What about the right to safety (from foreign agression and criminality). If you live in a nice neighborhood, there is virtualy no crime and still you would pay to make other parts of town safer for the people who live there.
@TreeSmoke1999 You haven't actually read any of Rand, have you? "I’d rather vote for Bob Hope, the Marx Brothers, or Jerry Lewis. I don’t think they’re as funny as Professor Hospers and the Libertarian Party." "It’s a cheap attempt at publicity, which Libertarians won’t get." "[Libertarians] are not defenders of capitalism. They’re a group of publicity seekers who rush into politics prematurely, because they allegedly want to educate people through a political campaign, which can’t be done."
@RainMaker8113 I have her book beside me, havn't read her?!? Wanna debate Rand LOL. Your exactly like the creationists who do everything to say Darwin and Einstein were believers in a God contrary to evidence. i.e. your taking a statement and stretching it. Ayn Rand believes
Reason
Capitalism
Civil Liberties
No Taxes
No War
....DUHHHHHH thats a anarcho-capitalist/libertarian!!!!
Ayn Rand on why she didn't support the libertarian party...."They are not defenders of capitalism"
What Williams is saying about rights is so simple that it depresses me that so many people don't recognize it. His argument is a better one than the one I give, which is "grow up and stop living in a fantasy worlds." What do rights have to do with anything anyway? It's childish. I have the right to play golf like Tiger Woods, but I don't.
You have a right to drive a boat to Cuba and fill it up with agricultural commodities. You have the right to drive that boat back to the US and sell those commodities. You have the right to kill any body who obstructs you from doing this especially customs or the navy.
If you think men can grant other men "rights", then u fail to see what a right is. Men can grant other men only privileges- which are very much alienable. Its impossible to grant any man the right to speak freely or the right to bear arms- as those rights are inalienable & no one's to give or take away. But its possible to fuck up individual's rights- thats exactly what govt is doing right now- infringing on the real rights of men
You can't get rid of food stamps and all, until you get rid of property taxes, buying land, having to work for someone else to get food, pay someone else for housing. And what did they do before... ask the native Americans.
@sunRsaturn Wow! Try it this way, buying land that will be taxed and certain amounts goint to food stamps.
Native Americans bought and sold with the settlers and with themselves before that. Either way, trust me, they worked hard for their food. Again though, why not feed a hungry person in your area. And then get them a checkup if they need it.
Even right now, we don't leave people laying in the street and ask if they can pay before taking them to a hospital. It's not a matter of rights, it's the health care bill is a swindle. We have a right to be Humans and help other Humans. This nit wit is a professor? He's not even a Human.
What a retard. Then Wally and the neo-con better their asses over to Iraq and Afghanastan and start fighting them Moooslims. Obama and Bush will lead the charge with a nuke strapped to cheney and the goldman sachs brigades right behind.
@sunRsaturn A retard? You would be no match for him intellectualy, but now that I've seen all your comments, I think you'd sink before you even started.
I agree with WW that HC is not a right but his reasoning is flawed. By his definition I would not have a right to an attorney...but I do. Even if I cannot afford one.
@ravaneli55 Yes, I do really have that right. Ever heard of Miranda rights? "You have the right to remain silent...you have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for you."
@kbr7171 Miranda rights are a law. THat doesn't justify the definition of a right. I don't care what's law, and what isn't. Law is writtned by corrupt and incompetent people. Slavery was legal, Hitler was legal, and so were Stalin and Mao's actions.
While I personally see noo flaw with the miranda rights, it is hard to justify the definition of a right, just by saying it's law
@ravaneli55 WOW! Went all Hitler and slavery on my ass. Look all I am trying to say is Dr Williams reasoning is flawed if he believes in the rights put forth by the Constitution The sixth Amendment decrees legal counsel to be a right, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall...have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
Rights are not endowed by man but by a higher being. Individuals have rights. Govt only has VERY VERY limited priveliges granted to them by the people- & freely revoked by the people if the govt becomes perpetually corrupt as is the case of modern US govt. But such notions as the constitution have been lost in modern society due to govt indoctrination stations aka "public schools".
@kbr7171 Rights are only protected by the Constitution and the government (hopefully). This imposes a burden on the government to protect those rights. All rights in the Bill of Rights requires an imposition on the government. Those rights are protected by our military, police and the 2nd Amendment.
The question is does the protection of a right imposed on the government give a return on investment to taxpayers equally. Heath care does NOT give an equal return so it is not a right.
Neither can rights contradict each other. If you have a right to be free from the initiation of violence upon your person, and thus the right not to be enslaved, and a right to keep the products of your labor (the primary three natural rights), then no other right can violate those primary rights. Government redistribution which isn't 100% voluntary thus is contradictory and invalid.
Add this: our rights come from the fundamental assumption that we own our own lives and our own bodies. From this logically comes the individual rights to life, liberty, property and self-defense. (We own our lives in the future, present and past...)
The only legitimate function of govt is the defense of these equal, individual rights.
In the 1840s we had a sound economy with sound monetary policy. We don't have this now thanks to the banksters setting up a debt/enslavement monetary system
@WorldSutra "Europe is way better off than US BECAUSE of the welfare system. Get an eduction."
Europe is utterly bankrupt and losing population. The US Federal Reserve has been funneling them trillions of dollars just to keep them from collapsing.
@strongbadXCP ""The US Federal Reserve has been funneling them trillions of dollars just to keep them from collapsing.""
