Libertarian @dcjogger@gameliberty.club

In theory, the $22 trillion US debt could be paid off in 6 years if 100% of US tax revenues from the $4 trillion annual budget went toward the debt and Social Security was ended.

This will not happen because the elites have paid off the politicians and too many people make money from welfare and the wars.

The only end to the debt will be a a total collapse of the economy like the USSR.

No one knows, but a stock market crash could happen in the next 10 years. Social Security will be bankrupt in 2034.

Leaving now would be the best bet.

Consider moving to Chile or New Zealand.

https://gameliberty.club/@dcjogger

There was a time when Americans believed in freedom.

The US is dying from a million cuts. Part of the reason the USA is a nanny police state now is that whenever there is a problem, the kneejerk reaction in the US is to call for a new law.

Nanny state laws are not the best solution, however. Nanny state laws lead to more laws, higher fines, and tougher sentences. Thirty-five years ago, DWI laws were enacted that led to DWI checkpoints and lower DWI levels. Seatbelt laws led to backseat seatbelt laws, childseat laws, and pet seatbelt laws. Car liability insurance laws led to health insurance laws and gun liability laws. Smoking laws that banned smoking in buildings led to laws against smoking in parks and then bans against smoking in entire cities. Sex offender registration laws led to sex offender restriction laws and violent offender registration laws.

Nanny state laws don't make us safer, either. Nanny state laws lead people to be careless since they don't need to have personal responsibility anymore. People don't need to be careful crossing the street now because drunk-driving has been outlawed and driving while using a mobile phone is illegal. People don't investigate companies or carry out due diligence because businesses must have business licenses now.

The main point of nanny state laws is not safety. The main purposes of more laws are control and revenue generation for the state.

Another reason laws are enacted is because corporations give donations to lawmakers to stifle competition or increase sales.

Many laws are contradictory, too. Some laws say watering lawns is required, while other laws say watering lawns is illegal.

Many nanny state laws that aim to solve a problem can be fixed by using existing laws. If assault is already illegal, why do we need a new law that outlaws hitting umpires?

Do laws even work? Heroin is illegal, but do people still use heroin?

Nanny state laws are not even necessary. If everything was legal would you steal, murder, and use crack cocaine? Aren't there other ways to solve problems besides calling the police? Couldn't people educate or talk to people who bother them? Can't people boycott businesses they hate? Couldn't people be sued for annoying behavior? Couldn't people just move away? Even if assault was legal, wouldn't attackers risk being killed or injured, too? Do people have consciences? Having no laws doesn't mean actions have no consequences.

If there is no victim, there is no crime.

We don't need thousands of laws when we only need 10.

Should swimming pools be banned because they are dangerous? Hammers? Bottles? Rocks? Energy drinks? Pillows?

Where does it end?

If one state can have self-serve gas stations, why can't every state have them? If sodas were legal 20 years ago, why can't they be legal now?

Freedom is not just a one way street. You can only have freedom for yourself if you allow others to have it.

Control freaks might get angry when a neighbor owns three indoor cats, but what did the neighbor take from them? Why should this be illegal? Is outlawing cats something a free country should do? Doesn't banning everything sound like the opposite of liberty?

Instead of getting mad at people who like freedom, why don't people realize that freedom is a two way street?

If you allow others to paint their house purple then you can, too.

If you allow others to own a gun then you can, too.

If you allow others to swear then you can, too.

If you allow others to gamble then you can, too.

Good men don't need laws. Bad men won't obey laws.

Who wants to live in a prison?

Think. Question everything.

Most people support the police state until they become a victim of it.

https://gameliberty.club/@dcjogger

dcjogger

http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-15.html

Americans are so retarded now that they scream regulations will help the economy because more prisons and guards are needed when business people are arrested.

http://f2bbs.com/bbs

I’m not surprised that mobs shriek at Trump administration officials in restaurants and that Maxine Waters wants more of that. I’ve watched this happen at American colleges.

One example:

Heather Mac Donald is a Manhattan Institute scholar who wrote the book “The War on Cops.” She argues that Americans are less safe today because police, for fear of being called racist, back off. I sometimes disagree with Mac Donald, but she is a thoughtful researcher whose ideas deserve to be heard.

At UCLA, when she was allowed to give her “Blue Lives Matter” speech, many in the audience applauded.

But then “they stormed the stage,” she explains in my video interview with her.

The protesters, both white and black, shouting “Black lives -- they matter!” drowned out any possible questions.

Watching video of the event, I was surprised to see what looked like a party atmosphere. Protesters smiled as they got out cameras and recorded each other.

“It’s almost an expectation that if you’re a minority student on campus, you’re there to protest,” Mac Donald told me.

Eventually, the UCLA protesters took over the stage. No further discussion was possible.

From UCLA, Mac Donald went to Claremont University, where she was met with posters that said her speech should be “shut down” because she is an “anti-black fascist.” I asked Mac Donald about that.

“This is preposterous. I have spent enormous amounts of time in high-crime, minority neighborhoods talking to good people there who are desperate for more police, who have a right to expect the same freedom from fear that people in safer neighborhoods take for granted,” she replied. “My agenda is to try to give voice to these people. To say that I’m anti-black is ridiculous.”

Nevertheless, Claremont activists blocked the entrance to the lecture hall where Mac Donald was scheduled to speak so that no one could enter.

Mac Donald gave her speech to the empty room, and that was recorded for the internet, but no students could ask questions because they couldn’t get in. Even a school newspaper reporter who tried to get opinions from protesters was shouted down.

“I’m with the Claremont Independent, and I’m wondering if you might be willing to tell me anything at all,” he pleaded with the mob, but they were more interested in stopping speech than in arguing any points.

“The protestors are the ones engaging in what is clearly historically fascist behavior,” said Mac Donald later. “In the case of the Berkeley riots, vandalizing, breaking glass, setting fires, beating people up. But they go under the moniker ‘anti-fascist’ ... They called me a fascist. But I have not tried to silence anybody.”

Years ago, California Governor Ronald Reagan called Claremont “a place that fosters discussion and debate ... where a student could learn to deal with controversy.”

No more, wrote Mac Donald in a City Journal article titled “From Culture to Cupcakes.”

“College once promoted an understanding of Western culture,” she says. “Today ... there is an enormous bureaucratic infrastructure dedicated to teaching students that they’re victims.”

She calls that the diversity bureaucracy.

“UCLA has a Vice Chancellor for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (who) makes $445,000 a year. The Berkeley Division of Equity and Diversity Inclusion has a $20 million budget.”

She warns, “There’s a co-dependency between the exploding diversity bureaucracy and these narcissistic, delusional students who act out little psychodramas of oppression before an appreciative audience of diversity bureaucrats.”

Really? I pushed back. “Psychodramas of oppression?”

“Do we believe in objective reality?” she replied. “These students ... are among the most privileged human beings in human history. To be at an American college with educational resources available to them that the Renaissance humanists would have killed for. (Yet they) think of themselves as victims. That, to me, is a very sad state of delusion.”

These “victims” now feel entitled to censor other people’s speech, but differences won’t be resolved without debate. Politicians don’t help when they encourage their supporters to get rough, as Trump did on the campaign trail and as Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., now has.

At least the college kids may outgrow this behavior. We’re stuck with the politicians.