Author Topic: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?  (Read 5320 times)

Offline ricwoz

  • Mover and Shaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 385
Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« on: September 24, 2007, 12:14:30 PM »
The current round of bills being debated and passed are similar to all the other sessions in the last few decades.   We see more and more of big Government, at the Federal level, stepping on states, markets and individuals and replacing existing systms with huge governnmet bureacracies.

For instance the attempt by FedGov to extend a welfare healtcare benefit to families making up to $84,000 a year.  Demagoged by the Democrats and their lapdog media.     Or the Bush-signed-into-law Federal benefit that pays for prescription drugs.   

And of course, looming on the horizon is the HIllary-Care 2 bill.

Given this seemingly inexorable extension of FedGov into every facet of life is the FSW movement fighting a hopeless rearguard battle?   If FedGov socializes healthcare, Wyoming won't be exempt.   The trend seems to be that soon the behaviour of states will be totally controlled by FedGov.

Basically the control freaks don't want to allow states to act differently then they do in New York.

One of my ideas has been to slowly say "no" to mandates, but in most cases that means that Wyoming residents would pay taxes to FedGov, but not get the services.

Is there some way that people invision to deflect FedGov via the FSW mechanism?   I used to think that states make a difference, but the trend is away from that.

I think there are still lots of good reasons for moving to Wyoming, like the land, the beauty, the relative lack of statism.  But looking at what's coming I'm not sure that much of the worst in "new laws" will be attenuated by living there.

Your thoughts?


Offline MamaLiberty

  • FSW Founding Member, In Wyoming
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,520
  • Self ownership/ personal responsibility
    • The Price of Liberty.org
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2007, 12:26:24 PM »
#1. Just how long can the bloated state - fed - continue? Think USSR, collapse of communism (however brief it was)

#2. Those who engage in the alternate economy  - don't pay into the state - fed - as much will prosper, and suffer less.

#3. Find alternatives to state medicine, "services." They do exist.

The alternatives are far more realistic in rural Wyoming than almost anywhere else, especially any city. The trick is to already be here and have those alternatives in place before the crunch.
It's not that people are dumber, it's that stupidity used to be more painful.

Offline bobcat

  • FSW Rifleman
  • FSW Founding Member, Wyoming Bound
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,861
  • Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2007, 04:25:55 PM »
Agreed, ML.  If all of what you suggest takes place Ricwoz, we both know an underground economy will spring up and flourish in areas that will support it.  I.e., non-metro areas.

Quote
The trick is to already be here and have those alternatives in place before the crunch.

Yup.  Even if all you have is a piece of paid for property, it could well be better than nothing.
Bobcat  

"Those who would sacrifice Liberty for security, deserve neither Liberty or security."  -Benjamin Franklin
"Citizenship is not a spectator sport"  -K Denninger

Offline ricwoz

  • Mover and Shaker
  • *****
  • Posts: 385
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2007, 10:42:49 PM »
Yes but rural communities with good neighbors are found throughout the country, particularly in the west.   One of the attractions of FSW is the chance to roll back the socialist state.  If that goes away then is FSW really about  TEOTWAKI scenario planning?

Personally I think Rome is a better guess as to the longevity of the USA than the USSR.   That is normal citizens in the USSR were deeply unhappy with their everyday lot.  I don't see that here, in the USA.  I see people who are happy with their big-screen TV's, mortgages and whatnot.    I don't see the USSR as much of an example, at all.


Offline MamaLiberty

  • FSW Founding Member, In Wyoming
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,520
  • Self ownership/ personal responsibility
    • The Price of Liberty.org
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #4 on: September 25, 2007, 08:25:52 AM »
Well, your experiences will have been very different than mine, most likely. I never knew any Romans, but I've met some Russians.

I don't know anyone in Wyoming who is happy with a big mortgage, a big screen TV and so forth. Those I know are hard working people who want to live independently. Some of them think that includes government schools and agricultural subsidies at this point, but nobody's perfect.

To answer your question: No. I don't see anything that changes my faith in FSW or the reasons I came to Wyoming. Whether or not any place in the country can be "saved" in any way... nobody knows. We do have to live the best we can in the meantime. We can't know the future and we're probably going to have to roll with the punches no matter where we are when the time comes. I'd rather be with friends I can count on.
It's not that people are dumber, it's that stupidity used to be more painful.

Offline Paul Bonneau

  • Member, In Wyoming
  • Administrative Staff
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,480
    • Wyoming Liberty Index
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #5 on: September 28, 2007, 07:41:16 PM »
Much of Rome's existence was not very glorious.

The 20th Century is sometimes called America's century, with good reason. I doubt very much that the 21st will be. This country has spent its future into oblivion; let's see how important it can be with no real economy. It will become a backwater nation, I'm guessing. Very likely drifting in and out of dictatorship. Parts of it may split off.

The feds will have their hands full with the big cities. Smart folks will find themselves quiet places off the beaten track, far away from big cities, with people around who have an independent spirit, who can stand up to bureaucrats and bullies. We don't know what good can be done with Wyoming as a state per se (I tend to be doubtful any good can come from government) but the people and the communities will still be here. People will still be able to live reasonably well and with a fair amount of freedom. Maybe a lot.