The 5 biiggest companies in the world are ALL European. The European Union has the largest and wealthiest economy in the world and is the first trade power in the world. The GDP of Europe is 2 trillion dollars bigger than the GDP of US. If a company in US gets bailout money, there is a strong chance it is a company owned by a euro group. THAT is why the money goes to Europe
@WorldSutra "Europe is way better off than US BECAUSE of the welfare system. Get an eduction."
I'm not sure what an "eduction" is, but clearly if you had one, it can't be a good thing.
You also have absolutely no understanding of the US Constitution, nor what the framers meant by "general welfare".
Being "Liberal" once had a lot to do with loving freedom, but it no longer does. Now it has to do with expanding government power and reducing individual freedom.
@WorldSutra That general welfare argument is such crap. The founders never meant "government payments to the populace" or "redistribution of wealth" when they put that phrase into our constitution. Show me the federalist paper that shows it means what you are saying here. I DARE YOU... Otherwise they would've started social security and medicare after Washington took the oath of office. Look up Madison and "enumerated powers". Takes a leftist to misinterpret our founding documents like that.
@216trixie ::"Society wishes that everyone has health-care. You have no right to stop them." Who, is Society. Who, is "You".?::
We are the many, you are the few. Health care is not an entitlement program. In all the civilized countries of the world, it is a human right. America is going to catch up with the civilized world one day., You cannot stop that. No, really, you cannot stop that.
@WorldSutra "We are the many, you are the few". Translation: Might makes right, or Do What We Say because We say it, or Tyranny of the Majority. "You cannot stop that, No, really, you cannot stop that." The trembling, fearful voice of the bully. Fuck you.
@216trixie No you have no rights, except those you will be given. You already have no right to murder, child abuse, theft, and you have no right to a thousand things, and you never will in this country or most countries.
You are under a strict regime called "the civilized world" and you will never escape it unless you move to the boonies. You also have no right to pollute others. We the People, own this planet, and you will do as your told. Its the law of the land. Welcome to reality kid.
If I have a "right to a home", someone else would be obligated to furnish the building materials and land to build on, and labor to erect it, thus depriving them of the fruits of their labors. They can't ask for recompense for their efforts. All of the socialist "second bill of rights" nonsense was dismissed for a reason. Those were not "natural rights" they were asserting. I'ts just another attempt to establish "needs" as "rights". Simply not enough critical thinking on the left....
If government, and all forms of order, disappeared, would I still be able to do it?
So yes, government DOES provide some rights (like right to a fair trial), but government doesn't give me right to free speech, right to bear arms, etc.
Most of the Bill of Rights is simply the writers highlighting ways the government can exist without infringing, like the 5th and 8th amendments.
A right certainly is not something you couldn't have without government.
@jrsub3 "government DOES provide some rights (like right to a fair trial)" I would put forth that gov't doesn't provide that right as much as protect the right to equal justice/fair judgement.
If you put forth W.Williams' definition that a right is something that we can have without taking from another, then justice and judgement is a right as long as it is equal. There is no need for gov't to mediate a contract between two people, but the US sets up the protection of said contract and laws.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Rights are for slaves. If a right is something that cannot be taken from you, it is a defensive term, and its only use is a means of defending against communism. It is easily turned upside-down, into a phrase such as "right to healthcare", which is the natural direction of the term "right".
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@captvanhalen It is an irony, to say the least. A well regulated militia is what we have. The "right to bear arms" is a misnomer. The Constitution is built on Orwellian doublespeak.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@StatelessRich Rights are atheism. They do not exist without the state. Hence, right is a statist term. Thus, initiation of force is indeed part of rights.
@SomethingSea1 Rights exist without a state, but the state is supposed to defend them. If there were no government, I still would have a right to defend my own life, and you would still be infringing on my rights to steal from me.
(part 1) "Are you saying that if there were no government, we would have no right to life?"
Gov't is the separation of people into two classes: those of the ruling, the law, and those of the sheeple, the citizens, to whom law is applied. This separation occurs on the bases of this thought: people are bad; the conclusion is that we need people to watch over people.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
(part 2) Rights have two uses that arise from this separation. The first use is that of defense against the ruling class. The second is that of expansion of the ruling class ("right to healthcare").
Hopefully this is an adequate preface for what I'm about to say. If it's not, please do ask for clarification. *Rights* are to *gov't* as
*the meaning of life* is to *who created the universe*.
That is to say, that I find your question to be without cognitive value. It is a meaningless question.
@SomethingSea1 Um...I didn't get your first part, but I think I get what your saying.
But I would disagree with your analysis.
First, rights are not only protection from rulers, but also other individuals (which you might think of as would-be rulers).
Second, I think that rights are inherent in life, but we only give them a name because people try to infringe on them. If nobody ever even thought to violate another person's rights, it would never occur to us that we had or needed rights.
@SomethingSea1 "Rights are atheism. They do not exist without the state" Let me get this straight, the following rights don't exist unless a gov't or controling force like gov't takes something away from another?
- life
- thought
- property
- self protection
- freedom of movement
From what I can tell, if gov't and states and nations all vanished, these would still exits, thus these rights are not dependant of a state. In fact, it is often the state that tries to take these things away
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@bsabruzzo The issue is that of language. If God doesn't exist, does that take away our freedom to not be sent to hell? Or is that an irrelevant question, now? Rights, by the nature of their use and how we think of/about them, are tied with statism, in the same way that "being free of sin" is tied with the concept of God. When you no longer have The State, such terms as how right would apply would, yes, still exist... in the same way that atheism exists without theists. A dinosaur concept.
