’t figure it out on my own. So much for my 35 year-old college edumakation dee-gree thing.

  46. Andy

    “NewFederalist // Mar 5, 2013 at 6:26 pm

    ‘Because they really want Jesse Ventura to run.’

    With so many better potential alternative nominees I have to agree with Paulie… ain’t gonna happen.”

    Honestly, I don’t think that there are that many better alternatives than Jesse Ventura for President. This is when you factor in name recognition, charisma, ability to raise money, and issues/philosophy.

  47. paulie Post author

    He’s not better known or with a more enthusiastic following than Ron Paul. If Ron Paul had to hire people to get on the ballot in only a few states which required a lot less signatures than what Ventura would have to get – and he did – Ventura, if he wanted to run, would need to say early on that he is running and raise a lot of money.

    Otherwise I stand by my prediction that it will not happen. I would even be willing to bet on it. Any takers?

  48. Andy

    “paulie // Mar 5, 2013 at 6:45 pm

    He’s not better known or with a more enthusiastic following than Ron Paul. If Ron Paul had to hire people to get on the ballot in only a few states which required a lot less signatures than what Ventura would have to get – and he did – Ventura, if he wanted to run, would need to say early on that he is running and raise a lot of money.”

    Actually, I would say that Jesse Ventura is just as well known as Ron Paul. Remember, he was a star in pro wrestling and in movies before he got into politics, and also remember that he was elected Governor of a state which is a higher office than being a member of the US House of Representatives like Ron Paul was.

    So Jesse Ventura is well known, and he does have a big following. He’s also got more charisma than Ron Paul.

    I will say that Ron Paul has a larger following that is rabidly into politics, but if Ventura delves more into politics by running for office that his political following could grow.

    But yes, getting Jesse Ventura on the ballot in all 50 states plus DC as an independent candidate for President would be an enormous job, and there is no way it would happen without raising money and hiring people.

    “Otherwise I stand by my prediction that it will not happen. I would even be willing to bet on it. Any takers?”

    I doubt that Jesse Venture is going to run as well. I think that a part of him wants to do it, but another part of him enjoys running off to Mexico for half of the year and not being in the spotlight all the time, plus his wife apparently does not want him to run.

    A dream ticket that I’d like to see would be Andrew Napolitano for President and Jesse Ventura for Vice President.

  49. Jill Pyeatt

    Andy, as you know, I follow many of the “conspiracy theories” Jesse Ventura talks about, and believe there’s validity to many, if not most, of them, but I think Ventura is too much of a niche personality to succeed as a candidate. If he wants to run (and I personally don’t think he’s serious about it), he needs to start now by writing opeds and doing interviews about how to solve some of the country’s enormous problems instead of just poitnint them out. He needs to break out of the two-dimensional mold most people see him in.

  50. NewFederalist

    “A dream ticket that I’d like to see would be Andrew Napolitano for President and Jesse Ventura for Vice President.”

    I could go for that ticket! John Stossel would HAVE to be in the cabinet, though.

  51. NewFederalist

    Perhaps in the old refrigerator with the door still on it in the backyard but that’s it!

  52. paulie Post author

    But yes, getting Jesse Ventura on the ballot in all 50 states plus DC as an independent candidate for President would be an enormous job, and there is no way it would happen without raising money and hiring people.

    So exactly what I said.

    He wants it done for him – AND debate inclusion – before he even really jumps in, and that’s just not going to happen.

  53. Andy

    Jill Pyeatt // Mar 5, 2013 at 7:43 pm

    Andy, as you know, I follow many of the ‘conspiracy theories’ Jesse Ventura talks about, and believe there’s validity to many, if not most, of them, but I think Ventura is too much of a niche personality to succeed as a candidate.”

    People said that about him when he ran for Governor of Minnesota, and we all know what happened with him there, he got elected.

    “If he wants to run (and I personally don’t think he’s serious about it), he needs to start now by writing opeds and doing interviews about how to solve some of the country’s enormous problems instead of just poitnint them out. He needs to break out of the two-dimensional mold most people see him in.”

    I don’t think that he’s serious about running.

  54. Catholic Trotskyist

    William, thanks for the update on Phil Davison. I guess I’m the only commenter here besides you who is a fan of his. His speech in 2010 is always inspirational to listen to. He should run for President on some party in 2016.

  55. Zapper

    Jesse Ventura is running for President just like Sarah Palin did …

    … running all the way to the bank.

    It’s just a way to help keep his name in the spotlight and boost book sales and appearance fees.

  56. Andy

    “Zapper // Mar 6, 2013 at 12:12 am

    Jesse Ventura is running for President just like Sarah Palin did …

    … running all the way to the bank.

    It’s just a way to help keep his name in the spotlight and boost book sales and appearance fees.”

    I don’t believe that this is the case at all for Jesse Ventura. If Jesse Ventura was just out for money there’s a lot more he could do to get it, and he would not disappear off to Mexico for half the year.

  57. Robert Capozzi

    a 96: [JV] would not disappear off to Mexico for half the year.

    me: Hmm. Building up mystery. Keep them guessing. Ever heard of that?

    Myself, I can’t read minds, so I have no idea what JV’s up to. When and if he makes a move, I will deal with it then.

    Drive oneself nuts speculating at one’s own jeopardy.

  58. Andy

    “Robert Capozzi // Mar 6, 2013 at 6:41 am

    a 96: [JV] would not disappear off to Mexico for half the year.

    me: Hmm. Building up mystery. Keep them guessing. Ever heard of that?

    Myself, I can’t read minds, so I have no idea what JV’s up to. When and if he makes a move, I will deal with it then.

    Drive oneself nuts speculating at one’s own jeopardy.”

    Once again, if he was just out for money there’d be a lot more that he could do to get it, so if he is just out for money he’s doing a lousy job of it.

  59. Robert Capozzi

    A, yes, maybe you are not familiar with the concept of “over exposure.” A celebrity who gets over-exposed devalues his/her brand…they flame out.

    Whether he’s doing a “good” or “lousy” job is a subjective matter. He’s doing what he’s doing, and the outcome is the outcome. Your label of the outcome is yours, not his. He’s doing his best, as are you.

    Why not leave it at that?

  60. paulie Post author

    He likes to make money like everyone else, but he also likes other things his time in Mexico and his ability to speak about certain subjects. So, he isn’t purely into making money at any cost, but it’s true that his phantom presidential campaigns help keep him in the public eye and boost book sales, appearance fees etc.

  61. Andy

    Paulie said: “So, he isn’t purely into making money at any cost, but it’s true that his phantom presidential campaigns help keep him in the public eye and boost book sales, appearance fees etc.”

    Oh this is bull. He doesn’t even talk about running for President very often. He can sell plenty of books and do plenty of other things to make money regardless of whether he ever talks about running for President or not. If Jesse Ventura wanted to “sell out” to make money he could have done it a long time ago. This is a ridiculous assertion.

  62. paulie Post author

    I never said he sold out. In fact, I specifically said otherwise. However, he gets a certain amount of attention from making it seem like he might run for president when he knows he won’t, and he’s happy to take those mileage points. That doesn’t involve selling out his beliefs or giving up his lifestyle.

  63. Robert Capozzi

    I can’t say I know the person who hasn’t “sold out” in some way. The moment we do anything we don’t want to, we “sell out.” Life is one big sell out, actually.

    ‘Course, there may be the rare person who is always doing what s/he wants to. If such a person is alive, I’d like to know his/her secret.

    That said, I’m guessing that A means that JV never advocates things he doesn’t fully believe. Here again, I’m skeptical, but then JV may be the very rare person who always speaks his mind. We of course can’t know if he does or doesn’t, aside from distance mind readers. This is another person I’d like to have a conversation with. Is it a gift, or a talent one can develop?

  64. Robert Capozzi

    P, yes. I do wonder whether A – and perhaps you – think that JV always did and said what he believed in his heart when he was guv, or whether this MO applies only in the current, post-guv timeframe.

  65. paulie Post author

    @106 This is open thread…it’s not “off topic.”

    And LOL – thanks for the reminder.

    However, I think Wayne was right about buying gold. I also recommend silver, platinum, lead, bitcoin and 3D printer stock.

  66. paulie Post author

    Not sure I can parse that. “Austrian crackpot economics”? And what does Austrian economics have to do with being a Republican? And Root is an Austrian economist?

  67. paulie Post author

    Austrian economics is neither crackpot nor Republican, and hyperinflation is certainly likely given the manipulation of the money supply, although we can’t know exactly when.

  68. Zapper

    We are currently having massive inflation, George.

    Inflation is an increase in the money supply. It does NOT necessarily follow that there is a proportional increase in the CPI.

    First off, the CPI drastically understates the increase in prices of goods and services. It also wrongly discounts the actual increase in price levels by not adjusting for lowered prices that come from technological and productivity advancements.

    More importantly, the CPI cannot hope to measure inflation because it ignores other effects that increased money supply can have that show up in places other than comsumer prices, but still result in a reduction in the wealth of holders of “money.”

    Examples of these off CPI inflationary items include increases in the value of commodities and investment assets due to the increased supply of money.

    In the current massive inflation, the average American is losing while investors gain as the inflated currency pours into investment markets.

    Another area where inflation – that is the increase money supply – is going that benefits the priviliged class and increases the wealth divide is massive debt reduction and increased net worth of the banks and financial insitutions. This is inflation – newly printed dollars – that have increased the wealth disparity by nearly doubling the money supply and giving nearly the entire increase to the rich banking classes.

    The inflation is there George.

    The typical fairly land, so-called “economist” has no clue how to find it or measure it.

    The CPI is not even a good approximation of inflation.

  69. Zapper

    @96 Really, don’t be naive. Ventura is using this technique, Palin used it, Root used it. They all know that being a potential POTUS candidate means more exposure and more money. It takes only a few well chosen words, winks, hints and smiles to add a lot of public interest and cash to the bottom line.

    If Venture wanted to actually run for POTUS, he knows it takes a lot of personal effort and commitment well in advance – at least two years in advance – of an actual campaign.

    He doesn’t want to run. He wants the cash.

  70. Robert Capozzi

    MORE….full disclosure, I think much of the Austrian school’s insights are helpful, yet some who ID themselves as “Austrian” take loopy, wildly overstated positions on economic matters.

  71. Jill Pyeatt

    GP, do you think Austrian economics are a conspiracy theory? That’s a serious question.

    California is experiencing massive inflation. Not only do I know this by paying our own bills, but from the hundreds of families I work with in my insurance business. Who cares if we’re told otherwise? Our wallets remind us every day. I also think gold would already be $2000 an ounce if it weren’t being artificially held down.

  72. Andy

    “Zapper // Mar 6, 2013 at 11:46 am

    @96 Really, don’t be naive. Ventura is using this technique, Palin used it, Root used it.”