Much of what ric was talking about was pretty predictable years ago. Look in Molon Labe! at some of Boston's predictions. Wyoming was chosen with those predictions in mind. It's still the best bet.
Laws turn men into slaves.

Offline bobcat

  • FSW Rifleman
  • FSW Founding Member, Wyoming Bound
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,861
  • Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #6 on: September 28, 2007, 08:55:15 PM »

Quote
The 20th Century is sometimes called America's century, with good reason. I doubt very much that the 21st will be. This country has spent its future into oblivion; let's see how important it can be with no real economy. It will become a backwater nation, I'm guessing. Very likely drifting in and out of dictatorship. Parts of it may split off.

I hope not, but if the current rate of socialist decline continues relatively unabated, your suggestion is quite plausible.

Quote
The feds will have their hands full with the big cities. Smart folks will find themselves quiet places off the beaten track, far away from big cities, with people around who have an independent spirit, who can stand up to bureaucrats and bullies. We don't know what good can be done with Wyoming as a state per se (I tend to be doubtful any good can come from government) but the people and the communities will still be here. People will still be able to live reasonably well and with a fair amount of freedom. Maybe a lot.

Much of what ric was talking about was pretty predictable years ago. Look in Molon Labe! at some of Boston's predictions. Wyoming was chosen with those predictions in mind. It's still the best bet.

Absolutely.
Bobcat  

"Those who would sacrifice Liberty for security, deserve neither Liberty or security."  -Benjamin Franklin
"Citizenship is not a spectator sport"  -K Denninger

electrum!

  • Guest
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2007, 08:13:07 PM »
I am not near as worried about socialistic health care programs as I am about martial law.  Seems to me alot of the thinking here is "straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel".

Offline Boston

  • FSW Founder
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,212
  • FSW Rifleman
    • Javelin Press
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2007, 10:13:07 PM »
It has long baffled me that a governor has not yet called
the "withholding federal highway funds" bluff since it
is the states who collect those funds on behalf the USG.

Mandatory insurance, helmet laws, etc. are the states' prerogative.

It's time for a governor to overtly protect his state's sphere.

We're enslaving ourselves, that's the bitter irony.
It's not like the USG is an occupying foreign power...

I'd be keen to see a coaltion of "Just Say NO!" states
resist federal encroachments.

Boston


Offline planetaryjim

  • Needs To Get Out More
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,048
  • I am not a part of your empire.
    • The Indomitus Report
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2007, 11:10:48 PM »
The Rome example is quite interesting.  Certainly, there is evidence that the Praetorian Guard killed John F. Kennedy, or was at least complicit in his death.  There is no reason to believe that any presidential election has involved counting all the votes and recent elections are quite lurid in this regard.  So, I could actually get behind this comparison of the bloody imperial Rome and the bloody American empire.  One certainly has to suspect that the occupation of Iraq is going to continue as long as it is profitable to the people who run the empire, and not a moment longer.

With regard to people being happy with their lot, I think that is true.  Most Americans think they are prosperous.  They are experiencing "good times" compared to, say, the 1970s when prices were very high and lines for gasoline very long.  Or to the 1980s when fewer tech gadgets were available, cell phones were bricks, and the economic boom had just started. 

However, I think all that is going to come to an end.  The good times have been built on a mountain of paper debt.  The fiat money inflation going on right now to attempt to recover from the current credit fiasco has pushed the USA dollar to all time lows on the dollar index, to parity with the Canadian dollar - not seen since the 1970s - and to all kinds of other difficult positions.  I think there is very little chance that failures of banks like Northern Rock or Netbank are going to be fewer in number.  Rather, they are going to be increasingly frequent, and larger, and more difficult to bail out.

People generally don't rebel when they are feeling very prosperous.  They tend to rebel when they feel oppressed.  And, in economic prosperity, it is nearly impossible to get people to accept that they are oppressed.

In the next three years or so, I expect inflation to put the Dow up around 30,000, gold up around $10,000 per ounce, and silver up to $400 an ounce.  Oil would likely be upwards of $100 per barrel.  In fact, I think the people on this list and their friends are going to live to see the collapse of a major world currency.

In the past, the collapse of the Roman denarius, the collapse of the Byzantine solidus, and the collapse of the dinar of the Caliphate are the only similar global currency collapses.  Two of these occurred due to the onslaught of the Mongol empire (which morphed into the Ottoman empire).

If you have some gold and silver, you may be able to weather the storm.  But, if you think inflation is all fun, you should look into the hyperinflation in Yugoslavia in 1993, or the hyperinflation in Germany and Austria in 1919-1923.  Or read Andrew Dickson White's classic on fiat money inflation in France.  It isn't fun stuff.  Governments fall.  People suffer.  Lives are exterminated.  Dictators rise to power (e.g., Milosevic, Hitler, Napoleon).
My long posts make some think I'm a key figure in FSW.  I'm not. I'm not an officer nor a leader.  I'm just this guy.  I think FSW is a great idea, & defend & promote it as I'm able.   Assuming that anyone agrees w/me is mistaken. Your bad results from your poor assumptions are your responsibility.

electrum!

