From: punditster@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/13/2026 10:53 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   > On Tue, 13 Jan 2026 10:40:18 -0800, Dude  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 1/13/2026 10:26 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>> On Tue, 13 Jan 2026 10:08:01 -0800, Dude  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 1/13/2026 9:49 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>> On Tue, 13 Jan 2026 12:26:21 -0500, Wilson    
   >>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 1/12/2026 7:03 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 15:42:55 -0500, Wilson    
   >>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On 1/12/2026 1:24 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 12:50:31 -0500, Wilson    
   >>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 1/12/2026 11:37 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 10:55:14 -0500, Wilson    
   >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/12/2026 8:38 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 01:31:52 -0800, dart200   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/11/26 3:36 PM, vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *+-how would we fund consumerism tho???   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All the economists, right and left thik consumer spending is   
   unproductive,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which is why they would prefer a consumtion tax over an income   
   tax.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> consumers buying things is unproductive?? what in the fuck is   
   the point   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the economy even?? to make things that aren't consumed??   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> consumer spending is supposed to be the fucking bedrock   
   guidance of the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> economic engine, that's the how the market is supposed to work.   
   if   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> consumers can't spend ... how in the fuck do we know what to   
   produce, eh???   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ofc we wouldn't need usury to fund consumer spending if they   
   were paid   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> more fairly regardless of whether we tax them or not. idk why ur   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bringing up tax that ain't the question here   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Discourage consumprion, encourage income.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THe problem is the right doesn't trust the left with two   
   taxes.  THey want   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the left to admit defeat and repeal the income tax amendment   
   first.  But   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tariffs are primarily how the USA was financed before an   
   income tax.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> i want us to stop using the federal govt, to do things that   
   should be   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> state level orchestration. the feds were supposed to be a   
   *limited*   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> power govt, not governing everything power govt   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and fuck tariffs, eh??   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #god   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> like bro ... u telling me the richest most powerful country on   
   the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> planet can't complete on the open market without tariffs???   
   where's the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> permanent state of many tariffs edition of us "capitalism"???   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fucking ??   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Usury is an integral part of this system.  No way could   
   consumerism   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> generate wealth for a few if they couldn't use money to make more   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> money.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> consumerism   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> tariffs   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> various tax schemes   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> politics   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Something is wrong with this system.  Perhaps we could think of   
   a new   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> one that has not been tried before.  Because, so far, nothing   
   works   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> long term, which is why we are here fussing about the system   
   that we   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> are left with after the others failed.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Human beings want to matter, to feel important and appreciated,   
   and by   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> doing so improve their place in the world. So they do things to   
   those   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> ends. Whether or not they actually make things better for others   
   is   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> ultimately always secondary to those primary goals.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> This is true of people everywhere. We are built by our evolution   
   to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> improve our social status. Because having a high status conferred   
   an   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> increased chance of survival.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> This is how we've been behaving:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>        > see that things aren't working as well as we think they   
   should   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>        > design a solution to make things better (and improve the   
   status of   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> those involved in the repair)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>        > solution does not make everything better   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>        > some things are even worse   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>        > repeat   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> So it is time for a new idea, not revert to an old idea like   
   >>>>>>>>>>> libertarianism.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Because giving people that much freedom doesn't work for you, as I   
   >>>>>>>>>> explained:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Because reverting to failed past ideas seems kinda stupid.  As you   
   >>>>>>>>> mentioned once upon a time, those ideas were left behind for a reason   
   >>>>>>>>> with intention to do things in a better way.  It occurs to me that   
   >>>>>>>>> perhaps you don't like the better way that was chosen.  You really   
   >>>>>>>>> have no interest in possible new ways of handling those old problems.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Leaving behind the ideals of liberty is the end of civilization.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> However, your definition of liberty does not rule us.  Let us return   
   >>>>>>> to:  libertarianism was abandoned for a reason.  An improvement was   
   >>>>>>> intended.  Discarding that improvement does not require returning to   
   >>>>>>> old unworkable ideas.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> What I hear:  "Blah, blah, blah I don't like freedom and want the boot."   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You hear what you want to hear.  Good job.  Watch out that you don't   
   >>>>> actually think about anything.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>> Think about this: What would the US be without the principle of liberty?   
   >>>   
   >>> I don't think that is what it is like right now, but himbo is working   
   >>> on it.   
   >>>   
   >> That would be Donald Trump, President of the United States of America,   
   >> to you bimbo.   
   >   
   > Sorry pal.  No dice.   
   >   
   >> Without liberty you would be bound. The question is, if you are bound,   
   >> by what means can you free yourself?   
   >   
   > It does appear that neither of us is bound.   
   >   
   >>   
   >>>> Libertarian principles in the U.S. government today emphasize individual   
   >>>> liberty, limited government, free markets, and non-interventionism.   
   >>>   
   >>> Abandoned for good reason.   
   >>>   
   >> The US Constitution and the US Bill of Rights is still in effect, the   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)