    I think that you are being naive, and Jesse Ventura should not be lumped in with Sarah Palin or Wayne Root. Jesse Ventura was a lot more successful than either Palin or Root before he got into politics.

    If Jesse Ventura had wanted to “sell out” then he would not have lost his TV talk show a few years ago for speaking out against the war in Iraq. If Jesse Ventura was about making money, he’d cozy up to the mainstream politicians. If Jesse Ventura was just about making money, he would have remained friends with Arnold Schwazenegger, instead of having a falling out with him over Arnold’s pro-war and pro-police state views.

    I really think that some people jump to conclusions about anyone who makes money off of politics. I’ve heard people say the same thing about Alex Jones, never mind the fact that Alex Jones would make a lot more money if he had sold out a long time ago and became like Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh.

    I’ve even had people say that about me for making money off of politics, but the truth of the matter is that if I was only in it for the money, I’d have a lot more money right now.

    I think that Jesse Ventura believes what he says he believes, and that he has thought about running for President, and don’t forget that a lot of people have ASKED him to run for President. He’s torn on the issue, and that’s why he has not done it, at least so far. I don’t think that he’s got any sinister agenda to act like he’s going to run for President in order to make money.

  73. Andy

    Jill Pyeatt said: “Our wallets remind us every day. I also think gold would already be $2000 an ounce if it weren’t being artificially held down”

    Gold got close to $2,000 per ounce not too long ago. It has gone down since then, but I expect it to go up in the not too distant future, and I believe that it will go beyond $2,000 per ounce.

  74. paulie Post author

    I don’t think it’s a sinister agenda. He just gets additional attention by hinting he might run for president, even though he knows he won’t. That does not mean his political views are insincere.

  75. paulie Post author

    Gold got close to $2,000 per ounce not too long ago. It has gone down since then, but I expect it to go up in the not too distant future, and I believe that it will go beyond $2,000 per ounce.

    I agree.

  76. Andy

    “paulie // Mar 6, 2013 at 1:16 pm

    I don’t think it’s a sinister agenda. He just gets additional attention by hinting he might run for president, even though he knows he won’t. That does not mean his political views are insincere.”

    I disagree.

  77. Zapper

    Ventura doesn’t “sell out” by taking views on issues contrary to what he believes. You are correct on that.

    He does, however, maximize his attention and gain revenues by playing the potential POTUS card.

    He has no intention of running, but he can make money by pretending he just might – wink, wink.

    Maybe he’ll fly to Mars someday too.

  78. Robert Capozzi

    Z 125: Ventura doesn’t “sell out” by taking views on issues contrary to what he believes. You are correct on that.

    me: Are you guessing, or do you KNOW that?

    If I were to guess, it’d be that JV is more forthcoming than most, but that he’s holding back and calibrating his message, too. Of course, everyone does it to some extent, so there’s that.

  79. paulie Post author

    Z 125: Ventura doesn’t “sell out” by taking views on issues contrary to what he believes. You are correct on that.

    rc127: Are you guessing, or do you KNOW that?

    p: I’m guessing Z is correct

    If I were to guess, it’d be that JV is more forthcoming than most, but that he’s holding back and calibrating his message, too. Of course, everyone does it to some extent, so there’s that.

    p: I’m guessing you are correct as well.

  80. Mark Axinn

    Austrian crackpots:
    Mises, Hayek, Hazlitt, Hoppe.

    Perfectly normal mainstream economists:
    Keynes, Samuelson, Krugman, Reich.

    Frankly, I prefer the crackpots.

  81. Executive Detractor

    I just divested all of my silver holdings at one of those gold and silver shops in a strip mall down the street. And deposited the $56 check in the bank. I am not an accountant or a lawyer and this information should not be considered legal or investment advice. I’d probably be richer if I had bought a barrel of gold or sliver ten years ago.

  82. George Phillies

    117 No, conspiracy theories are beliefs there are unseen occult forces manipulating world events. For example, the “plunge protection team” is a conspiracy theory.

    The belief that metallic currencies work well, because a government that cannot print money must live within its means, is demonstrated by the great economic success of current-day national governments that cannot issue their own currency.

  83. Tyler Cowen

    Everything we were taught about the monetary base is wrong in a world with interest on reserves (IOR). A large base can sit there forever. The price level is not proportional to the base, changes in the base, etc. It just isn’t.

  84. Follow the White Rabbit

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YWWH-lcrXg0

    Everyone says there is a race problem.
    Everyone says this race problem will be solved when the third world pours into every
    white country and only white countries.

    The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody
    says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third
    worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

    Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country
    and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

    What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved
    only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country
    and ONLY into black countries?

    How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem.
    I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

    And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of
    psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?

    But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race,
    the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a
    naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

  85. Freakofdaweek

    Jesse is gonna run in 2000…no, wait…2004…nuh uh…2012…if America is ready….oh wait, America wasn’t ready so 2016…

    Remember when Jesse was backing Trump for POTUS? GOOD TIMES.

  86. Zapper

    @131, 133 … Greece?

    That’s your example? Greece?
    And you claim to understand what about economics?

    Greece is a good example of what happens when Socialism runs wild; an example of what happens when governments are allowed to borrow and run deficits.

    A requisite for a free market system, a requirement for healthy government and for a sound monetary system can be summed up in the well-known axiom:

    “Neither borrower nor lender be.”

  87. paulie Post author

    Everything we were taught about the monetary base is wrong in a world with interest on reserves (IOR). A large base can sit there forever. The price level is not proportional to the base, changes in the base, etc. It just isn’t.

    It’s kind of like Jenga. You can play the game for a while, but eventually it will collapse.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenga

  88. Robert Capozzi

    P, I’m just not so sure. If the point is that the Fed is essentially giving banks cash and the banks are hoarding that cash and reaping interest on it, how does that necessarily lead to either price inflation or collapse.

    I think this is – on its face – an interesting point. Could be the wrinkle that explains what’s going on now is NOT leading to widespread price inflation.

  89. paulie Post author

    At some point, that interest distorts the price structure of the economy to an unsustainable level. TANSTAAFL.

    You may be correct that it is the explanation for why it has not happened yet, though.

  90. Robert Capozzi

    p, yes, it’s certainly a distortion. Whether the distortion can be managed in such a way that it doesn’t become “unsustainable,” I can’t say. Generally, it does at minimum buy time, and with time comes technological improvement. With that comes real growth and productivity improvement.

    The “lunch” I agree isn’t costless by definition, but quantifying the costs seems impossible to discern, as the variables are too many.

    Some do seem to be more talented at spinning plates, though. My preference is for undoing distortion, but I can’t say with certainty that continuously tweaking the distortion necessarily leads to ThunderDome.

  91. paulie Post author

    Whether the distortion can be managed in such a way that it doesn’t become “unsustainable,” I can’t say.

    Without a bottom line to check its growth, the distortion grows exponentially like an avalanche. The idea that it can be managed is dangerous and false.

    The “lunch” I agree isn’t costless by definition, but quantifying the costs seems impossible to discern, as the variables are too many.

    Since bad behavior that profits a select few is allowed to happen without costs or risks, it grows exponentially. Without the natural checks and balances of economic enterprise failure it’s just a matter of time before the balloon pops. The only question is how long.

    The money does not come out of nowhere at zero cost, regardless of what it does (including funding loans). Sooner or later the bill comes due.

  92. Jeremy C. Young

    These guys are friends of mine. They’re trying to get funding to produce a video on approval voting, which they’ll then send to a contest in hopes of getting exposure and grant funding for their future approval voting projects. They’re hard-core third party activists who are working to change the first-past-the-post voting system to make it easier for third parties to garner support. If you have some spare change rattling around, kick it their way; you won’t regret it.

  93. Jeremy C. Young

    These guys are friends of mine. They’re trying to get funding to produce a video on approval voting, which they’ll then send to a contest in hopes of getting exposure and grant funding for their future approval voting projects. They’re hard-core third party activists who are working to change the first-past-the-post voting system to make it easier for third parties to garner support. If you have some spare change rattling around, kick it their way; you won’t regret it.

  94. George Phillies

    Why are we not seeing widespread general price inflation? Let’s see. High unemployment. Extensive international production competition. Low interest rates limiting income of many old people. Digital technology leading to great improvements in production efficiency. Low money velocity. European economies approaching or in recession, driving manufacturers to compete by cutting prices and to the extent they can wages.

    Where are we seeing price inflation? Natural resources, notably timber. But not natural gas, whose price has plummeted.

    Of course, I have had supporters of Austrian crackpot economics try to tell me that by definition money supply inflation is actual inflation, and the economic statistics that contradicted their rantings had to be fake. Recall for example, the fellow who published some variant on GNP inflators which had the amusing property that if you used them to calculate the size of the economy, at some point during the great recession the GNP was negative.

  95. Wyoming Territory Foundation

    I have had supporters of Austrian crackpot economics try to tell me that by definition money supply inflation is actual inflation

    How do you define inflation then?

  96. Robert Capozzi

    p, yes, managing it is certainly dangerous, agreed. Short of abolition, managing its undoing is also dangerous, and abolition is unfathomable, short of the ThunderDome scenario.

    To say that its management is “false” seems false, since they ARE managing the money supply and Operation Twist and QE, etc. Yes, it’s fair to critique this management and its unintended consequences, but to deny that it’s happening seems ostrich-like.

    In some sense, the “bill” may come due, but if the wealth base expands in the interim, the debt service could shrink.

    Now, Cowen could be incorrect, but I do think his point has merit. That doesn’t justify management, but it does suggest that any form of management inevitably leads to blood in the streets.

  97. Winnipeg Titanium Foundry

    “To say that its management is “false” seems false, since they ARE managing the money supply and Operation Twist and QE, etc. ”

    It only seems false. It would likewise seem false to predict that an expanding balloon will eventually pop, since it’s still expanding, but logic dictates that it will.

    “Yes, it’s fair to critique this management and its unintended consequences, but to deny that it’s happening seems ostrich-like.”

    No one is suggesting that it is not happening, only that it is unsustainable and that the balloon will pop sooner or later.

  98. Robert Capozzi

    Last I checked, the economy is not a balloon. It’s size is bounded only by our collective creativity.

    Epic fail.

  99. paulie Post author

    Expanding the money supply does not increase the rate at which our collective creativity grows the economy. And, without checks and balances in place, all the incentives are there to have one outstrip the other. Institutions respond to incentives.

    Epic fail, indeed.

  100. Robert Capozzi

    P, generally I find your reading comprehension to be A+. Perhaps you are having a bad day, since I agree with you and have said as much previously.

  101. paulie Post author

    @153 It’s possible. Trying to do too many things at once, I think.

    @148 You might want to publish the direct article link. That link is only current until he publishes his next article.

  102. Robert Capozzi

    Given what GP said earlier, it may not necessarily be a “bad” as the Austrians have historically led us to believe, however, that money supply manipulation always leads to Weimar outcomes. Such catastrophizing undermines credibility, much as Chicken Little did.