@SomethingSea1 "If God doesn't exist, does that take away our freedom to not be sent to hell?"
If that is all God is to you, the thing that has power to make your eternity a miserable experience -- then no wonder you have such a jaded view of rights.
Now, if you think about it ... this whole subject is about Walter E Williams. He gave us a very good definition of rights that we should meditate upon.
But rather, you instead use this forum to draw attention to yourself - you are not Walter. :)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@captvanhalen "Now, if you think about it ... this whole subject is about Walter E Williams. He gave us a very good definition of rights that we should meditate upon."
The subject is rights, not Walter.
"But rather, you instead use this forum to draw attention to yourself - you are not Walter. :)"
You're damn right I'm not. Thanks for the passive-aggressive smile. And no, I'm not using this forum to focus on myself, but on the subject of rights. Clearly, though, you don't want to discuss it.
Just pointing out that you are fundamentally wrong. You are trying to confuse everyone with your bullshit because what Walter E Williams said was so SPOT ON!
So, no i do not want to discuss your definition of rights because this video is about Walter William's definition of rights.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"Just pointing out that you are fundamentally wrong. You are trying to confuse everyone with your bullshit because what Walter E Williams said was so SPOT ON!"
Oh boy, now with religious-esque projection. Abort.
"So, no i do not want to discuss your definition of rights because this video is about Walter William's definition of rights."
Ok. I'll let you to your messiah.
":)"
May the jelly bean monster touch you with his noodly appendage.
@SomethingSea1 "May the jelly bean monster touch you with his noodly appendage."
Hey. At least i CHOSE and DESIRE to want God to exist.
All you have is the desire to want God to .... not exist. Why? I guess because you are afraid. So far, your only definition of God is something which has to power to eternally torment you.
Second. You either want something to exist. Or you want something to not exist. It doesn't matter if it really exists or not. Right now -- you have a choice. So which is it.
Would you rather God to exist. Or would you rather God to not exist?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"So far, your only definition of God is something which has to power to eternally torment you."
That would be an implication of the definition. My definition of God is a concept which humans use to describe big stuff, and is inherently contradictory because humans are still trying to figure out themselves and the universe.
"But thanks for showing us your true colors. :)"
Gotta love that spiteful so-Christian smile. Thank you, likewise.
You're obviously religious. Christianity is what I'm familiar with, in specific, but religions generally follow approximately the same thought-patterns.
"You make an awful lot of assumptions for a "philosopher.""
I didn't say I was a philosopher. And, your point?
@captvanhalen I apologize for that half-response. I mean that you are clearly not interested in the angle that I was talking about. You want to talk about rights and how they aren't wishes. You don't want to talk about rights being bullshit.
@SomethingSea1 "You want to talk about rights and how they aren't wishes. You don't want to talk about rights being bullshit."
I think most (if not all) of LibertyPen's audience believe that rights are anything BUT bullshit. I also think most of LibertyPen's audience ignore the bullshit that is posted down here anyways. SPAM comes in many forms, after all. Methinks you are peddling philosophical SPAM.
Yeah, technically, I am. I'm spam in the same way that an atheist talking about how God's bullshit is spam to Christians. I'll do a favor for you and stop responding.
@SomethingSea1 "I'm spam in the same way that an atheist talking about how God's bullshit is spam to Christians."
Advocators of Atheism are no better than any other "priest" that peddles their religion UPON others.
We are grown adults here. We can make up our own minds and probably already have. Many of us have lived twice as long as you and have already evolved past where you are now.
"Advocators of Atheism are no better than any other "priest" that peddles their religion UPON others."
Right, because their followers tithe 10%, and advocates of atheism install laws that make it so christian-or-otherwise leaders can't become president, and have proposed prop88, which makes marriage between a man and wife illegal.
"Many of us have lived twice as long as you and have already evolved past where you are now."
@SomethingSea1 "f God doesn't exist, does that take away our freedom to not be sent to hell?" This is not relevant, as, if you don't believe in God or Hell, the point is moot to you.
"Rights, by the nature of their use and how we think of/about them, are tied with statism, in the same way that "being free of sin" is tied with the concept of God" No, not really, as these are natural rights, thus are ours by nature, even without a God or a gov't. (Most "sins" are, in fact, universal morals)
I believe that health care is a right, just like my first amd rights to free speech or freedom of religion. Let me explain:
The government should not be abridging my freedom to choose my preferred medical treatment, such as done by the FDA, DEA and for example anti-marijuana laws.
The government should make no law respecting an establishment of a medical system, nor force me to pay for others medical choices. My relationship with my Doc is like my minister, personal and outside of state control.
@XCritonX "I believe that health care is a right" From what you said, it is not that "Health Care" is a right. The rights are in fact the right of free choice, of property and of assembly/commerce.
Care is not a right because it takes from another. But choice, property and commerce allows for you to get care to support your right to life.
@bsabruzzo Did you read the rest? We have the right to peruse happiness, but no one has the responsibility to ensure that we succeed.
Like my right to free speech my right to medical care is a right to chose. I can choose to be silent, or to say something stupid, or something profound. Just because I have the right to communicate doesn't obligate anyone else to listen.
@madass888 Rights can be taken away. Chinese don't have freedom of speech. If rights couldn't be taken, then there would be no need to fight for them.
