Under what individual authority does government exist?

[Rob Roy]

he's also ignoring that government only exists by consent of the governed.

does that mean he is a rape fetishist?

That is patently false. The institution of the USA itself acknowledged that. If your statement were so, secession would not be punishable by death would it?

 

[schuylaar]

So, consent or die?

living in society means we have roads to travel, stores to shop and our safety upheld versus living in the woods.

seeing is how i'm a 'top of the mark suite' kind of girl..my vote is for society.

that is the theory behind imprisonment. you are removed from society because you were naughty.

 

[Rob Roy]

he's also ignoring that government only exists by consent of the governed.

does that mean he is a rape fetishist?

living in society means we have roads to travel, stores to shop and our safety upheld versus living in the woods.

seeing is how i'm a 'top of the mark suite' kind of girl..my vote is for society.

that is the theory behind imprisonment. you are removed from society because you were naughty.

Government is not "society" . Please don't confuse the two.

All of the things you posted above could be provided in a world where a single coercive authority was abolished and a free market was permitted. In fact, many of them (most? all?) would be done more efficiently and in a more just fashion if the obstacles were removed..

Competition among service providers usually means more innovative products, better prices and more choice for a consumer.

A government that forcefully disallows "competition" is not acting in your best interests, it is acting in a mode to maintain its monopoly.

You should question authority.

 

[H R Puff N Stuff]

This is a false assumption you have made.

How did they acquire jurisdiction over you as an individual in the first place is a question you might want to consider.

they have jurisdiction because you are in that location in wich they have jurisdiction move to another local and they dont have jurisdiction.jurisdiction has more to do with location than the person a person can travel thru many jurisdictions.

 

[Rob Roy]

they have jurisdiction because you are in that location in wich they have jurisdiction move to another local and they dont have jurisdiction.jurisdiction has more to do with location than the person a person can travel thru many jurisdictions.

That doesn't answer how they acquired jurisdiction does it?

No offense intended, but your response is a bit circular.

 

[NewtoMJ]

Or do it the old fashion way and chop off their heads. Gee, you complain about the money in politics, then uphold it as a virtue.

At no time did I state money in politics is a virtue. Electing people into office, does not and should not require billions of dollars on campaigns. I believe if you can't run solely on your ideas and principals, and not on rhetoric and slander, there is no place for you as a person of authority in this country. I also believe that it's the responsibility of the voter to be informed independently of biased mainstream sources, which is why I support classes at the high school level, as well as free courses inside community centers that will give people the mental tools required to source their own facts and data.

 

[NewtoMJ]

This is a false assumption you have made.

How did they acquire jurisdiction over you as an individual in the first place is a question you might want to consider.

Because society as a majority agrees to allow them that jurisdiction. If you can convince enough people to revoke that agreement, then you have revolution.

 

[NoDrama]

In extreme cases, sure. Or you can elect officials who shape the government in a way you feel is more to your tastes.

Sorry, but that is just plain 100% wrong.

Go ahead, try to leave the USA and its control over you.
Did you know it takes on average 4 years and $50,000 just to denounce your citizenship? Does that sound like something that everyman can just do at a whim?

If you move to Spain today and make $100,000. you have to pay Spain the tax you owe them, PLUS you have to pay income tax to the US government.

No matter where you work in the world, as long as you are a US citizen you MUST pay income taxes.

That doesn't sound like you can remove yourself from US government control by simply moving away from the US like you claimed.

 

[NoDrama]

Because society as a majority agrees to allow them that jurisdiction. If you can convince enough people to revoke that agreement, then you have revolution.

So "Society" can legally make all your choices for you?
So for instance, if a majority of people want you to be thrown into a giant threshing machine to be pulled apart and killed, well then you HAVE to do it?

The thing about rights is that NO ONE NOR ANY ENTITY CAN TAKE THEM AWAY. You have a right to life, the majority of people cannot vote to take your rights away. Rights don't work like that. The majority also cannot vote to force you into some business dealing beyond your consent, but of course some people believe that "Government" in its infinite wisdom only makes the appropriate choices for us all, like some super parent who takes care of its children.

 

[NoDrama]

they have jurisdiction because you are in that location in wich they have jurisdiction move to another local and they dont have jurisdiction.jurisdiction has more to do with location than the person a person can travel thru many jurisdictions.

Whoops, another person who thinks all you have to do is move away from the USA to escape all the governments controls over you.

Where do you people come from?

 

[NewtoMJ]

Sorry, but that is just plain 100% wrong.

Go ahead, try to leave the USA and its control over you.
Did you know it takes on average 4 years and $50,000 just to denounce your citizenship? Does that sound like something that everyman can just do at a whim?