  103. paulie Post author

    They aren’t endless. They are subject to laws of nature, which include human behavior in response to incentives.

  104. Robert Capozzi

    The aggregation of human behaviors responding to ever-shifting incentives present a near-infinite range of possibilities.

  105. Dennis

    Okay everyone,

    Try and contain your excitement…promise you won’t get too overjoyed or jubilant with this news…but Wayne Allyn Root is addressing the CPAC conference next week.

    Paulie, don’t worry, there is still time for you to buy a ticket!

  106. Zapper

    @56,55 …

    Inflation is an increase in the money supply without increasing the commodity backing.

    Inflation is NOT an increase in consumer prices of consumption items … although such increase is symptom, a sign that inflation is occurring.

    Likewise, the CPI does not measure inflation. Ideally, the CPI would be a measure of the change in a (very large) basket of consumer items that estimates the rate of change in consumer prices. Of course the current CPI, for obvious political reasons has been rigged to vastly understate the change in consumer prices. However, even if undertaken honestly, the CPI would not and could not be a measurement of inflation.

    The pretend economists (and GP above) fail to understand that the increase in the money supply which is the actual inflation can also find its way into other places. The economy is far larger than consumption, but they don’t even recognize this missing “dark matter” of the economic universe.

    The usual economic understanding of inflation comes from classroom explanations that everyone holding a dollar gets another one – driving up all prices; or that the government prints and spends the money itself driving up a large segment of the economy, which then flows into the hands of all the consumers, workers and producers who first benefit from this spending – thus driving up all prices in a more twisted way with benefits for the politically preferred groups who get the money first.

    However, these are not the only possibilities, and not the current method of handing out the newly created funds – the real inflation.

    Assets have seen – as intended – a large portion of the current run of inflation. Thus making this round of inflation a deliberate attempt to increase the wealth of the already wealthy vs. the rest of America. The 1% got the money and nearly all of this part of the inflation increased economic pie.

    And the dark matter in today’s inflation universe – debt reduction and elimination for the most privileged and wealthy banking and investment classes with political clout.

    That inflation has occurred, is massive – yes Weimar like – and hurts all of us in the 99% left out is incontrovertible.

    However, this time the inflation is a direct and deliberate wealth shift. The government has increased the relative wealth of the 1% vs the rest as a matter of policy through the control of the money supply without a gold standard. That’s why it doesn’t show up in the CPI – the phoney designer stat used to fool the naive such as GP and to dupe the great majority of pretend “economists” who understand nothing and only parrot the standard economics textbook they memorized years ago.

  107. Thomas L. Knapp

    @162,

    “Inflation is an increase in the money supply without increasing the commodity backing.”

    Then there’s no such thing as inflation in the US, since US currency is not commodity-backed.

  108. Robert Capozzi

    162 Z: However, this time the inflation is a direct and deliberate wealth shift.

    me: Where is the evidence of THIS assertion? How do you know this?

    btw, I would note the obvious: that the “1%” are not the only ones holding financial assets.

  109. Chuck Moulton

    Jill Pyeatt wrote (@67):

    George, do you know what prompted this letter from Chuck?

    Sorry, I haven’t been following IPR as closely as usual the past few days (working on some Virginia LP stuff). I missed this until now.

    Here’s the basic gist:

    The LNC has been discussing a service level agreement (or affiliate agreement). Pat Dixon (chair of TX and vice-chair of the LSLA executive board) asked on the state chairs list for other states to give input about what states wanted in such an agreement. Few people responded.

    Pat introduced the following motion on the weekly LSLA executive board conference call:

    Patrick Dixon moves that the LSLA approves this draft affiliate agreement and submits it to the LNC for further consideration.

    He had mentioned the motion in advance of the call on the state chairs list. Aaron Starr opposed the motion on the state chairs list, making 3 basic arguments.

    Aaron Starr wrote (summary points in email):

    1) It is beyond the scope of the LSLA Executive Board to approve any affiliate agreement.

    2) What are proposed as requirements of the LP National office are already addressed as a matter of existing LNC policy or in the LP Bylaws.

    3) What National can demand of state affiliates is restricted, in that LP Bylaw Article 6.5 states that “the autonomy of the affiliate and sub-affiliate parties shall not be abridged by the National Committee or any other committee of the Party, except as provided by these bylaws.”

    I agreed with Aaron on the state chairs list and joined the LSLA executive board conference call (which I don’t normally attend because I’m not on the board). Pat’s motion failed — more due to Aaron’s reasoned opposition than the one minute I gave my opinion I’m sure.

    I got the sense some LNC members were frustrated that Pat’s motion failed because they wanted state chairs to participate in formation of the affiliate agreement prior to the March LNC meeting. Paulie saw my opposition to the LSLA executive board adopting an affiliate agreement on behalf of the state chairs and emailed me asking how I would proceed.

    Paulie wrote (via email):

    Do you have an alternative suggestion for LNC to communicate with State Chairs for this purpose?

    I think LSLA was just a proxy for communicating with state chairs by/from/to LNC for the purpose of starting work on such a reciprocal agreement defining what states and national expect of each other.

    The email was longer, but that’s the meat of it. My emailed response to Paulie was what George Phillies posted at comment 66.

    Hope that helps clarify the context of my quoted email.

  110. Robert Capozzi

    Watching Morning Joe this morning with much coverage of Rand Paul’s filibuster. The word “libertarian” was used over and over and over again.

    All this seems awfully helpful to the cause of liberty, even though I sometimes disagree with Rand Paul. One commenter indicated that Paul’s moderation in contrast with his Dad makes him a SERIOUS playa on the stage.

    How do others feel about this?

  111. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC @ 166,

    I’m not a big Rand Paul fan, but I think he did a hell of a good thing in more than one way.

    He brought back the REAL filibuster — most of the time what they falsely call a “filibuster” is just not having 60 votes for cloture. A real filibuster is when a Senator or Senators personally make the effort of talking everyone to death to stave off the inevitable long enough to make a point, and it’s a beautiful thing (the only time I ever loved Robert Byrd was when he rambled on for 90 minutes about a little dog he had).

    He got a Democrat (Wyden of Oregon) to join his filibuster, thus creating the core of a bi-partisan Senate opposition to the insidious idea of unfettered executive power to murder.

    A pretty good day’s work.

  112. George Phillies

    @151 no, there are natural resource, capital, and labor constraints.

    If you find a way around these, let me know, as I would like to clear the foot of snow off my driveway without spending money or investing time.

  113. Zapper

    Yes, GP, you continually prove you know nothing about economics … and you’ve done it again.

    (the link @169 came up as a blank beige screen – must be a link to what you know about econ)

    Failure to understand why backing money is necessary and how it works is just the first obvious example, and citing people like yourself who don’t understand economics – even those with make-believe university certificates – is useless.

  114. Zapper

    @168 Actually I know about that project. It, however, fails just as I stated, because it ignores the majority of the real economy (not GDP, but the entire economy, including existing assets and wealth) that is not included in current consumer prices.

  115. Zapper

    Thomas L. Knapp // Mar 8, 2013 at 6:17 am

    @162, “Inflation is an increase in the money supply without increasing the commodity backing.”

    Then there’s no such thing as inflation in the US, since US currency is not commodity-backed.

    *****

    This is not quite correct. The US dollar is currently without a fixed Gold standard. This is what is required to have an honest, stable currency without inflation or deflation.

    The US dollar does still have unfixed, constantly eroding gold backing – although without an audit we don’t know how much. It is the prospect of that backing being refixed at any point in time that protects the dollar from total collapse.

    However, the dollar is being constantly inflated because the backing exists currently along with the absence of a gold STANDARD.

    Gold backing is not enough. We need a 100% backed gold backing on a fixed gold standard.

    The US dollar is therefore not quite a fiat currency and can survive longer as a result.

    Gold backing is not the same as a Gold Standard.
    Likewise for commodity backing and commodity standard.

    And for those, like the make-believe economists and GP: a Gold Standard has nothing to do with being linked with other currencies. This was one of the elements of distruction of the dollar and instability in the currency markets in the past that is wrongly assumed to be a defect in the gold standard.

    In reality, a gold standard is applicable to a single currency. The issuers of a gold standard currency must refuse to make any links or establish any pegs. The gold backed, gold standard currency must stand alone with every monetery unit backed by and pegged only to gold, and must not linked or pegged to any other currency.

  116. Wes Wagner

    Sigh….

    If we dump religion for a moment… this is the objective truth about currency:

    1) Fiat currency has value because the government that issues it demands that taxes be paid in it.

    2) Currency is a commodity, whether it is fiat or not.

    3) Commodities trade based on fundamental laws of supply vs demand

    4) It is quite possible to have a stable fiat currency, it is just impractical because politics will typically cause issuing nations to destroy its underlying value via over-supply and deficit spending that outstrips GDP

    5) Backing said currency with gold will just cause debt instruments to be written by the same said governments even as if they are derivative instruments so they can do #4 and explode the monetary supply of this new pseudo-currency

    6) There is no legislative or regulatory replacement for ethics, so trying to change “policy” with regards to the issues addressed in 1-5 is pointless.

  117. Zapper

    @164 While you note the obvious that others outside the 1% hold financial assets (also commodity assets), I will also note the obvious that there are few outside the 1% who will gain more from an increase in the value of their financial and commodity assets than they will lose by the aggregate of their total economic and financial portfolios being weighted outside of financial and commodity assets, including the following factors as examples:
    1) the wealth shift toward the 1% as a percentage of the whole economy (not GDP),
    2) loss of relative value of their labor income as their labor income becomes a far smaller piece of the total pie,
    3) loss of purchasing power in their cash and dollar denominated assets,
    4) R/E losses due to both declines in value and inflation adjusted value

    Even more important is that the 1% was able to unload a massive amount of debt resluting in a major increase in net wealth. While those outside the 1% were unable to do this (those who unloaded bad R/E loans also lost the underlying R/E assets, so not the same.)

  118. Zapper

    @175 Zimbabwe: Fiat currency. Government requires taxes to be paid in fiat currency. Falls to zero. Collapses. Fail.

    Fiat currency is not a commodity. It is paper.

    The world today has many partially fiat currencies, however they are backed by dollars, other foreign partial fiat currencies backed by dollars, and commodities.

    They do not have a fixed gold or other commodity standard. However, they are partially backed on an unfixed basis. So they continue to exist.

    When the backing is totally removed, as it was in Zimbabwe, any such currency will quickly collapse.

  119. Jill Pyeatt

    Thanks, Chuck, for your explanation.

    I thought Rand Paul’s 13-hour talkathon was exquisite. He made a huge point and most certainly got many people’s attention, not only about the fact that certain people felt they didn’t need to even answer questions from their senators, but, of, course, the awful possibilities of killing people by drone right here on our soil. I consider Rand a Republican who sometimes does things right, but he certainly did things right on Wednesday. I think the country was slightly better off yesterday because of his actions. I hope he continues defying the neocons who surround him.

