A Modest Proposal Survey on Part 3

customer_survey_101As the end of this series of posts, I’d like to ask for your opinion on the ideas discussed.  These survey questions will come from Part 3. If you are wondering what prompted these questions, please refer back to A Modest Proposal Part 3. Thank you for your participation.

Posted in District/County Issues, National/International Issues, Oklahoma Issues | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A Modest Proposal Survey on Part 2

customer_survey_101As the end of this series of posts, I’d like to ask for your opinion on the ideas discussed.  The first survey question will come from Part 2. If you are wondering what prompted these questions, please refer back to A Modest Proposal Part 2. Thank you for your participation.

Posted in District/County Issues, National/International Issues, Oklahoma Issues | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Modest Proposal Part 5

Recap.  For the previous 4 installments of this blog I have discussed various aspects of a government based on the non(zero) aggression principle.  In some instances, examples of what this type of government would be contrasted with the aggressive government we currently have.  The question, now is, how can those who wish the government to butt out of their private lives, who are ready to take personal responsibility for themselves and their families, and are ready to live in the freedom in which many of the founders of the united States of America believed, effect this change?

Critical thinkingAssumptions.  Before diving in, I want to state some assumptions made which are behind these recent posts.

1. The ability to bring the national government under control is not viable-the system is too corrupt to be saved.
2. It is only a matter of time before the dollar is dethroned as the world’s international currency.
3. Any effort to break away from the current national government will necessitate a new monetary system based on a physical commodity such as gold and/or silver.  In regards to this, Texas is well on its way to achieving this with the gold depository law recently enacted.
4. Any movement toward session and sovereignty will be met with political and possibly military pressure from the national and, depending on the size of the movement, the individual state where the secession begins.
5. Once a county with a foreign military presence (US) residing within it decides to form its own government separate from the US, that foreign military presence must leave, and will leave without incident. (I know, this is a big assumption.)

Strategy.  There would need to be a group of committed activists within each county.  The group would need writers of letters-to-the-editor of various newspapers in the area, writers of blogs and Facebook sites popular within the county, someone to liaise with the adjacent county activist groups to coordinate efforts and exchange ideas, and someone to decipher the current political system to begin crafting referendums for local ballots to propose changes to the county government (similar to those that have been discussed in the previous 4 blog articles).  The writers to the editor could take turns writing the articles, attempting to not only educate the readers but to also motivate them to support the referendums when they are introduced.

As momentum begins to grow behind the movement, rallies within the county would be organized to widen publicity for NAP and the new government.  Local television and radio coverage of these events would spread the word even further.  Getting  nationally-known speakers to come and speak would enhance the movement and could assist nearby counties with their campaigns as well.

Because of its central importance to gaining freedom, one of the first referendums should be on creating an organized militia for the county.  The decision concerning the capitation tax and repeal of city and county taxes, and the declaration of non-support of state income taxes would need to be coupled with the militia as one will not work without the other.  Depending on the number of elections, it is conceivable that freedom for the county could be had within one or two years.  Key is the groundwork mentioned in the previous two paragraphs.

This strategy follows the NAP, does not use coercive force, and, if successful, allows those who wish to remain citizens of the United States to remain so while still living in the county…no one HAS to move anywhere due to the county’s restructured government.

Economic Growth.  With the lack of corporate taxes, federal, state, and local, businesses would be able to thrive.  Once counties begin to confederate, having the same NAP structure, even more businesses and industry will apply for entry, creating a resurgence of commerce in the area which will grow exponentially, once word gets out.

Conclusion.  So, this is how freedom could return to this country, one county at a time.  It will take a huge effort, one that will not be over any time soon.  It must be remembered, however, that all it takes is a small, industrious and irate minority to effect change of this magnitude, made a little easier by eating the elephant one bite at a time and not trying to eat it all at once.  Comments are welcomed.