If you move to Spain today and make $100,000. you have to pay Spain the tax you owe them, PLUS you have to pay income tax to the US government.

No matter where you work in the world, as long as you are a US citizen you MUST pay income taxes.

That doesn't sound like you can remove yourself from US government control by simply moving away from the US like you claimed.

I wasn't aware income taxes had to be paid when that income is made in a different country.

So "Society" can legally make all your choices for you?
So for instance, if a majority of people want you to be thrown into a giant threshing machine to be pulled apart and killed, well then you HAVE to do it?

The thing about rights is that NO ONE NOR ANY ENTITY CAN TAKE THEM AWAY. You have a right to life, the majority of people cannot vote to take your rights away. Rights don't work like that. The majority also cannot vote to force you into some business dealing beyond your consent, but of course some people believe that "Government" in its infinite wisdom only makes the appropriate choices for us all, like some super parent who takes care of its children.

I agree, government is flawed and often times they don't do what's best for everyone. But who gives us "rights"? Without some sort of figure or group upholding the sovereignity of your "rights" how can you be sure someone doesn't come and take them away? That's not to say, that a government can't take them either, and if that is the situation one should consider violent protest.

 

[see4]

This is unnecessary. You seem to be able to carry on a conversation when you want to, without resorting to this kind of stuff. You're free to do what you like, but I'll ask you to consider not being such an asshole with your false allegations. Thanks.

Fair enough. I apologize.

 

[see4]

The problem with your statement is it doesn't consider the difference between defensive force or offensive force.

In a truly free market, if it existed, exchanges would be done on mutual and consensual basis. What happens now is the institutions you refer to are engaging in offensive force as part of their standard business model (their existence is based in it) .

So, when people resist OFFENSIVE force, (all people have a right to defend themselves and self determine), the force they are applying is an acceptable form of force, as it is defensive.

Your statement is absurd and has been refuted.

Since when have you argued forced coercion can be either offensive or defensive? That claim is also quite absurd, as you put it.

By your definition, one can infer that the government is defensively coercion people to get along. They are reacting to a series of actions, which by definition is, defensive.

No such thing as a "truly free market", but I think that is besides the point. A free market is an economic construct, where your claim of government coercion is a social ideology. Essentially you are arguing two different points.

 

[heckler73]

"Individual Authority" ? What does that even mean?

Here's why government exists: to send Italian coffee-makers into space.

“Italian coffee giant Lavazza joined forces with the Turin-based engineering company Argotec and the Italian Space Agency to provide a specially designed machine for use off the planet. Nasa certified its safety.


“It is the first coffee machine able to work in micro gravity on the ISS, where the principles that regulate the fluid dynamics of liquids and mixtures are very different from those typical on Earth.


“It uses a ‘capsule system’ to fill plastic pouches with espresso and other hot drinks such as tea. The machine can also be used to rehydrate food.”


Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2030055/astronaut-takes-star-trek-selfie-to-celebrate-arrival-of-coffee-to-international-space-station/#OCjREpo3PDc32jVg.99

 

[H R Puff N Stuff]

That doesn't answer how they acquired jurisdiction does it?

No offense intended, but your response is a bit circular.

if your from the east US the revolt,the midwest the louisiana purchase,the west manifest destiny you do remember jr high history assuming your from the US

 

[OddBall1st]

"Individual Authority" ? What does that even mean?

Here's why government exists: to send Italian coffee-makers into space.

“Italian coffee giant Lavazza joined forces with the Turin-based engineering company Argotec and the Italian Space Agency to provide a specially designed machine for use off the planet. Nasa certified its safety.

“It is the first coffee machine able to work in micro gravity on the ISS, where the principles that regulate the fluid dynamics of liquids and mixtures are very different from those typical on Earth.

“It uses a ‘capsule system’ to fill plastic pouches with espresso and other hot drinks such as tea. The machine can also be used to rehydrate food.”


Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2030055/astronaut-takes-star-trek-selfie-to-celebrate-arrival-of-coffee-to-international-space-station/#OCjREpo3PDc32jVg.99

No drive through ?

 

[heckler73]

No drive through ?

Starbucks and Tim Hortons haven't figured out how to get up there, yet.
I imagine they'd have to pay more than minimum wage, too...except when flying over the 3rd world, then they can exploit the employees.

 

[OddBall1st]

Dunkin Donuts hasn`t got there yet ???

 

[OddBall1st]

Klingon`s run on dunkin`s is a lie ?

 

[abandonconflict]

"Individual Authority" ? What does that even mean?

It means monarchy.