    I really hope the LP make some kind of strong statement supporting his actions.

  120. Wes Wagner

    Z @177

    Zimbabwe had nothing to do with “backing” … and it is a commodity.

    If you take 100,000,000 units of currency and suddenly create 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 units of new supply, the result is obvious.

    I am not here to argue with you… you can either evaluate what I have said against the basis of economics and arrive at the same objective truth I have, or you can practice religion.

    Your choice.

  121. Jill Pyeatt

    Can someone going to tomorrow’s Oregon convention please take a few photos and notes, and report here how it goes? Thanks.

  122. George Phillies

    The gold standard was a total catastrophe. We can see the modern equivalent in Greece, where a country that cannot adjust its currency exchange rates with respect to its major trading partners — because they use the same money — is now advancing into economic collapse, much like the collapse in the Carolinas before the revolution where there was no money to be had (pine tree dollars were the ersatz replacement).

    As the Congolese have demonstrated, even reasonably stable systems can be persuaded to collapse if you beat them hard enough,

  123. Zapper

    @179 Actually, I should have said that fiat currency IS a commodity – it’s paper!

    However, that is the only actual value of fiat currency, that of the paper and perhaps any value the art on the paper may have.

    The US dollar has lost 99% of its value since 1913 due to issuance of additional dollars without backing (there is no gold STANDARD), yet because the gold backing the dollar is still there, the dollar has not collapsed, it is just constantly inflated.

    Other currencies that do not collapse are able to continue because they do actually have some backing, as I stated.

    Check it out. They all hold other currencies, gold, other commodities and other things as backing. If they had none of these the currency would quickly collapse – as in Zimbabwe.

    The problem is they have no STANDARD. There is no fixed relationship. The commodity backing must be fixed as in $20 = 1 oz of gold, with every dollar issued backed.

    Without a standard, there is massive inflation.

    Without backing there is collapse.

  124. Wes Wagner

    Z @183

    Your arguments are religious in nature.

    You do not address the fundamental underpinning of my argument, which is that it is based on supply and demand.

    Even your counterargument, if interpreted correctly agrees with me, once you strike all the fallacies out of it.

    Let’s say the USD is fixed at $20 = 1 oz of gold … and a giant gold meteorite hits the earth and shatters into billions of pieces, increasing the gold supply by 100,000x .. what happens then to the USD ?

    The USD has lost 99% of its value because the supply of USD has outstripped demand. It has nothing to do with the removal of the gold standard.

    Removing the gold standard perhaps is analogous to taking the governor off a school bus… but a determined driver will find a way to make a school bus go 100mph if they want to, even if it means taking the buss over a cliff.

  125. Zapper

    @182 You didn’t read what I wrote, or more likely didn’t comprehend.

    Greece is like a state in the US. They have to manage their budget or they will have financial trouble.

    The problem you are alluding to is a red herring promoted by other phoney economists. The links between currencies that caused great financial distortion in the marketplace has NOTHING to do with a gold standard.

    The snake under Bretton Woods as an example.

    Under a gold standard with gold backing there are NO such links to other currencies.

    As to Greece: If a government will follow the rules necessary to maintain a free government, free society and free markets: That is, if the government never runs a deficit and never borrows money, then they will not have the kinds of problems Greece has today.

  126. Zapper

    From WW @184: Let’s say the USD is fixed at $20 = 1 oz of gold … and a giant gold meteorite hits the earth and shatters into billions of pieces, increasing the gold supply by 100,000x .. what happens then to the USD ?

    ****

    Good. Let’s try your example. First, human civilization will be ended. Perhaps all humans on Earth, like the dinosaurs will be extinct. But, if some humans manage to survive, then at some future date, maybe thousands of years in the future, they will create a new civilzation. At that time they will be able to create money again; and they will use some other relatively scarce commodity to back the new currency.

    *****

    Your scenario shows you have no logical basis to refute what I’ve explained to you. So you try to create preposterous situations.

  127. Zapper

    Now, let’s look more realistically. Yes, gold backing on a 100% gold standard has a weakness in that there could be some major discovery of the commodity that would disturb the value of the currency. That’s called risk. That’s called life. And in a free market there would be other currencies backed by alternative commodities or baskets of commodities to spread and diversify the risk.

    Now, what about real fiat currencies with NO backing: they ALWAYS collapse.
    There are no exceptions.

    What about currencies with partial backing and no standard such as the dollar and other currencies most of which are currently backed by dollars: they ALWAYS have massive inflation and loss of purchasing power.

    Reality is tough. Life’s a bitch.
    “… And that’s the way the way it is…” – WC

  128. Wes Wagner

    Zapper @186

    Umm.. did you multiple the mass of the amount of known gold above the earth by 10^6 and come up with a planet killer scenario? Really? Honestly?

    Whether it is mining asteroids, comets, improved mining techniques, discovery of a new motherload, the concept of basing a single currency on a single commodity is absurd.

    As I said… your arguments are religious in nature and do not reflect the opinions that would be held by someone with a basic fundamental understanding of economics.

    Now if you started to spew things like: all issued currencies should be issued only on the basis of a basket of commodities held in an exchange warehouse and redeemed for value thereof and/or promises of short term (<30 day) production and all reserve banking should be done only on the basis of fully backed capitalization for the issuance of credit — you might be getting the point where someone could have a rational discussion with you.

    What I am seeing is a religious zealot.

  129. Zapper

    @188 If you had read what I wrote back at 174:

    “… Gold backing is not enough. We need a 100% backed gold backing on a fixed gold standard. …”

    and at 162:

    “… Inflation is an increase in the money supply without increasing the commodity backing. …”

    then perhaps you would have seen that I covered that.

    But it was a mistake to assume that others actualy knew what a 100% gold standard means, as apparently you didn’t get what I meant, so others will certainly not know what a 100% gold standard means.

    It also means, as GP doesn’t get, that there can be no Bretton Woods type “snake” agreements and other currency pegs, links and support agreements.

    Although I do not agree that all money should be backed by a basket of commodities, gold is actually preferable to the other options, in a free market monetary system some currencies could be based on a basket concept, it should be obvious that 100% backing means 100% backing, that is every unit of currency would be legally issued only when the required commodity had been deposited and the commodities held for exchange or redemption in an appropriate “warehouse” or currency issue and redemption facility or exchange bank.

  130. George Phillies

    You can tell the fruitcakes because they refer to normal money as “fiat currency”. Of course, the main fruitcake here is the fellow who keeps advocating steps that would destroy our ballot access.

  131. TOm Stevens Not Seeking Re-Election

    From the LPPA Facebook page

    Tom Stevens wrote
    STEVENS NOT SEEKING RE-ELECTION AS LPPA STATE CHAIR

    I have decided not to seek re-election as State Chair of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania at the Annual Convention scheduled to be held on April 27, 2013. ”

    Stevens goes on to say that he did a lot for the party, he was sure to be re-elected, but the associated costs were too high.

    …George Phillies

  132. Wes Wagner

    GP @190

    Technically calling it fiat currency is true… in that it has value because the issuing government issuing it declares it so (aka by fiat) … the underlying assumption that it must be a pejorative, however, is the issue.

    In a purely theoretical sense a fiat currency could be retained as a store of value if the faith and confidence in the underlying government were such that people could be reasonably certain that it would not be debased through profligate deficit spending or inflation.

    I haven’t met too many governments that have that type of restraint ;)

  133. Zapper

    George, you are the main reason that the LP isn’t successful in your state. You lack the political acumen to know what to do, the leadership ability to set up a viable LP group and the gumption take on the challenge… and you don’t understand economics.

    You should stick to climate change.

  134. Andy

    Wes Wagner said: “6) There is no legislative or regulatory replacement for ethics, so trying to change ‘policy’ with regards to the issues addressed in 1-5 is pointless.”

    Isn’t this an arguement in favor of repealing legal tender laws? Let people expirement with different forms of money and people can decide in the market place which currencies to they want to accept and which currencies they want to reject.

  135. Wes Wagner

    Andy @195

    Well one of… there are probably a few thousand good reasons to repeal legal tender laws ;) and just prosecute people who do something nefarious under common law fraud.

  136. Executive Detractor

    What is the origin of the story that goes something like “most people know it’s wrong to steal from your neighbor. Hiring a group to steal is wrong. Getting the government to steal by taxing is wrong.” I think it’s in a Ruwart book, but was this a story by some Austrian economist or Adam Smith or Playdoh or something?

  137. George Phillies

    The February LPUS membership report shows that the national party has 13957 sustaining members, people who have paid money, up from 12870 last June. The pre-election increase phase seems to have come to an end. There are a total of 127552 members, people who have signed the pledge.

    The staff report from Executive Director Howell claims 15130 members. The mismatch arises because staff is claiming donors who have not signed the pledge to be members. Hopefully LNC members will not become confused by this issue, which becomes significant if there is a Judicial Committee appeal on some matter.

  138. Darryl W. Perry

    Preliminary results from Keene, NH School Board
    Mary Hofreiter had withdrawn from the race, but was unable to be removed from the ballot. Ian Freeman, Darryl W. Perry & Conan Salada are the co-chairs of the NH Liberty Party

    School Board Candidates(3 elected)Percentage in parenthesis is the percentage of the 1625 ballots cast
    Chris Coates1049 (64.47%)
    Susan Fratus1005 (61.77%)
    Kris Roberts891 (54.76%)
    Don Parker882 (54.21%)
    John Bordenet305 (18.75%)
    Mary E. Hofreiter110 (6.76%)
    Ian Freeman107 (6.58%)
    Conan Salada78 (4.79%)
    Darryl W. Perry69 (4.24%)
    Blank368
    Write-ins11

  139. Krzysztof Lesiak

    I found this on Reddit. I thought about posting it as an article but then again the source does not seem credible enough. So I’m posting it here to see what people think.

    “More evidence that Gary Johnson was a scam: $1 million raised for TV ads, only $13k actually spent.

    Source 1: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/candidate.php?id=N00033226

    Source 2: http://i.imgur.com/uJYET.jpg

    Source 3:http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/10ia67/i_am_gov_gary_johnson_the_libertarian_candidate/c6dpg24

    Now that the election is over, can we all agree that Gary Johnson is a scam? After raising $1 million on his website for the specific purpose of TV ads and after raising $2.3 million total, he ended up spending only $13,600 on ads, or 0.6% of his entire campaign budget, while somehow racking up $227,202 in debts.

    And by the time he finally did start running ads, it was for his “Be the 5%” campaign, for the sole purpose of giving Gary Johnson $90 million in tax payer funding. In other words, Gary lied about how he was going to spend money on ads. And the ads he did run were for the sole purpose of getting more money, not for the sake of any sort of social change.