@Vanster2010 Back during the elections it seemed like everybody was trying to turn my vote into a race issue. I guess that happened to a lot of people. I voted for Ron Paul anyway but if somebody like Walter E. Williams had been running I could have not only been proud of our 1st black president but I could've bragged about voting for him. To me one of the worst things Obama did was to rob blacks of that pride. All this time we wait for America to jump that hurtle and look what he did with it.
What is that tune called in the beginning and the end of the clip? I really liked it.
Baesing 4 weeks ago
What about the right to safety (from foreign agression and criminality). If you live in a nice neighborhood, there is virtualy no crime and still you would pay to make other parts of town safer for the people who live there.
allonsvoyons2 2 months ago
Walter E Williams and Ayn Rand are some of my fav libertarians
TreeSmoke1999 5 months ago
@TreeSmoke1999 You haven't actually read any of Rand, have you? "I’d rather vote for Bob Hope, the Marx Brothers, or Jerry Lewis. I don’t think they’re as funny as Professor Hospers and the Libertarian Party." "It’s a cheap attempt at publicity, which Libertarians won’t get." "[Libertarians] are not defenders of capitalism. They’re a group of publicity seekers who rush into politics prematurely, because they allegedly want to educate people through a political campaign, which can’t be done."
RainMaker8113 3 months ago
@RainMaker8113 I have her book beside me, havn't read her?!? Wanna debate Rand LOL. Your exactly like the creationists who do everything to say Darwin and Einstein were believers in a God contrary to evidence. i.e. your taking a statement and stretching it. Ayn Rand believes
Reason
Capitalism
Civil Liberties
No Taxes
No War
....DUHHHHHH thats a anarcho-capitalist/libertarian!!!!
Ayn Rand on why she didn't support the libertarian party...."They are not defenders of capitalism"
TreeSmoke1999 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
General Welfare is a PREAMBLE, with all of the specific LIMITED powers listed underneath.
uglyindian1 6 months ago
Liberty Pen gives me the sense that there ARE souned minded people still out there, not hooked on governement drug, er priviliges and entitlements.
Liberty Now !
jccusell 7 months ago 2
Comment removed
jheit1 8 months ago
Walter is a common sense American and great economist. He's brilliant! Glad to have him on the right!
dgravesfcmd 9 months ago
What Williams is saying about rights is so simple that it depresses me that so many people don't recognize it. His argument is a better one than the one I give, which is "grow up and stop living in a fantasy worlds." What do rights have to do with anything anyway? It's childish. I have the right to play golf like Tiger Woods, but I don't.
koyunbaba73 11 months ago
The Wisconsin state workers should watch this video, pertaining to their Collective bargaining rights, er, entitlements
ksamong 11 months ago
Man, this video is going to blow some leftist minds. A minority male telling them something isn't a "Right!"
snoobeagle 1 year ago
You have a right to drive a boat to Cuba and fill it up with agricultural commodities. You have the right to drive that boat back to the US and sell those commodities. You have the right to kill any body who obstructs you from doing this especially customs or the navy.
JeremyKonstenius 1 year ago
Walter Williams is a true American. I have nothing but respect for this man!
Thank you, LibertyPen. This is an excellent and very important video!
cowgirlmoon 1 year ago 21
"if wishes were horses beggars would ride"....now I understand my dad's fav saying
Allisa4757 1 year ago 3
An economist with a soundtrack: Sweet!
KEMPROTH 1 year ago 6
If you think men can grant other men "rights", then u fail to see what a right is. Men can grant other men only privileges- which are very much alienable. Its impossible to grant any man the right to speak freely or the right to bear arms- as those rights are inalienable & no one's to give or take away. But its possible to fuck up individual's rights- thats exactly what govt is doing right now- infringing on the real rights of men
swu880 1 year ago
God I love liberty pen.. Its like crack for my brain
TheMrLiberty 1 year ago 34
@TheMrLiberty haha then what is crack for?
pureaggression 11 months ago
Thank you walter williams for breaking it down so clearly.
moulayram 1 year ago
You can't get rid of food stamps and all, until you get rid of property taxes, buying land, having to work for someone else to get food, pay someone else for housing. And what did they do before... ask the native Americans.
sunRsaturn 1 year ago
@sunRsaturn Wow! Try it this way, buying land that will be taxed and certain amounts goint to food stamps.
Native Americans bought and sold with the settlers and with themselves before that. Either way, trust me, they worked hard for their food. Again though, why not feed a hungry person in your area. And then get them a checkup if they need it.
ricadrew 1 year ago
Even right now, we don't leave people laying in the street and ask if they can pay before taking them to a hospital. It's not a matter of rights, it's the health care bill is a swindle. We have a right to be Humans and help other Humans. This nit wit is a professor? He's not even a Human.
sunRsaturn 1 year ago
@sunRsaturn Pay attention, people who've been advocating the HCB have been saying it's a right and it's what he's responding to.
