Free Talk Live Interview with Lee Doren

[StrangeWorld18]

hahaha hydrogen oxide, thats funny. I didn't know hydrogen oxide was ice either, but I wouldn't sign a petition for something I didn't understand.

Although if you think about it, what if I were in that situation. Protesting outside a chem lab for injecting animals or something, and someone came up to me with a petition to sign to ban hydrogen oxide for use in iced tea... I don't know if I'd sign it but I might if they convinced me it was dangerous. Taught me a lesson. We all need wifi phones!

[ricadrew]

If you support H-20, you're a racist!!!

LOL!!!

[captainimij]

I enjoyed this.

[FightBadIdeas]

Hey, why don't you post the link for the google maps page on the side bar so we can see it?!

[billyjoeallen]

How do you reconcile a small government stance with a large military stance?

[Skyler827]

A military is seen as an essential part of government.  There is a free market way of employing a defense force, but it would in most cases require the abolition of government itself. Small government is usually a compromise most people are willing to get behind, but it's virtues come from reductions in government power. These reductions scale continiously to the point of having no government in their advantages.

(cont...)

[Skyler827]

(...cont)

Someone who advocates military spending do so for two reasons: Defending our homeland, and fighting terrorism/liberating people abroad. Believe it or not, if the Army were to be privatized and the market were to open to start ups, private armies would form and compete for your support of both of these goals, just like charity organizations do now.

[Skyler827]

The government would need to privatise the military and open the market to start-ups. Then each private Army would find a market niche like middle east terrorism, Homeland security, and Atlantic patrol. People would only give their money to an army that wastes the least money.

Each private army would be motivated to tell you what it's going to do, how it will do its job, casualty rates, and so on, so people will only contribute to the army that wastes the least money.

[xtreme1002003]

Interesting idea, but I think private armies not directly tied to the government might not obey orders from the government or even be much more likely to revolt against the government's interests or suppress the people in one way or another than the our military is under the current system.

[xtreme1002003]

Also, private armies could potentially fight amongst each other for power, control, and dominance, much like how we see in third-world countries like the Philippines, were a lot armies are owned by rich warlords.

[xtreme1002003]

Military is a legitimate government function that is outlined by the Constitution and is necessary to protect our nation and our life, liberty, and property.

Social welfare programs, socialized health care, and nanny state government, however, are not.

[Skyler827]

@xtreme1002003 I agree that Military is a legitimate government function. It is outlined in the constitution, and weather or not it could be safely be done in a free market is debatable. But if it could be done by a free market, then my explanation is the best guess I have as to how it could be done. But I agree with your last point: the nanny state and social welfare programs are not legitimate government functions.

[rowandy85]

@Skyler827

What gives the Constitution authority to determine what is a "legitimate" government function?

[Skyler827]

@rowandy85 The men who signed it on behalf of the 13 States on September 17, 1787. They gave it the authority. The Constitution is widely believed to outline what government should and should not have the power to do. But I'm not saying that it is absolutely right. I am an anarchist myself, and as good as the constitution is, lets just say I use the term "legitimate" government function somewhat liberally.

[rowandy85]

@Skyler827 Then it only gives the authority over those men and the men on who's behalf they signed it. I never signed it and neither did I have anyone sign it on my behalf, so it has no "legitimate" authority over me, and neither does the government that derives itself from it.

[Skyler827]

@rowandy85 I agree. That's what I think.  The only problem is, people like you and me are not very common in this country. So many people here actually think that the founding fathers had the right to sign away their freedoms to this government that they had created. Just like they think that time and time again different people had the right to expand it; none of them did. I'm glad to find someone who agrees with me.

[ForABetterTomorrow]

donations

[default013]

@billyjoeallen How do you find it possible for a free nation to continue unmolested by its enemies without a large and capable military?

[82816a1]

Heaven help us, we've lost control

This should be our finest hour

But were racing towards the end of days

Pulling back from the brink, despite our best efforts

The volume increases and the beat goes on

[junekoman]

thats pretty cool