    So where did the money go? Of the $2.3 million that Gary Johnson raised, $2 million was spent on a single organization, NSON Opinion Strategies, who served as Gary Johnson’s “advisors.” If you want to know about NSON, visit this link: http://nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/gary-johnson-swindle

    “But that’s only because Gary Johnson didn’t raise much money to begin with! He can’t compete with Obama or Romney!”

    Check the first link. Jill Stein, Thad McCotter, Buddy Roemer, Fred Karger, and Randall Terry all raised far less money than Johnson did, yet they all managed to spend far more on media. Terry raised only $270, but he spent $80k on ads (27.5%). Stein raised $893k, but she spent $260k on ads (27.5%).

    “But he needed that money to get on the ballot and fight legal challenges!”

    Completely false. Check out Johnson’s expenditure report. Only $17,500 went to law firms, or less than 1% of the total campaign budget.

    “This is only a minor scandal, because the things he stands for are so much more important!”

    Right, because you can absolutely trust a man who willfully lies about his own campaign expenditures to deliver his promises on everything else. This isn’t simply an issue of mismanagement, it’s an issue of credibility. Gary Johnson doesn’t have any.”

  140. Darryl W. Perry

    Not entirely third party related:

    Bradley Manning Speaks
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBYYhZGqHXA

    Transcript:

    I believe that if the general public, especially the American public, had access to the information, this could spark a domestic debate on the role of the military and our foreign policy in general… I also believed the detailed analysis of the data over a long period of time by different sectors of society might cause society to reevaluate the need or even the desire to even to engage in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations that ignore the complex dynamics of the people living in the effected environment everyday… Ultimately, I felt that the right thing to do was to release the SigActs… I felt this sense of relief by them having it. I felt I had accomplished something that allowed me to have a clear conscience based upon what I had seen and read about and knew were happening in both Iraq and Afghanistan everyday… The video depicted several individuals being engaged by an aerial weapons team… It was clear to me that the event happened because the aerial weapons team mistakenly identified Reuters employees as a potential threat and that the people in the bongo truck were merely attempting to assist the wounded. The people in the van were not a threat but merely ‘good samaritans’. The most alarming aspect of the video to me, however, was the seemly delightful bloodlust they appeared to have… They dehumanized the individuals they were engaging and seemed to not value human life by referring to them as quote “dead bastards” unquote and congratulating each other on the ability to kill in large numbers… The more I read, the more I was fascinated with by the way that we dealt with other nations and organizations. I also began to think that the documented backdoor deals and seemingly criminal activity that didn’t seem characteristic of the de facto leader of the free world… The more I read the cables, the more I came to the conclusion that this was the type of information that– that this type of information should become public. I once read and used a quote on open diplomacy written after the First World War and how the world would be a better place if states would avoid making secret pacts and deals with and against each other… I thought these cables were a prime example of a need for a more open diplomacy… I believe that if the general public, especially the American public, had access to the information, this could spark a domestic debate on the role of the military and our foreign policy in general.

  141. Jill Pyeatt

    Thanks for the above, Daryl. Most third parties are liberty-oriented, so I personally think that’s pertinent here.

  142. Deran

    Kshama Sawant, college instructor and active Socialist Alternative member who challeneged the state’s leading Democratic legislator last year is running this year against incumbent Seattle City Council leader Richard Conlin,

    http://votesawant.org/sawant-to-run-against-conlin-for-seattle-city-council/

    http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/03/13/kshama-sawant-is-running-against-council-member-richard-conlin

    Sawant is articulate, and Socialist Alternative are a fairly level-head groups of socialists, so I think she has a chance of getting through the primary to the general.

    Municipal elections in Seattle are all nonpartisan, so she will not be able to run with a socialist political label.

  143. George Phillies

    I am examining Johnson’s campaign filings with the FEC. Impressive amounts of additional debt are appearing, starting with the very filings.

    For example for the second quarter of 2011
    Original filing back then – $227,360
    Amended filing February 2013 $403,644

    And right before the convention, debt at the end of May:
    Original filing back then – $150,181
    The truth revealed February 2013 – $1,209,758

    A reasonable man might suggest that the convention delegates, presented with a nominating campaign that on arrival at the convention was in the hole by more money than most LP Presidential campaigns raise post-nomination, might have looked favorably at alternative candidates.

    The reasons for the debts are also, let us say, interesting. Some of them appear imprecise relative to the FEC Requests for Additional Information.

  144. Thomas L. Knapp

    @210,

    “A reasonable man might suggest that the convention delegates, presented with a nominating campaign that on arrival at the convention was in the hole by more money than most LP Presidential campaigns raise post-nomination, might have looked favorably at alternative candidates.”

    Such a man might be reasonable, but he’d be uninformed. The evidence of most LP presidential nominating conventions over the last couple of decades is that the majority of delegates, it told that the word “gullible” is written on the ceiling, will look up every time.

  145. Jill Pyeatt

    George, will this all be excused away as debt to Ron Neilson? Is it broken down more specifically?

  146. Deran

    The California Peace and Freedom just endorse Cindy Sheehan to be their 2014 gubenatorial candaite.

    http://www.peaceandfreedom.org/home/campaign/june-2014

    Sheen says she is running “primarily because I believe that California should be leading the nation in peace, education, health care, sustainable/renewable energy and democracy. I was born and raised in California and have lived my entire life here. I love my state and know it can be doing far better than it is now.”

    I find this much more exciting than Roseanne Barr. Sheehan self-identifies as a socialist, and she is a good campaigner with name recognition.

    Alas, California’s “Top Two” primary system will probably exclude Sheehan from the official November election. The votes that legally elect a candidate.

  147. George Phillies

    @211 excellent point.

    However, the gullibles are perhaps even more concentrated on the LNC.

    Note that Johnson, exclusive of Federal money sharing, appears to have raised a tad less post-convention than Barr did.

  148. Mark Axinn

    George–

    Yesterday I received the latest issue of Liberty in America and as always read it cover to cover; thanks so much for putting it together and forwarding.

    Question: You appear to assume that Ron Nielson was the $325 per hour senior consultant for the Johnson/Gray campaign. My understanding is that Ron was the campaign manager and that someone else, far more senior than he, was the the senior consultant.

    Moreover, since people in such positions rarely work full-time on just one matter, a billing rate of $325 does not strike me as particularly exorbitant if one is getting quality advice for that rate.

  149. Mark Axinn

    Roger Stone is certainly far more senior than anyone else involved in the Johnson 2012 campaign (except for Gary Johnson and Jim Gray).

    I do not know what his financial understanding was, if any.

  150. Kleptocracy And You

    The Mises Institute and Me

    In the fall of 1987 I was a senior economics major at the University of North Carolina, looking at options for graduate school. By chance, I found a flyer for a five-year-old organization called the Ludwig von Mises Institute. I was thrilled — I was already an enthusiastic, if unsophisticated, fan of Mises and the Austrian school of economics, and was amazed that someone had named an institute after him! That someone, of course, was Lew Rockwell, and a letter of inquiry about graduate fellowships led to a phone interview with Murray N. Rothbard, Mises’s former student and the Institute’s academic vice president, a visit to Stanford University for the Institute’s summer instructional conference (what became Mises University), and the most important relationship of my professional life.

    I went on to earn my PhD, become a tenured professor, and spend my days researching and teaching Austrian economics, speaking at Mises Institute events, writing for its publications, and following its work. {I now have gone} to Auburn to serve as the Institute’s Executive Director and the inaugural Carl Menger Fellow. The Mises Institute continues to be the world’s leading center of research, teaching, and outreach in the tradition of Mises and the Austrian school, and its beautiful campus in Auburn is the center of the action.

    It’s hard to believe it’s been 30 years since Lew founded the Institute, working from his dining room table, working with indefatigable energy and the help of Rothbard, one of the truly creative geniuses of our time. In those three decades, the Institute has achieved so much. Thank you for making all of this possible. Your continued support is crucial in this fight for sound ideas and sound policies. We can do nothing without the help of good people like you. Thank you!
    We need your help in 2013 Click here to donate – https://mises.org/forms/53/We-Need-Your-Help-in-2013

    Peter G. Klein, Ph.D.
    Executive Director Ludwig von Mises Institute

    Ludwig von Mises Institute
    518 West Magnolia Avenue
    Auburn, Alabama 36832-4501
    334.321.2100
    800.636.4737

    Please help Us in 2013 – https://mises.org/forms/53/We-Need-Your-Help-in-2013
    Thank You !

  151. Austin Battenberg

    I’m a believer of the Austrian school of economics, though I am not necessarily opposed to other ideas. I’m not going to be like Zapper and say that the only good idea is gold-backed currency. I like what Andy said, eliminate legal tender laws, and let the free market and individuals choose what currency to use.

    I just want to say, I know we aren’t witnessing any massive hyperinflation, but I thought that is because the dollar is still the reserve currency of the world and is being propped up by everyone in the world still using it.

    Also, I don’t make that much money, so I feel the effects of the minor inflation we ARE experiencing. When I go buy groceries I pay more and get less then I did a few years ago. I work at an auto parts store and I see the prices rise on oil and batteries (among other things) every few months.

    And isn’t it true that the official inflation rate doesn’t include food and energy? Those are the things going up the most. Am I the only one who saw my electric bill almost double a couple years ago?

    You guys who call Austrians crack-pots are insulting those like me who want solutions to the obvious price increases that are making our day to day lives more difficult.

  152. Brian Holtz

    isn’t it true that the official inflation rate doesn’t include food and energy?

    The BLS breaks out inflation data for scores of sectors (and over a dozen regions), and the subindex that excludes food and energy is frequently cited as the core trend for inflation, but the overall CPI definitely includes food and energy.

    Am I the only one who saw my electric bill almost double a couple years ago?

    It’s unlikely you saw your electricity price double. The Jan 2009 price index for electricity was 190.4, and in Jan 2013 was 194.5. (In 2003 it was 132.1.)

  153. Robert Capozzi

    ab 224: …I thought [there's no hyperinflation in prices] because the dollar is still the reserve currency of the world and is being propped up by everyone in the world still using it.

    me: While that sounds true enough, how does that lead to little price inflation with the expansion of the money supply?

    The best explanation I’ve seen is that QE is mostly just going to financial institutions which are in turn reaping interest on reserves, for the most part.

    I’da thunk that we’d be Zimbabwe by now, too, but it ain’t the case. Maybe the “old” models ain’t working any more, given the new tools that the Fed has dreamed up.

  154. Concerned Citizen

    I’m drafting a treatise on how we can save this country through the LP in 2016. WOULD IPR be interested in publishing it?

  155. Waylon T. Freebird

    April 1st is coming up. You might want to make sure to get it in by then, or there could be a year’s delay before it gets published.

  156. ProFunk

    https://www.facebook.com/events/116750551849485/

    [When]
    Tuesday, March 26, 2013
    [Time]
    6:00pm until 9:00pm in PDT

    [Where]

    Liberty Headquarters
    [Description]
    Come down and meet the candidates who are running for the Libertarian Party of Nevada Executive Committee at the 2013 State Convention.