Honestly, I'm not sure you were able to comprehend this video.
ricadrew 1 year ago
So abolish the Police and military? I bet the next G20 or elite meeting would like that.
sunRsaturn 1 year ago
What a retard. Then Wally and the neo-con better their asses over to Iraq and Afghanastan and start fighting them Moooslims. Obama and Bush will lead the charge with a nuke strapped to cheney and the goldman sachs brigades right behind.
sunRsaturn 1 year ago
@sunRsaturn A retard? You would be no match for him intellectualy, but now that I've seen all your comments, I think you'd sink before you even started.
ricadrew 1 year ago
I agree with WW that HC is not a right but his reasoning is flawed. By his definition I would not have a right to an attorney...but I do. Even if I cannot afford one.
kbr7171 1 year ago
@kbr7171 May be his reasoning is not? I agree the government has passed a law to provide u with a lawyer, but do u really have that right?
ravaneli55 1 year ago
@ravaneli55 Yes, I do really have that right. Ever heard of Miranda rights? "You have the right to remain silent...you have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for you."
kbr7171 1 year ago
@kbr7171 Miranda rights are a law. THat doesn't justify the definition of a right. I don't care what's law, and what isn't. Law is writtned by corrupt and incompetent people. Slavery was legal, Hitler was legal, and so were Stalin and Mao's actions.
While I personally see noo flaw with the miranda rights, it is hard to justify the definition of a right, just by saying it's law
ravaneli55 1 year ago
@ravaneli55 WOW! Went all Hitler and slavery on my ass. Look all I am trying to say is Dr Williams reasoning is flawed if he believes in the rights put forth by the Constitution The sixth Amendment decrees legal counsel to be a right, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall...have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
kbr7171 1 year ago
@kbr7171
Rights are not endowed by man but by a higher being. Individuals have rights. Govt only has VERY VERY limited priveliges granted to them by the people- & freely revoked by the people if the govt becomes perpetually corrupt as is the case of modern US govt. But such notions as the constitution have been lost in modern society due to govt indoctrination stations aka "public schools".
swu880 1 year ago
@kbr7171 Rights are only protected by the Constitution and the government (hopefully). This imposes a burden on the government to protect those rights. All rights in the Bill of Rights requires an imposition on the government. Those rights are protected by our military, police and the 2nd Amendment.
The question is does the protection of a right imposed on the government give a return on investment to taxpayers equally. Heath care does NOT give an equal return so it is not a right.
HoldingOnToLiberty 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Neither can rights contradict each other. If you have a right to be free from the initiation of violence upon your person, and thus the right not to be enslaved, and a right to keep the products of your labor (the primary three natural rights), then no other right can violate those primary rights. Government redistribution which isn't 100% voluntary thus is contradictory and invalid.
ostralopithicus 1 year ago
Comment removed
ostralopithicus 1 year ago
What one man receives without working for ; another man must work for without receiving.
espada9 1 year ago 3
Wow, this is a great one!
Add this: our rights come from the fundamental assumption that we own our own lives and our own bodies. From this logically comes the individual rights to life, liberty, property and self-defense. (We own our lives in the future, present and past...)
The only legitimate function of govt is the defense of these equal, individual rights.
freesk8 1 year ago
In the 1840s we had a sound economy with sound monetary policy. We don't have this now thanks to the banksters setting up a debt/enslavement monetary system
kroovyandcal 1 year ago 2
I can't stop clicking the fucking "Add to Favorites" button on these damn LIbertyPen videos!
bodybuilder444444 1 year ago 4
@bodybuilder444444
hear hear!
TimeWarp66 1 year ago
I always like what WW has to say, but I would add:
What right did any of my predecessors have to impose a government on me?
furyofbongos 1 year ago
Thank God for Walter Williams.
steve0281 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Your right to free-speech is Socialism.
Your right to travel freely is Socialism. Yes, society pays for your travel. Roads, Bridges, Air Traffic Control, police security, etc. etc.
Your right to protection by the police is also Socialism.
Society has a right to tax themselves in order care for its citizens as it chooses, and you have no right to stop them.
Society wishes that everyone has health-care. You have no right to stop them.
Game over, You loose. The world is moving on without the USA.
WorldSutra 1 year ago
@WorldSutra "Society wishes that everyone has health-care. You have no right to stop them." Who, is Society. Who, is "You".?
216trixie 1 year ago
@216trixie Clearly if in a society of 10 people, where 1 earns $0, 8 earn $50,000 and 1 earns $250,000, if the 9 say "give me your $", then it's fine.
This is what SOCIETY wants. We are nothing but tools to meet other people's ends.
Also, someone should remind this clown of the state of affairs right now in Europe's welfare state model.
jrsub3 1 year ago
@jrsub3
Europe is way better off than US BECAUSE of the welfare system. Get an eduction.
PS. In your US constitution, the Government is given the direct responsibility for the WELFARE of the people.
You republican hatemongers are dvmb fvcks.
Liberal = Freedom Lover.
Liberal = American.
WorldSutra 1 year ago
@WorldSutra "Europe is way better off than US BECAUSE of the welfare system. Get an eduction."
Europe is utterly bankrupt and losing population. The US Federal Reserve has been funneling them trillions of dollars just to keep them from collapsing.
strongbadXCP 1 year ago
@strongbadXCP ""The US Federal Reserve has been funneling them trillions of dollars just to keep them from collapsing.""
The 5 biiggest companies in the world are ALL European. The European Union has the largest and wealthiest economy in the world and is the first trade power in the world. The GDP of Europe is 2 trillion dollars bigger than the GDP of US. If a company in US gets bailout money, there is a strong chance it is a company owned by a euro group. THAT is why the money goes to Europe
WorldSutra 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@WorldSutra "Europe is way better off than US BECAUSE of the welfare system. Get an eduction."
I'm not sure what an "eduction" is, but clearly if you had one, it can't be a good thing.