  • Guest
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #10 on: October 01, 2007, 09:48:54 AM »
Quote
If you have some gold and silver, you may be able to weather the storm.
Unless, of course, the Government confiscates them as it once did gold...they've got alot of ways of controling us all set up and ready to go when the timie comes.

Offline rhodges

  • Administrative Staff
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,744
    • Richard's tech pages and GPG public key
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #11 on: October 01, 2007, 10:08:04 AM »
Unless, of course, the Government confiscates them as it once did gold...they've got alot of ways of controling us all set up and ready to go when the timie comes.

One possible scenario I envision is where the US dollar collapses, providing a politically easy way for the government to renounce all those trillions of unpayable future obligations and trade deficits.  Then the Amero is pulled out of a hat as the solution to the problem.

In one variation of this story, the government announces that since other countries feel betrayed and cheated for losing their shirts on the dollar, the Amero needs to be backed by gold.  And therefore, it is every American's civic duty and obligation to give their gold to the government so that the new currency can succeed.  Anyone who refuses is a traitor and probably a terrorist.

I have no special evidence to believe that this is more than just a thin possibility, but the idea nags me from time to time.
Get my GPG/PGP public key at: http://www.hodges.org/rh/public_rhodges.asc
If I ever find a dead cat, I will put it in a black box and give it to a physicist friend.  Then when he opens the box, I will shout, "Hey! You killed my cat!"

Offline planetaryjim

  • Needs To Get Out More
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,048
  • I am not a part of your empire.
    • The Indomitus Report
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #12 on: October 01, 2007, 04:35:43 PM »
Quote
If you have some gold and silver, you may be able to weather the storm.
Unless, of course, the Government confiscates them as it once did gold...they've got alot of ways of controling us all set up and ready to go when the timie comes.

Among the illusions of the all-powerful state is its reputation for infallibility and omnipotence.  It turns out to be as foolish as the least intelligent person charged with running anything in the state, and as weak as the least powerful among its apparatchiks.

Certainly in the case of gold confiscation, the reputation is much greater than the reality.  By reputation, in 1933, president Franklin Roosevelt demanded the confiscation of all American gold by executive decree.  By reputation, it was all confiscated.

In reality, only some 21.9% was confiscated or turned in voluntarily.  The rest remained in private hands.  Naturally, only a tiny amount of the gold coins in private hands circulated until 31 December 1974 when president Ford ended the confiscation threat, again by executive decree.  But, that was as much the consequence of "Gresham's law" as it was the consequence of the threat of confiscation.  People naturally kept in private stockpiles gold and silver when the fiat money began to inflate.

A very good review of the actual facts on confiscation is available from my friend James Turk on his site for the Freemarket Gold & Money Report.


I would urge you to read it.  In particular, it reviews Alan Greenspan's 1966 essay on the topic.  I think these words are still vital, today: [/color]

Quote
"The abandonment of the gold standard made it possible for the welfare statists to use the banking system as a means to an unlimited expansion of credit."
* * *
"The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard."

Today, people who know much more than me about encryption, virtual private networks, onion routing, and digital bearer instruments have developed a number of gold-based alternatives to national currencies.  My current thinking is that eCache is one of the best of these.  Pecunix, while much less secretive, is very effective.  I review some of these on my indomitus.net site and provide tutorials about some aspects of the situation at Vertoro.com.

One of the key advantages of digital warehouse receipts for gold (GoldMoney, Pecunix, e-gold) is that you don't have to store the gold in your home.  So, its presence there is not an "attractive nuisance" generating break-ins by burglars or robbers, such as government thugs seeking to enforce a confiscation order.  The globalization of the economy means that I can use allocated storage of gold in Zurich to make a payment to a programmer in Panama for services delivered to a client in Germany, all without leaving home.
My long posts make some think I'm a key figure in FSW.  I'm not. I'm not an officer nor a leader.  I'm just this guy.  I think FSW is a great idea, & defend & promote it as I'm able.   Assuming that anyone agrees w/me is mistaken. Your bad results from your poor assumptions are your responsibility.

Offline Paul Bonneau

  • Member, In Wyoming
  • Administrative Staff
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,480
    • Wyoming Liberty Index
Re: Does the death of Federalism make FSW less attractive?
« Reply #13 on: October 07, 2007, 09:59:54 AM »
Except that doesn't work all the time either.  ::)

Government can make all the noise it wants about gold confiscation. Gold is not an attractive nuisanse unless others know you have it. If you keep your mouth shut, neither freelance nor official government criminals can take it from you. Even if they think you have it, but don't know where you have it, they can't take it away. In a confiscation situation, a healthy black market is sure to appear, so your gold is spendable anyway.

Even FDR didn't attempt to confiscate all gold; IIRC he allowed 4 ounces per family to remain in private hands. Probably only a small minority of people had more than that. It is always easier to pick on small minorities.
Laws turn men into slaves.