    The event will be at Liberty Headquarters

    We will have food and beverages available. Please RSVP so we can get an accurate headcount for the food.

  157. paulie Post author

    They will announce their slate tomorrow.

    So far I know it’s Brett for Chair and I will guess Tim Hagan, who is also the national treasurer, for treasurer. That’s just a guess. I don’t know who else yet.

  158. Jill Pyeatt

    I’ll write to Brett and ask for the scoop as soon as it’s released. This is exciting!

  159. Krzysztof Lesiak

    Thanks Paulie. Like I told Jill, if you see any half decent articles that are interesting (there will surely be a good number relating to third party politics) feel free to post them to IPR as commentary :)

  160. Krzysztof Lesiak

    Yes I might just be taking up Paulie’s offer to help me pay for LP membership dues soon ;)

    I will also be going to Illinois’s state LP convention this September (featuring Tom Woods, one of my favorite authors). I hope I can get a press pass for IPR though, it’s a bit pricey for a high school student like myself lol

  161. NewFederalist

    Let’s start a rousing debate on necrophilia! (Perhaps we should save that for the April Open Thread.)

  162. Krzysztof Lesiak

    I found this comment on a John Stossel YouTube video, what do you guys think?

    “Libertarians need to FLOOD the Republican Party.
    think about it… Ron and Rand Paul are obviously Libertarians but they ran ans Republicans. VERY FEW would? have EVER heard of them had they never ran as Republicans.
    How many, outside of Libertarians, have ever heard of Michael Badnarik or Gary Johnson???”

  163. Gordon Smirnoff

    People have been trying to infiltrate the Republicans for a long long time, it has never worked and will never work.

    And Rand Paul is not a Libertarian. Are you serious?

  164. Krzysztof Lesiak

    It’s not my comment, it was someone else on YouTube. And Rand has some libertarian leanings, even if he think the label is an “albatross around his neck.”

    And I beg to differ, Gordon. Ron Paul, Justin Amash, and Thomas Massie ARE libertarians for sure, and they won as Republicans. I do understand though, that the GOP establishment is still controlled by neocons and is fighting hard against the Liberyt Movement. Also Ron Paul brought libertarianism more publicity and made it more popular than the LP did in its 40 year history.

    Of course I love the LP so I’m not hating on it, but if it weren’t for Ron Paul a LOT of people like me wouldn’t even care about politics in the first place.

  165. Sam Kress

    Ron Paul is a mix of libertarian and conservative. Rand Paul is more conservative than libertarian. Rand Paul and the Kentucky LP both say Rand Paul is not a libertarian.

  166. Jill Pyeatt

    I couldn’t go near the Republican party because of their warmongering, and their shameful cheating and rule-changing throughout the past campaign cycle. I could never get the bad smell off of me.

  167. Sam Kress

    Speaking of smells the following is by Jenny Webb:

    Cutting back on government opens voids in service that must be filled. I’d like to address one of those.
    DIY Government: Be your own DEA agent.
    As more states legalize marijuana, I hear the concern, “What about my teenager? What if someone under 21 gets ahold of it?” It’s a legitimate worry. With a little preparation, even a slacker parent can do a better job than the DEA, the Sheriff, the police, or the juvenile court.
    There are four main worries; the munchies, that smell, red eyes, mood changes. The good news is with Tide and Dorito’s you can have the problem solved in the time it takes to do a load of laundry.
    Step 1: Feed the child. Doritos are fast and efficient but don’t be afraid to try left-overs from the fridge. You can order Pizza for serious cases.
    Step 2: Wash the hit-by-car skunk smell out of the hoodie. (Teenagers never seem to get the good stuff.) Tide is top choice, but any detergent will do the trick. I find the smell of pot, although stronger than cigarettes, washes out more easily.
    The red eyes will go away without medical intervention.
    If you have a teenage daughter like mine, you might welcome the lightened, giggly mood. The bad news is that buzz wears off about the same time the dryer buzzes.
    You can do this on your own, with existing tools, in less than two hours. No kicked-in doors, no family pets getting shot, no court hearings, no court fines. It saves everyone time and money.
    Maybe you find yourself worried about school performance. You can use existing parenting methods for those problems. You know – take away Xbox, lap top, cell phone, grounding. Those may have been an issue before pot. In fact, those may the real reason homework isn’t getting done.
    Many will ask if I’m serious. Yes, I am. I take care of my own kid and I expect others to do the same. Stop looking to the government as some magical father figure to step in with discipline and perfect solutions to parenting problems.
    If you are a parent who insists on the old-fashioned court costs and juvenile detention center, you might have to wait for your kid to commit a real crime. I don’t suggest that. They meet bad kids there, really bad kids.

  168. Krzysztof Lesiak

    Ok. I read them all. Pretty good reasons. I liked the appeal to Ron Paul people.

    Still need more time before I take you up on the offer, Paulie. Also, given that I’m the campaign manager for a Republican (before you shoot me, he is a Ron Paul supporter, libertarian type who voted for Gary Johnson in the general, and also the LP IL ran ZERO candidates for Congress in 2012, a trend that might continue, so LPers in northern Illinois and Chicago should get behind him), it might prove a liability of sorts. Although I’m not really that concerned about it. The GOP primary is open in Illinois. Whatever. I’ll certainly be thinking about it.

    What I’m saying is this, if I join the LP, I also want to be able to support Liberty minded Republicans like Amash, Thomas Massie, for example. There’s not too many of them, at least when it comes to ones that have been elected. Like when a Libertarian ran against Amash in 2012, it was a WTF? moment for me.

  169. Krzysztof Lesiak

    Also I don’t want to completely disavow the CP…especially since they’ve been really growing rapidly here in Illinois. I know you’re not a big fan of them, Paulie, but I find them much better than the Dems and GOP as a whole. They’re planning on running a full slate for statewide offices, while when I talked to IL LP chair Matt Ervin (sp?), he said he wasn’t sure there would be a full slate.

  170. Andy

    Krzysztof Lesiak: “What I’m saying is this, if I join the LP, I also want to be able to support Liberty minded Republicans like Amash, Thomas Massie, for example.”

    There is nothing that says that if you join the Libertarian Party as a dues paying member that you can not do what you said above. This is a common misconception that is held by a lot of small “l” libertarians.

  171. Andy

    “Krzysztof Lesiak // Mar 30, 2013 at 11:55 pm

    Does someone want to give me arguments/ reasons for joining the Libertarian Party? I am strongly considering it.

    If I do, I’m not changing my position on abortion, though. I’m still pro-life. I thought about getting a bumper sticker from Libertarians for Life: http://www.l4l.org/index.html

    I think that you should join the Libertarian Party, and you do not have to change your stance on abortion. There is disagreement in every party over a lot of issues. I know that in the Constitution Party a few years ago that there was a dispute over the Nevada affiliate (and maybe some others) taking a stand on abortion that made an exception for cases of rape.

    The bottom line is which party do you line up the most with on the issues. Do you think that you line up more with the Libertarian Party, or the Constitution Party?

    You obviously do not really line up with the Republican Party, except as a person who wants to move it in a more pro-liberty direction, like a Ron Paul type.

    Joining the Libertarian Party, or any other party, is not really a life long commitment. You could always join, and then quit later if you decide you don’t like it or don’t want to be involved with it for some reason.

    Although the Constitution Party does have a more libertarian wing in it, its base is more of a paleo-conservative party.

    Where do you stand on international trade? Do you think that the government should increase tariffs, as in enacting protectionism, or do you think that tariffs should be low, or even eliminated?

    If you favor low tariffs or no tariffs, you’d be in line with the Libertarian Party (note that support for free trade does NOT mean support for NAFT, or GATT, or CAFTA, which the hardcore libertarians point out are not really free trade agreements).

    If you favor protectionist tariffs, you’d be more in line with the Constitution Party.

    Where do you stand on the issue of drugs? Do you think that drug prohibition should be ended, or do you think that the federal government should work to prevent drugs from being imported into the country, and that each state should pass their own drug laws, but your stance is that each state should pass laws against drugs and fight them at the local level?

    If you prefer the first option, you are in line with the Libertarian Party, if you prefer the second option, you are in line with the Constitution Party?

    Do you think that other vices like gambling, pornography, and prostitution should be legal, or do you think that state or local governments should outlaw them, and that the federal government should prevent these things from happening across US borders or between the states?

    If you chose the first option, you are in line with the Libertarian Party, if you chose the second option you are more in line with the Constitution Party.

    I could go on with more issues, but I think you get the point.

    Another point is where do you think that you can be the most effective. The Libertarian Party is quite a bit larger than the Constitution Party in terms of number of dues paying members, amount of money it has raised, the number of candidates elected to office, and the number of states where the parties currently have ballot access. Although, none of these are necessarily reasons to join a party.

    When it comes to the Republican Party, if you find any Ron Paul like candidates you want to support, go ahead and support them, but I seriously doubt that the majority of the Republican Party is going to change any time soon. The Republican Party is a corrupt organization, and the Republican Party and its supporters are nothing more than a bunch of control freaks, and people who like being lead around by control freaks (just like the Democratic Party). The Republican Party had the opportunity to nominate a pro-liberty candidate for President in 2008 with Ron Paul, and in 2012 with either Ron Paul or Gary Johnson. The Republican base rejected Ron Paul twice, and Gary Johnson was barely a blip on the radar screen in the Republican primary. What is wrong with people who would look at Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Newt Gingrich, and vote for anybody but Ron Paul? I’ll tell you what is wrong with them, and that is that they are either control freaks or people who like being lead around by control freaks. These people DO NOT WANT FREEDOM. The people who control the Republican Party DO NOT WANT FREEDOM, that’s why they did a bunch of things to sabotage or marginalize Ron Paul in the primaries. Now I’m not saying that nobody should go the Ron Paul Republican route, because there is certainly some value to it as well, but I’m just saying that know when you go into the Republican Party (or the Democratic Party) that you are going into a corrupt, anti-liberty organization, and that there are lot of people there who will never change, and that you will have to fight them tooth and nail to get anywhere.

    Now as far as Libertarian Party vs. Constitution Party goes, which party do you think you line up with more, and in which party are you more able to live with your differences some of the other party members?

    If being part of a party that takes a 100% anti-abortion stance is really important to you, then you should go to the Constitution Party. If you can tolerate the fact that the Libertarian Party has a lot of division on that issue, where some members agree with you, but others are on the opposite side of the issue, with others falling somewhere in between the two extremes, then perhaps you can find a home in the Libertarian Party.

    Or maybe you’d prefer to not be a part of any political party.

    The choice is yours.

  172. George Phillies

    @255 You quote: “Libertarians need to Flood the Republican Party”

    Of course, we would not complain if they returned the favor, would we? (8^))

    And we outnumber them so much that we could actually do this.