You also have absolutely no understanding of the US Constitution, nor what the framers meant by "general welfare".
Being "Liberal" once had a lot to do with loving freedom, but it no longer does. Now it has to do with expanding government power and reducing individual freedom.
mpc91 1 year ago
@WorldSutra That general welfare argument is such crap. The founders never meant "government payments to the populace" or "redistribution of wealth" when they put that phrase into our constitution. Show me the federalist paper that shows it means what you are saying here. I DARE YOU... Otherwise they would've started social security and medicare after Washington took the oath of office. Look up Madison and "enumerated powers". Takes a leftist to misinterpret our founding documents like that.
jamo387 9 months ago
@216trixie ::"Society wishes that everyone has health-care. You have no right to stop them." Who, is Society. Who, is "You".?::
We are the many, you are the few. Health care is not an entitlement program. In all the civilized countries of the world, it is a human right. America is going to catch up with the civilized world one day., You cannot stop that. No, really, you cannot stop that.
WorldSutra 1 year ago
@WorldSutra "We are the many, you are the few". Translation: Might makes right, or Do What We Say because We say it, or Tyranny of the Majority. "You cannot stop that, No, really, you cannot stop that." The trembling, fearful voice of the bully. Fuck you.
216trixie 1 year ago
@216trixie No its called evolution. (your violent mind translates every statement into violence. )
The old-school ways are over, but you are too backward to see it. You are living in the past. You don't understand the human race.
WorldSutra 1 year ago
@WorldSutra Your violent philosophy denies my right to live my life as I see fit. Your collectivist nightmare will never exist in my lifetime.
216trixie 1 year ago
@216trixie No you have no rights, except those you will be given. You already have no right to murder, child abuse, theft, and you have no right to a thousand things, and you never will in this country or most countries.
You are under a strict regime called "the civilized world" and you will never escape it unless you move to the boonies. You also have no right to pollute others. We the People, own this planet, and you will do as your told. Its the law of the land. Welcome to reality kid.
WorldSutra 1 year ago
@WorldSutra If 51% of society wishes to shoot the 49% of society that disagrees, by your logic they can.
BTW, it's *lose, not loose. You troll.
jrsub3 1 year ago 4
@jrsub3 ""If 51% of society wishes to shoot the 49% of society that disagrees, by your logic they can."
No, murder is against the law in civilized countries, but not in your barbarian America.
WorldSutra 1 year ago
Yea, and I have a right to an inter-continental ballistic nuclear missile.
What a crock of sh!t.
WorldSutra 1 year ago
If I have a "right to a home", someone else would be obligated to furnish the building materials and land to build on, and labor to erect it, thus depriving them of the fruits of their labors. They can't ask for recompense for their efforts. All of the socialist "second bill of rights" nonsense was dismissed for a reason. Those were not "natural rights" they were asserting. I'ts just another attempt to establish "needs" as "rights". Simply not enough critical thinking on the left....
Federalist306 1 year ago
You dont have a right to a trial by jury, a lawyer, or any other government service.
kamikazee55 1 year ago
2 idiots who watched this vid hate FREEDOM
YESobamaCANfuckupUSA 1 year ago 3
well liberals thought a house was a right look where that got us.
jp3711nc1 1 year ago 2
The simplest way to define a right.
If government, and all forms of order, disappeared, would I still be able to do it?
So yes, government DOES provide some rights (like right to a fair trial), but government doesn't give me right to free speech, right to bear arms, etc.
Most of the Bill of Rights is simply the writers highlighting ways the government can exist without infringing, like the 5th and 8th amendments.
A right certainly is not something you couldn't have without government.
jrsub3 1 year ago
@jrsub3 "government DOES provide some rights (like right to a fair trial)" I would put forth that gov't doesn't provide that right as much as protect the right to equal justice/fair judgement.
If you put forth W.Williams' definition that a right is something that we can have without taking from another, then justice and judgement is a right as long as it is equal. There is no need for gov't to mediate a contract between two people, but the US sets up the protection of said contract and laws.
bsabruzzo 1 year ago
The Constitution:
watch?v=daMghgSMCk0
watch?v=lUXbnx2TXoU
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Rights are for slaves. If a right is something that cannot be taken from you, it is a defensive term, and its only use is a means of defending against communism. It is easily turned upside-down, into a phrase such as "right to healthcare", which is the natural direction of the term "right".
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
Comment removed
heyniceaddress 1 year ago
When the initiation of violence must be used, it is not a right.
StatelessRich 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@StatelessRich "When the initiation of violence must be used, it is not a right."
Like the 2nd amendment?
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
What are your thoughts on that, StatelessRich?
captvanhalen 1 year ago
Comment removed
captvanhalen 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@captvanhalen It is an irony, to say the least. A well regulated militia is what we have. The "right to bear arms" is a misnomer. The Constitution is built on Orwellian doublespeak.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 "The "right to bear arms" is a misnomer. "
Are you for gun confiscation? Do you want to disarm the public?
captvanhalen 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Are you for gun confiscation?"
No.
"Do you want to disarm the public?"
No.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@StatelessRich Rights are atheism. They do not exist without the state. Hence, right is a statist term. Thus, initiation of force is indeed part of rights.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 Rights exist without a state, but the state is supposed to defend them. If there were no government, I still would have a right to defend my own life, and you would still be infringing on my rights to steal from me.
shamgar001 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@shamgar001 What are rights? What are they but ideology? What are they but a reaction and result of statism?
