I dare you to read this

Discussion in 'Second Amendment and Legal' started by phideaux, Oct 21, 2015.

  1. phideaux

    phideaux Well-Known Member Lifetime Supporter

    12,933
    100
    63
  2. gunslinger669

    gunslinger669 Active Member

    1,091
    1
    38
    I would, but..........

    Not Found

    The requested URL /en/the_law.html#SECTION_G010 was not found on this server.

    NOT FOUND

    Apache/2.2.22 (Debian) PHP/5.4.45-0+deb7u1 mod_ssl/2.2.22 OpenSSL/1.0.1e Server at bastiat.org Port 80
     

  3. phideaux

    phideaux Well-Known Member Lifetime Supporter

    12,933
    100
    63
    That's strange...

    Does the link not work for anyone else ?

    It links for me.


    Jim
     
  4. SHOOTER13

    SHOOTER13 RETIRED MODERATOR Lifetime Supporter

    7,454
    16
    38
    Works fine on my end...

    When a reviewer wishes to give special recognition to a book, he predicts that it will still be read "a hundred years from now." The Law, first published as a pamphlet in June, 1850, is already more than a hundred years old. And because its truths are eternal, it will still be read when another century has passed.

    Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850) was a French economist, statesman, and author. He did most of his writing during the years just before — and immediately following — the Revolution of February 1848. This was the period when France was rapidly turning to complete socialism. As a Deputy to the Legislative Assembly, Mr. Bastiat was studying and explaining each socialist fallacy as it appeared. And he explained how socialism must inevitably degenerate into communism. But most of his countrymen chose to ignore his logic.

    The Law is here presented again because the same situation exists in America today as in the France of 1848. The same socialist-communist ideas and plans that were then adopted in France are now sweeping America. The explanations and arguments then advanced against socialism by Mr. Bastiat are — word for word — equally valid today. His ideas deserve a serious hearing.
     
  5. buster40c

    buster40c Well-Known Member

    8,549
    267
    83
    Works for me.
    Reading this I think our liberty is a misnomer. IMO only if we have enough money shall we have rights. That's why the peasant shall never be allowed to become wealthy. Which also ties in with the peasant must be kept ignorant of what is being done to him. This is why the internet will be totally censored in the very near future.


    "Socialism Is Legal Plunder" ..... Here is the explanation of what is going on by legally using the law. What a web is woven.

    "Mr. de Montalembert has been accused of desiring to fight socialism by the use of brute force. He ought to be exonerated from this accusation, for he has plainly said: "The war that we must fight against socialism must be in harmony with law, honor, and justice."

    But why does not Mr. de Montalembert see that he has placed himself in a vicious circle? You would use the law to oppose socialism? But it is upon the law that socialism itself relies. Socialists desire to practice legal plunder, not illegal plunder. Socialists, like all other monopolists, desire to make the law their own weapon. And when once the law is on the side of socialism, how can it be used against socialism? For when plunder is abetted by the law, it does not fear your courts, your gendarmes, and your prisons. Rather, it may call upon them for help.

    To prevent this, you would exclude socialism from entering into the making of laws? You would prevent socialists from entering the Legislative Palace? You shall not succeed, I predict, so long as legal plunder continues to be the main business of the legislature. It is illogical — in fact, absurd — to assume otherwise."
    ....
    Who gives the legislature there raises and benefits? Where and whom do they get it from? LMAO Let the bank robber have the keys to the bank to plunder it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2015
  6. Ernesto

    Ernesto In the army now..

    558
    0
    0
    I read some of it. I also read the wikipedia about him and this the last part, sound familiar? He would prolly have a heart attack with all the coporate welfare goings. on now

    Negative railroad[edit]
    A famous section of Economic Sophisms concerns the way that tariffs are inherently counterproductive. Bastiat posits a theoretical railway between Spain and France that is built in order to reduce the costs of trade between the two countries. This is achieved, of course, by making goods move to and from the two nations faster and more easily. Bastiat demonstrates that this situation benefits both countries' consumers because it reduces the cost of shipping goods, and therefore reduces the price at market for those goods.

    However, each country's producers begin to criticize their governments because the other country's producers can now provide certain goods to the domestic market at reduced price. Domestic producers of these goods are afraid of being outcompeted by the newly viable industry from the other country. So, these domestic producers demand that tariffs be enacted to artificially raise the cost of the foreign goods back to their pre-railroad levels, so that they can continue to compete.

    Bastiat makes two significant statements here:

    Even if the producers in a society are benefited by these tariffs (which, Bastiat claims, they are not), the consumers in that society are clearly hurt by the tariffs, as they are now unable to secure the goods they want at the low price at which they should be able to secure them.
    The tariffs completely negate any gains made by the railroad and therefore make it essentially pointless.
    To further demonstrate his statements, Bastiat suggests—- in a classic reductio ad absurdum—- that, rather than enacting tariffs, the government should simply destroy the railroad anywhere that foreign goods can outcompete local goods. Since this would be just about everywhere, he goes on to suggest that this government should simply build a broken or "negative" railroad right from the start, and not waste time with tariffs and rail building.
     
  7. VThillman

    VThillman Active Member

    2,733
    24
    38
    Ernesto, the US corporations who have 'run away' to cheap labor countries are glad to read those words and your support of them.
     
  8. Ernesto

    Ernesto In the army now..

    558
    0
    0
    Oh no ya don't villian, you read that the wrong way. I am totally against corporations that get government welfare, send jobs out of the country and don't pay taxes. :)
     
  9. VThillman

    VThillman Active Member

    2,733
    24
    38
    What I figured. Read Bastiat again, you might detect a stench not completely disguised by the French perfume.
     
  10. Ernesto

    Ernesto In the army now..

    558
    0
    0
    Last two sentences of his quote I posted. I like that part.
     
  11. Ernesto

    Ernesto In the army now..

    558
    0
    0
    Republicans are looking really bad to the general public. The real unemployment is around 25% for some ethnic people. Blocking any bankers from going to jail, blocking any and every jobs bills, denying climate change to get money from coal corps ie Koch bro's. Protecting corps that send jobs overseas. The people are not dumb. This will be the worst loss the GOP has ever had. Trickle down don't work. Like, how many cars can a billionaire have, or tv's.
    It has been the middle class and manufacturing that's always brought America to the top.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Oct 25, 2015
  12. Ernesto

    Ernesto In the army now..

    558
    0
    0
    Edit; just speaking rationally mind you. Hey, ya just can't run for a POTUS election on just the 2nd amendment and win it- I hate Obama care but..... thank God the INs Co's cannot deny me insurance for existing conditions-my kids can still be on my policy - my premiums stopped going up 30% a year etc. And I will be pleased to collect that socialistic money I paid into on SS and Medicare.

    So what does the GOP stand for that the general public can really grasp? Personally I like a couple things the GOP stands for but then they waste a tremendous amount of time on religious stuff and the female anatomy ; which is personally none of my business what an woman wants to do with her body. I mean tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions of our tax payer money insistently having meetings after meetings, filing lawsuits and the general planned parenthood and birth control thing. This is all religious mumbo jumbo and none of my business or any elected official 's business. Sounds republican esq dont it? Stop spending money for religious business in government!!!
    And thats why the GOP is going to lose.
     
  13. VThillman

    VThillman Active Member

    2,733
    24
    38
    If the GOP can just nominate someone who doesn't have a closet full of shrunken 'indentured servant' heads and can count to 20 without removing foot gear, they have a good shot at it - because the Dems are going to nominate HC. It's Al Gore all over again, only more so.