    The author you are quoting appears to be out of touch a bit.

  173. Krzysztof Lesiak

    @266 Andy

    I oppose tariffs and protectionism, that is for sure.

    I believe in ending all drug prohibition. Correct me if I am wrong, but this includes also more hard drugs like cocaine and heroine. I can support that too.

    I’d say I’d support state’s rights too.

    Gambling, pornography, and prostitution should be legal. I support the Non-Aggression Principle. Any victimless “crime” is not a crime.

    I do know the LP has much better structure. 2008 LP prez vote, 1.25 million, Cp was like what, 122,000 or something like that? Senate vote was like 983,000, 1.06%, CP was like 140,000, 0.15%. I believe the LP has at least some infrastructure in every state. Every state party has a website at least. Not the same for the CP. Also CP has a lot less ballot access than the LP (including in Illinois where I live, they’ve been on the ballot for zero statewide offices so far and maybe only one federal race and one legislative race.

    As for life, I’ve heard the split is more than 60/40 pro choice and pro life. I’ve heard libertarianism in general is more a 50/50 split. Like you said in a different post Darrell Castle’s reason for the CP was the life issue. As long as we get rid of the misconception that all Libertarians are pro choice (Gary Johnson helped perpetuate this in his campaign) I can be in the LP. I’ve heard (from you I think) that Lee Wrights is a pro-life Christian libertarian. That’s good news, and I wonder who else on the LNC is pro-life?

    Given that Ron Paul is strongly pro-life (he sponsored a Sanctity of Life Act) and he is still a lifetime LP member, I could definitively be comfortable in the LP. Maybe they should alter the platform plank to say “Libertarian Party has no official position, we have both pro-life and pro-choice members” would be nice, or something of that tune.

    I find it interesting that despite his mild social conservatism (at least in his personal beliefs as a Christian) Ron Paul still considers himself a libertarian and unlike Rand doesn’t shy away from the label. George Phillies would call him a Christian Dominionist, but I’d strongly disagree. Christian Dominionists are to be found probably in the religious zealot faction of the CP. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe his Ron Paul’s only association with the CP is his 2008 endorsement of Chuck Baldwin.

    I’m curious as to what big L Libertarians are pro-life, especially presidential candidates. I think I may have heard something about Harry Browne and Badnarik being pro-life, I wonder what other LP prez candidates were pro-life?

    BTW, my pro-life stance comes from my Catholicism. Which is compatible with libertarianism because there is a Catholic Libertarians Facebook page. Catholics believe in free will and that’s what the LP believes in, too. But anyway, Catholic Democrats (politicians, like one of the Kennedys who was or still is a Rhode Island congressman) have been denied holy communion before simply because of their support for abortion. I think this is a pretty important issue.

  174. Krzysztof Lesiak

    I hope that 2016 LP nominee is pro-life. I supported Gary Johnson in 2012 and convinced both of my parents to vote for him. Hell, I filled out my mom’s entire ballot myself :)

    Gary did good outreach to Ron Paul people, but he perpetrated the myth that every Libertarian must be pro-choice, which annoyed me. To me, murdering the unborn is not socially tolerant. It’s the denial of one of the most basic individual rights, the right to life itself.

    That said, since I will be 20 years old in 2016, I kind of doubt I will vote for Johnson again, if he is the nominee. Don’t get me wrong, the guy is absolutely awesome. Perhaps the most qualified LP nominee ever. He was a great governor of NM. And he did a good job, like I said, getting across to Ron Paul people. I hope his views actually evolved, on things like wars and non-interventionism, and it wasn’t just shameless pandering. His personal accomplishments list is really awesome, I love how athlethic he is (both of us love cycling) and that he is such a down to earth guy.

    lol :)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXux37wzQeQ

    That said, I will support a more radical person for the LP nod in 2016. And in the general, if Judge Andrew Napolitano or the more radical person is not the LP nominee, provided Darrell Castle is the nominee, I’ll likely vote for Castle. Because Castle seems to be of the same mold as Chuck Baldwin, and Baldwin is awesome, far and away the best CP nominee they’ve ever had. (Howard Phillips and Virgil Goode were pretty sucky, Peroutka was rather decent).

  175. Andy

    “Krzysztof Lesiak // Mar 31, 2013 at 11:58 am

    I hope that 2016 LP nominee is pro-life. I supported Gary Johnson in 2012 and convinced both of my parents to vote for him. Hell, I filled out my mom’s entire ballot myself :)

    Gary did good outreach to Ron Paul people, but he perpetrated the myth that every Libertarian must be pro-choice, which annoyed me. To me, murdering the unborn is not socially tolerant. It’s the denial of one of the most basic individual rights, the right to life itself.”

    I’ve mentioned this on this forum before, but perhaps you missed it, so I’m going to mention it again, and that is that AS GOVERNOR OF NEW MEXICO, GARY JOHNSON SIGNED A BILL THAT BANNED LATE TERM ABORTIONS. GARY JOHNSON ALSO FAVORED PARENTAL NOTIFICATION IF A MINOR WANTED TO GET AN ABORTION. ALSO, LIKE RON PAUL, HE SAID THAT ABORTION SHOULD BE DECIDED AT ON A STATE LEVEL, AS IN EACH STATE COMES UP WITH ITS OWN LAWS REGARDING ABORTION.

    So the record clearly indicates that Gary Johnson is not as “pro-choice” on abortion as a lot of people are making him out to be.

    “I’d say I’d support state’s rights too.”

    I only support “state’s rights” so far as decentralization tends to limit tyranny, as in it is preferable that a few states get out of hand rather than the entire country, plus people can more easily move to a different state than they can leave the country.

    Having said this, I ultimately don’t believe that states have any rights. Only individuals should have rights. States are legal fictions, as is the national (aka-“federal”) government, as is local government, as is government in general. Now from a legal stand point, I do favor the 10th amendment, which limits the powers of the federal (or national) government to only what is specifically enumerated to it in the US Constitution, and which says that other issues are left to the states or to the people, however, I do not like how the mantra of “states rights” gets used by some people to violate people’s rights as the state level. The reminds me of the line from Mel Gibson’s character in the movie “The Patriot” where he says something to the effect of, “A legislature that is 200 miles away can violate my rights just as easily as a king which is 2,000 miles away.” (Not an exact quote, but close enough.) If my rights are being violated, does it make it OK if they are being violated by a local or state government official, rather than a federal government official? I would say no.

    “Also CP has a lot less ballot access than the LP (including in Illinois where I live, they’ve been on the ballot for zero statewide offices so far and maybe only one federal race and one legislative race. ”

    The Constitution Party has gotten candidates on the ballot in Illinois before. The last time was 2008.

    The Libertarian Party will also have to petition for ballot access in 2014 in Illinois, and I’ve heard that they plan to do this.

    “As for life, I’ve heard the split is more than 60/40 pro choice and pro life. I’ve heard libertarianism in general is more a 50/50 split.”

    I don’t know what the exact split is, but I’ve met a lot of Libertarians around the country who are on different sides of the issue.

    There is a Libertarian Party member from Maryland named Doris Gordon who started a group called Libertarians for Life. I have not heard anything about her in a while, but as far as I know the group is still around.

    “I support the Non-Aggression Principle. Any victimless ‘crime’ is not a crime.”

    Then it sounds like you could be in the Libertarian Party.

    “As long as we get rid of the misconception that all Libertarians are pro choice”

    You could be one of the people that works to change this misconception.

    “(Gary Johnson helped perpetuate this in his campaign)”

    This is somewhat true, but as I said before, Gary Johnson’s actual record indicates that he is not as “pro-choice” on abortion as some believe.

    “I can be in the LP. I’ve heard (from you I think) that Lee Wrights is a pro-life Christian libertarian.”

    He said this years ago, but I think that he avoided this issue so he could get more votes at the convention(s). He could have flip-flopped, but I’m thinking that it is more likely that he just avoided the issue for political reasons.

    “That’s good news, and I wonder who else on the LNC is pro-life?”

    I don’t know. I do know of one other person who is on the LNC who has sent out mixed messages on the issue of abortion (I don’t think I should say who it is on a public forum though), but I don’t think that anyone has taken a survey or grilled any LNC members on the issue.

    Even so, does it really matter that much where every LNC member stands on abortion? The LNC does not really speak for every member of the Libertarian Party.

    “Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe his Ron Paul’s only association with the CP is his 2008 endorsement of Chuck Baldwin.”

    I don’t think that Ron Paul has ever been a member of the Constitution Party, and I’m not aware of him ever having donating any money to the Constitution Party, but I’m pretty sure that he has spoken at a few Constitution Party conventions, although he has spoken at more Libertarian Party conventions. The only Constitution Party candidate that I’ve ever heard of him advocating voting for is Chuck Baldwin, and we all that that came about because Bob Barr was such a butthead (plus Chuck had endorsed and campaigned for Ron Paul).

    “I think I may have heard something about Harry Browne and Badnarik being pro-life, I wonder what other LP prez candidates were pro-life?”

    Harry Browne and Michael Badnarik were both pro-life, but neither advocated imprisoning people for abortion. They both took the attitude of changing people’s hearts and minds on the issue, and donating to charities for orphans or to help pregnant women, etc… They also said that abortion should be an issue that is decided on at a state level.

    I’m not sure about other LP candidates for President on the issue, besides Ron Paul of course. I seem to recall hearing that Andre Marrou was pro-life, but I could be wrong about that. You’d have to do some research to find out where other LP candidates for President stood on the issue of abortion.

    “I think this is a pretty important issue.”

    I think that there is a place for you in the Libertarian Party, but if you are going to be really bothered by the fact that there are a lot of Libertarian Party members who are on the other side of the abortion issue, and that you’ll have a difficult time changing their opinion on it (you might be able to sway a few of them, but there are others who I do not think that you will be able to sway), then maybe you should not join the party.

    It should be pointed out that if you are looking for an organization where everyone is lock step with you on everything, such an organization does not likely exist, outside of you being an “army of one” (so to speak).

    “I hope that 2016 LP nominee is pro-life. I supported Gary Johnson in 2012 and convinced both of my parents to vote for him.”

    Gary Johnson was (is) at least somewhat pro-life. Somewhat may not be good enough for hardcore pro-lifers, but I’m just pointing out that Gary Johnson’s actual position on abortion is not completely in line with the pro-choice on abortion side either.

    “Perhaps the most qualified LP nominee ever. ”

    I look at qualifications differently than a lot of people. Legally speaking, the qualifications to be President are that one is at least 35 years old, and a Natural Born American citizen. I think that there is something about having lived in the USA for at least 14 years (I’d have to re-check the Constitution for that one). Other than this, the job requires some basic skills such as reading comprehension, but beyond this, I would say does the person in question actually believe in personal freedom, and in placing limits on government power, and do they have the character to back it up? If a person meets all of these criteria, then to me they are qualified to be President (now the hardcore libertarian may say something like, “The office should not exist and coercive government should not exist,” but for the purpose of this discussion I’m not even going to go there). Fancy credentials do not necessarily impress me.