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 Are you saying that if there were no government, we would have no right to life?
shamgar001 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(part 1) "Are you saying that if there were no government, we would have no right to life?"
Gov't is the separation of people into two classes: those of the ruling, the law, and those of the sheeple, the citizens, to whom law is applied. This separation occurs on the bases of this thought: people are bad; the conclusion is that we need people to watch over people.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
(part 2) Rights have two uses that arise from this separation. The first use is that of defense against the ruling class. The second is that of expansion of the ruling class ("right to healthcare").
Hopefully this is an adequate preface for what I'm about to say. If it's not, please do ask for clarification. *Rights* are to *gov't* as
*the meaning of life* is to *who created the universe*.
That is to say, that I find your question to be without cognitive value. It is a meaningless question.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 Um...I didn't get your first part, but I think I get what your saying.
But I would disagree with your analysis.
First, rights are not only protection from rulers, but also other individuals (which you might think of as would-be rulers).
Second, I think that rights are inherent in life, but we only give them a name because people try to infringe on them. If nobody ever even thought to violate another person's rights, it would never occur to us that we had or needed rights.
shamgar001 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
watch?v=43kb9_OSu1o
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 "Rights are atheism. They do not exist without the state" Let me get this straight, the following rights don't exist unless a gov't or controling force like gov't takes something away from another?
- life
- thought
- property
- self protection
- freedom of movement
From what I can tell, if gov't and states and nations all vanished, these would still exits, thus these rights are not dependant of a state. In fact, it is often the state that tries to take these things away
bsabruzzo 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@bsabruzzo The issue is that of language. If God doesn't exist, does that take away our freedom to not be sent to hell? Or is that an irrelevant question, now? Rights, by the nature of their use and how we think of/about them, are tied with statism, in the same way that "being free of sin" is tied with the concept of God. When you no longer have The State, such terms as how right would apply would, yes, still exist... in the same way that atheism exists without theists. A dinosaur concept.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 "If God doesn't exist, does that take away our freedom to not be sent to hell?"
If that is all God is to you, the thing that has power to make your eternity a miserable experience -- then no wonder you have such a jaded view of rights.
Now, if you think about it ... this whole subject is about Walter E Williams. He gave us a very good definition of rights that we should meditate upon.
But rather, you instead use this forum to draw attention to yourself - you are not Walter. :)
captvanhalen 1 year ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@captvanhalen "Now, if you think about it ... this whole subject is about Walter E Williams. He gave us a very good definition of rights that we should meditate upon."
The subject is rights, not Walter.
"But rather, you instead use this forum to draw attention to yourself - you are not Walter. :)"
You're damn right I'm not. Thanks for the passive-aggressive smile. And no, I'm not using this forum to focus on myself, but on the subject of rights. Clearly, though, you don't want to discuss it.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1
Just pointing out that you are fundamentally wrong. You are trying to confuse everyone with your bullshit because what Walter E Williams said was so SPOT ON!
So, no i do not want to discuss your definition of rights because this video is about Walter William's definition of rights.
:)
captvanhalen 1 year ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"Just pointing out that you are fundamentally wrong. You are trying to confuse everyone with your bullshit because what Walter E Williams said was so SPOT ON!"
Oh boy, now with religious-esque projection. Abort.
"So, no i do not want to discuss your definition of rights because this video is about Walter William's definition of rights."
Ok. I'll let you to your messiah.
":)"
May the jelly bean monster touch you with his noodly appendage.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 "May the jelly bean monster touch you with his noodly appendage."
Hey. At least i CHOSE and DESIRE to want God to exist.
All you have is the desire to want God to .... not exist. Why? I guess because you are afraid. So far, your only definition of God is something which has to power to eternally torment you.
But thanks for showing us your true colors. :)
How many "converts" were you hoping for?
captvanhalen 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
*decides on whether to deal with the bullshit that will likely not lead anywhere. Oh fuck, whatever*
"Hey. At least i CHOSE and DESIRE to want God to exist."
I don't understand how that's a positive.
"All you have is the desire to want God to .... not exist. Why? I guess because you are afraid."
God doesn't exist. I don't want him to not to exist. It just doesn't. The fear you talk about is your own, but let's ignore that factor for now.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 "I don't want him to not to exist."
First. Do you really believe God is a male?
Second. You either want something to exist. Or you want something to not exist. It doesn't matter if it really exists or not. Right now -- you have a choice. So which is it.
Would you rather God to exist. Or would you rather God to not exist?
captvanhalen 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
"First. Do you really believe God is a male?"
"I don't want him to not to exist. It just doesn't."
"Right now -- you have a choice. So which is it."
Cute.
God doesn't exist. Its believers, though, do, and act upon
the perception of God existing.
"Or would you rather God to not exist?"
If God did exist, I would ask for that genocidal maniac to receive the death penalty. If anyone deserved it, it's God.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"So far, your only definition of God is something which has to power to eternally torment you."
That would be an implication of the definition. My definition of God is a concept which humans use to describe big stuff, and is inherently contradictory because humans are still trying to figure out themselves and the universe.
"But thanks for showing us your true colors. :)"
Gotta love that spiteful so-Christian smile. Thank you, likewise.
"How many "converts" were you hoping for?"
0.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 "Gotta love that spiteful so-Christian smile."
I'm not Christian. You make an awful lot of assumptions for a "philosopher."
captvanhalen 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
"I'm not Christian."
You're obviously religious. Christianity is what I'm familiar with, in specific, but religions generally follow approximately the same thought-patterns.
"You make an awful lot of assumptions for a "philosopher.""
I didn't say I was a philosopher. And, your point?
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@captvanhalen I apologize for that half-response. I mean that you are clearly not interested in the angle that I was talking about. You want to talk about rights and how they aren't wishes. You don't want to talk about rights being bullshit.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 "You want to talk about rights and how they aren't wishes. You don't want to talk about rights being bullshit."
I think most (if not all) of LibertyPen's audience believe that rights are anything BUT bullshit. I also think most of LibertyPen's audience ignore the bullshit that is posted down here anyways. SPAM comes in many forms, after all. Methinks you are peddling philosophical SPAM.
captvanhalen 1 year ago 2
"Methinks you are peddling philosophical SPAM."
Yeah, technically, I am. I'm spam in the same way that an atheist talking about how God's bullshit is spam to Christians. I'll do a favor for you and stop responding.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 "I'm spam in the same way that an atheist talking about how God's bullshit is spam to Christians."
Advocators of Atheism are no better than any other "priest" that peddles their religion UPON others.
We are grown adults here. We can make up our own minds and probably already have. Many of us have lived twice as long as you and have already evolved past where you are now.
Listen. Learn.
captvanhalen 1 year ago 2
"Advocators of Atheism are no better than any other "priest" that peddles their religion UPON others."
Right, because their followers tithe 10%, and advocates of atheism install laws that make it so christian-or-otherwise leaders can't become president, and have proposed prop88, which makes marriage between a man and wife illegal.
"Many of us have lived twice as long as you and have already evolved past where you are now."
Oh great. The ageism argument.
"Listen. Learn."
And argue.
SomethingSea1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SomethingSea1 "And argue."
More like struggle.
captvanhalen 1 year ago 2
@SomethingSea1 "f God doesn't exist, does that take away our freedom to not be sent to hell?" This is not relevant, as, if you don't believe in God or Hell, the point is moot to you.
"Rights, by the nature of their use and how we think of/about them, are tied with statism, in the same way that "being free of sin" is tied with the concept of God" No, not really, as these are natural rights, thus are ours by nature, even without a God or a gov't. (Most "sins" are, in fact, universal morals)
bsabruzzo 1 year ago
@SomethingSea1 Sorry, let me clarify that last statemen (Most "sins" are, in fact, universal morals)
Most sins are violations of universal concepts
- Don't murder
- Don't steal
- Don't lie
- Be good to others And so on.
Without God, you still have these universal truths (see Ancient Greek Pholosophy).
Without a gov't, you still have natural rights.
bsabruzzo 1 year ago
I believe that health care is a right, just like my first amd rights to free speech or freedom of religion. Let me explain:
The government should not be abridging my freedom to choose my preferred medical treatment, such as done by the FDA, DEA and for example anti-marijuana laws.
The government should make no law respecting an establishment of a medical system, nor force me to pay for others medical choices. My relationship with my Doc is like my minister, personal and outside of state control.
XCritonX 1 year ago 3
@XCritonX "I believe that health care is a right" From what you said, it is not that "Health Care" is a right. The rights are in fact the right of free choice, of property and of assembly/commerce.
Care is not a right because it takes from another. But choice, property and commerce allows for you to get care to support your right to life.
bsabruzzo 1 year ago
@bsabruzzo Did you read the rest? We have the right to peruse happiness, but no one has the responsibility to ensure that we succeed.
Like my right to free speech my right to medical care is a right to chose. I can choose to be silent, or to say something stupid, or something profound. Just because I have the right to communicate doesn't obligate anyone else to listen.
XCritonX 1 year ago
This man is a real treasure.
carcabe 1 year ago
A right is something no one can take away from you, not something others are forced to give you.
madass888 1 year ago 48
@madass888 "A right is something no one can take away from you"
No.
4gl2u 1 year ago
@madass888
Then would the "right to life" be a right? I mean, if someone kills you, they take away your right to life.
XFGDude 1 year ago
@madass888 Rights can be taken away. Chinese don't have freedom of speech. If rights couldn't be taken, then there would be no need to fight for them.
jffryh 1 year ago
Walter Wiliiams and Thomas Sowell is clearly the most talented around.
Vanster2010 1 year ago 35
@Vanster2010 are* god damn it
Vanster2010 1 year ago
@Vanster2010 *are* clearly =)
jwinter228 1 year ago
@Vanster2010 You bet they are. If only what they think, say and write had more exposure in the media, we'd all be better off.
tinydancer1965 1 year ago
@Vanster2010 Back during the elections it seemed like everybody was trying to turn my vote into a race issue. I guess that happened to a lot of people. I voted for Ron Paul anyway but if somebody like Walter E. Williams had been running I could have not only been proud of our 1st black president but I could've bragged about voting for him. To me one of the worst things Obama did was to rob blacks of that pride. All this time we wait for America to jump that hurtle and look what he did with it.
amzuel420 1 year ago 3
Comment removed
Gamerunit2 1 year ago
@Gamerunit2 You're wasting your time...I have nothing to do with people who talk to me like that. When you learn some social skills....Let me know.
amzuel420 1 year ago
Comment removed
Gamerunit2 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Gamerunit2 Ha..ha..ha...lil boy you gonna run home to your momma?
amzuel420 1 year ago