    “I love how athlethic he is (both of us love cycling)”

    This is nice, but this doesn’t have anything to do with politics.

    “That said, I will support a more radical person for the LP nod in 2016.”

    What if the radical Libertarian in question ends up being pro-choice on abortion?

    The way I look at it is the public is so divided on abortion that it doesn’t really matter that much where a candidate stands on the issue. I favor fully informing juries of their right to nullify laws as one of the most important issues that there is, and right now given the public split on abortion, under a system of fully informed juries, it would be difficult to get a conviction for abortion even if it was made illegal, and as I pointed out in another thread, under a system of fully informed juries, it could even be difficult to get convictions against pro-life vigilantes.

    So we can sit around and spend a bunch of time arguing about abortion, but meanwhile the government is getting bigger and bigger and taking away more and more of our freedoms. I’m very concerned about the growing police state in this country. Did you know that the Department of Homeland Security has recently purchased over 2 billion rounds of ammunition? Did you know that the federal government is building underground bases (Arkansas and Colorado are two of the locations), and that there are FEMA camps that have been built all over this country? The TSA is trying to expand into more and more locations, such as bus terminals, shopping malls, sporting events, etc… Government agencies are increasing their level of spying on American citizens. The Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the National Defense Authorization Acts have all been passed. Drones are being developed to spy on and even kill American citizens. More and more surveillance cameras are being put up. New gun control legislation is being pushed at both the state and national level. The police and military have both been training in gun confiscation raids (see the videos on YouTube for the gun confiscations that took place after Hurricane Katrina), and they have also trained with foreign troops to do this. The Federal Reserve keeps inflating the money supply, therefore lowering the value of the dollar. These are just some of the serious issues about which everyone ought to be concerned.

    What is it that the government is planning? It does not look good to me. I think that the fit could “hit the shan” in this country, and if, or when, it does, we could all be in for some serious problems.

    So we can sit around and waste a bunch of time arguing about whether or not life begins at conception, and whether or not individual rights apply to fetuses, but meanwhile a police state is being erected around us, and we may end up with a country (and world) which is not a very pleasant place for babies to be born.

  176. Mark Axinn

    I always heard that the split in the LP on abortion rights pretty closely mirrored the general public, with approx. 2/3 saying they are pro-choice and 1/3 saying they are pro-life.

    Of course that still begs the question of how one defines terms. I am pro-choice on everything, including an individual’s right to be pro-life.

    Fortunately for Libertarians, there is a very easy answer for those who oppose abortion: Unlike the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, the Libertarian Party opposes taking your money to pay for someone else’s abortion. So if you don’t want any of your money going to promote and pay for abortions, vote Libertarian since we are the only party which opposes government forcing people who oppose abortion to pay for them (even worse, to pay for them for strangers).

  177. Andy

    “Mark Axinn // Mar 31, 2013 at 6:24 pm

    I always heard that the split in the LP on abortion rights pretty closely mirrored the general public, with approx. 2/3 saying they are pro-choice and 1/3 saying they are pro-life.”

    The latest survey that I’ve heard indicate that public opinion is shifting in a more pro-life direction, but having said this, as I have pointed out on this site several times now, under a system or randomly selected fully informed jurors, it is really difficult to convict anyone for anything unless a law has support that is at least at 92%.

    “So if you don’t want any of your money going to promote and pay for abortions, vote Libertarian since we are the only party which opposes government forcing people who oppose abortion to pay for them (even worse, to pay for them for strangers).”

    The Constitution Party also opposes the use of tax payer money to fund abortions.

  178. Thomas L. Knapp

    MA @ 274,

    “I always heard that the split in the LP on abortion rights pretty closely mirrored the general public, with approx. 2/3 saying they are pro-choice and 1/3 saying they are pro-life.”

    Well, the split in the general public’s opinion varies widely based on exactly what questions are asked.

    Include partial birth abortion and the balance swings toward “pro-life.” No exceptions for rape, incest, health of mother, etc., it swings toward “pro-choice.”

    Both sides game that, of course.

    In 2002, the LP national convention came within 2% of eliminating its abortion plank. Not sure precisely how it’s fared at subsequent conventions, but the 2006 convention deleted 3/4 of the platform planks while leaving that one intact.

  179. Mark Axinn

    @275 and 276–

    You’re both right of course which is why I usually shy away from this subject.

    In any event, we’re all in agreement that the government shouldn’t be paying for abortions (or for pro-life counseling either) with money stolen at gunpoint from the taxpayers.

  180. paulie Post author

    LP is the only party that doesn’t want to use government money to either pay for or stop abortions.

    April thread coming up soon.

  181. Andy

    “paulie // Apr 1, 2013 at 9:32 am

    LP is the only party that doesn’t want to use government money to either pay for or stop abortions. ”

    This is not really true if you talk to some of the pro-life Libertarians who’d want to prosecute abortionists for murder as being an act of aggression, but then again, there is always vigilante justice.

    If all taxation were abolished, there’d still have to be some way of dealing with murderers.

    And just to reiterate, I think that under a system of fully informed juries, which is something that is advocated by most LP members, I think that it would be very difficult to actually get a conviction against anyone by applying murder laws to abortion, because unless a law is supported by over 92% of the population, getting convictions is not easy with randomly selected fully informed jurors. The other side may have a difficult time getting convictions against anti-abortion vigilantes as well, particularly in the more conservative areas.

    My guess is that abortions would be rare if we had a more libertarian society. Not due to any changes in the law, or changes in application of the law, but rather due to the increase in prosperity.

  182. paulie Post author

    I’m speaking of the official party position, not making claims that it represents 100% of all members.

    My guess is that abortions would be rare if we had a more libertarian society. Not due to any changes in the law, or changes in application of the law, but rather due to the increase in prosperity.

    I think you are correct.

  183. Pingback: April 2013 Closed Thread | Independent Political Report: Third Party News

  184. Krzysztof Lesiak

    Come on Paulie. Let’s have open thread back. I understand you’re tired with dumb comments that are not on topic or are outright ridiculous but… comments are a vital part of IPR. Even the stupid ones. After reading some old Angela Keaton threads, believe me, I’ve seen some stupid and annoying as fuck stuff on this site. Those threads almost made me want to gauge my eyes out.

  185. Darryl W. Perry

    For what it’s worth: I’ve moved the archives for the FPP Freedom Minute & Peace, Love, Liberty Radio. This is important, because the new archive host does not have an RSS feed (yet).
    What does that change? Not much, other than the fact that people who were subscribed will no longer get updates on new shows. In order to get the new updates, you will need to “follow” the SoundCloud page at https://soundcloud.com/darryl-w-perry
    You can also bookmark https://soundcloud.com/groups/fpp-freedom-minute and
    https://soundcloud.com/groups/peace-love-liberty-radio

    or you can find them in one location at http://radio.fpp.cc

  186. Jill Pyeatt

    My vote is ‘yes’. After all, this thread aquired more than 200m comments, even though some of them were silly.

  187. William Saturn

    I haven’t heard anything about Milnes in a long time. I’d like to see a special article about him today.

  188. paulie Post author

    I haven’t heard anything about Milnes in a long time. I’d like to see a special article about him today.

    You may have to come up with it then. I’m not feeling inspired there, and I’m not sure about anyone else.

  189. Jill Pyeatt

    Well, I remember you said in the fall we could post something in April, but I don’t choose to. I just really don’t want to encourage him. Maybe someone else will. I know he sent the letter to many people, including Geoff Neale, who he’s having an amusing dialog with now (I’m sure Mr. Neale doesn’t find it amusing).

  190. paulie Post author

    BTW, is Milnes running for President again?

    I think he’s always running for president.

    Hasn’t he sought the Green Party and LP line since like the 1990s?

    2008 election was the first time I heard of him.

  191. Catholic Trotskyist

    Yes, I think there should be an April open thread and I hope someone posts the correspondence between Robert Milnes and Geoff. As for the Catholic Trotskyist Party, there is currently some internal debate about its future and a possible name change.

  192. NewFederalist

    The Catholic Trotskyist Party name change could be a fascinating development in US politics. Let’s hope CT gives the scoop to paulie or some other staff writer at IPR. I am so giddy I can hardly wait!

  193. Krzysztof Lesiak

    BTW everyone call me Chris. I want to make your lives easier.

    The only reason I go by Krzysztof is to emphasize my Polish heritage, both on Facebook, and here on IPR.

    Everybody at school, and all my friends just call me Chris.

  194. Krzysztof Lesiak

    Internal debate?

    Is that debate going on in your head CT? I thought you were the only member of your party?

    I mean that non sarcastically BTW. Lolz I agree with NF, this is exciting news! (this part is sarcastic)

    :)

  195. Concerned Citizen

    My treatise is a work in progress. I will have it ready to publish in the coming months. Afterwards I will keep this site updated with my recruitment efforts.

  196. Steven Berson

    @288 – nature abhors a vacuum. I’d greatly appreciate if anyone could please let me know for the benefit of my own research the first 10 historical examples that come into your mind where a State was ended where it was not within 5 years replaced by another State. Thanks in advance!

  197. just saying

    Ron Paul & Gary Johnson’s functional policy positions on abortion are nearly identical. It’s just their rhetoric that’s different.

  198. Shave the Whales!

    I don’t think Gary Johnson would support Ron Paul’s “Sanctity of Life Act.”

  199. Catholic Trotskyist

    Chris, I was the only member for quite a while, but now there are actually some other members; they are not publicly active, however.

  200. Steven Berson

    @ 312 – Iceland and Ireland for what years? Maybe I should ask for examples post-industrial revolution.
    Somalia post-1991 to perhaps 2009 does make for an interesting case study but it often ends up being more of a study in civil war between numerous factions and clans – some of whom exhibit the hallmarks of a government in specific areas for periods of time – than it does in terms of a Stateless society.
    I guess people could mention Barcelona/Catalonia 1936-1939 anarcho-syndicalist experiment but you could also just as easily argue that it was still a State itself – and it displayed little resilience against the Phalangist insurgents so it’s ending isn’t all that heartening.
    Who has some more examples? Guess we could go back before the 19th Century if needed but it seems that increased population density and industrialization both were big factors in ending Statless societies worldwide.

  201. Steven Berson

    …again I’m not really looking for examples where it was a multi-factional extended civil war, i.e. Lebanon or Angola – but if people want to list these then go ahead.

  202. Andy

    “Krzysztof Lesiak // Apr 1, 2013 at 8:28 pm

    BTW everyone call me Chris. I want to make your lives easier.

    The only reason I go by Krzysztof is to emphasize my Polish heritage, both on Facebook, and here on IPR. ”

    Are you from Poland? I imagine you to have a Polish accent when I read your posts.

Leave a Reply