Posted in District/County Issues, National/International Issues, Oklahoma Issues, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

A Modest Proposal Part 4

RECAP. So, let me briefly recap what has been discussed. I am looking at a new form of governance which will maximize liberty and minimize government intrusion. We have looked at citizenship being a contract between the local (county) region and the individual that is renewed every year for people 18 years and up living within the geographic location comprising a county. Taxes are paid at the same time the citizen contract is signed and are a capitation tax of $100/year for citizens and $200/year for aliens. Taxes are distributed based on the will of each individual paying the tax where the individual lists the projects they wish to fund, placing their portion toward each project desired in $5 increments. Taxpayers are also given blanks where they can write-in projects not currently listed on the tax election sheet. Defense, emergency management, and tax project contract management were discussed. We covered what happens to tax money when it is insufficient to create a contract to perform the desired work, that the individual owns and is responsible for himself and his actions, that marriage is outside the purview of government, and how the legal system might work. Read Parts 1 thru 3 for a more complete explanation of these issues.

close borders no bordersImmigration.  While this was briefly discussed when covering citizenship, I’d like to look more deeply into the subject.  There are some who believe that immigration or migration should not be controlled in any way but that all should be free to immigrate at will.  I believe one of the reasons this is such a big issue at this time is the welfare structure instituted by the federal and state governments, using taxpayer funds to support non-citizens.  I recently read an article by Hans-Hermann Hoppe (https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/10/hans-hermann-hoppe/open-borders/) where he discusses this issue.  In its basic form, it is property rights that should be the primary driver.

In the governance I am proposing, each county would have an immigration board.  The board would consist of citizens of the county and would meet to interview and vote on whether or not to accept a prospective immigrant.  If the board accepted the immigrant, the immigrant would be allowed to either become a citizen, or could apply for a 1 year visa and pay the required capitation tax (see Part 1).  The tax would be pro-rated depending on the date in which the agreement is signed.  If the immigrant was rejected (maybe they were found to be criminals or were not selected for other reasons, the immigrant would need to leave the county.

There could be agreements with surrounding counties concerning citizens living in their counties but wanting to migrate to a different county where these counties would share information concerning prospective immigrants.  This information would assist the immigration board in its decision.

As was brought out by Mr. Hoppe, the board would be the body protecting the interests of the citizens of the county, ensuring use of common assets (roads, garbage, any tax-funded enterprise) was not being used by someone not contributing to that enterprise.  It would also be the protector of the peace, looking at the character of the prospective immigrant and deciding whether or not they would be an asset or a detriment to the county.

toll-plaza-approachRoads.  In a previous installment we briefly looked at roads, mainly as to whether or not the county would pay for them through the will of the taxpayer or the citizen would privately contract for the service.

If the county taxes are used to maintain the roads, should those outside of the county be charged a toll to use these roads to assist with upkeep since they would be using the roads freely?  This might depend on whether or not the roads are used for commerce.  If tolls were levied on some county’s roads but not on an adjacent county’s roads, would that commerce bypass the tolled county, basically isolating it from commerce?  Would it instead cause prices within the tolled county to be greater to cover the toll the trucks would have to pay to deliver those goods, thereby causing the citizen to bear the cost anyway?  What about the person just wanting to cross the county to continue a journey?  Would toll roads make a difference in which route they would take and would it make any difference in whether or not tourism or other commerce such as buying gas or getting a hotel room would or would not occur?

Again, this could be handled by the taxpayer if they decided to fund the toll booth construction and toll booth salaries.  Would the expense of the system outweigh the revenue gained?  Up to the citizens investigate and decide.

drivers licenseLicenses.  Would the government issue licenses?  No.  The individual is responsible for any damage to private property or life and limb.  Getting the government out of the licensing business would help rid it of cronyism and politicians being paid off by trades people to make it difficult for competition to enter the trade.  For instance, home inspectors were not required to have a license in Texas until a few years ago.  Now, in order to get a license, the new inspector must work as an apprentice for a period of time (over a year) before they can be licensed.  This apprenticeship is, naturally, at a reduced wage.  Wonder how this bill got passed?  Older inspectors go together and lobbied to get the law enacted, making it more difficult for new people to enter the trade.  This is just one example of the phoniness of licensing.

We already eliminated the marriage license.  How about drivers licenses?  Not needed if people are required to take responsibility for their actions and are required to compensate the injured when at fault.

insuranceMandatory Insurance.   As we all know, there are several mandatory insurance policies that we currently require, the most recent, that of health insurance.  Automobile insurance is another requirement.  Freedom requires personal responsibility.  This means that, while not mandatory, you are responsible for your own healthcare expenses and your own automobile accidents and the ensuing damage to property, should an automobile accident occur.  If you are unable to cover the cost of a possible automobile accident either through your own bank funds or insurance coverage, you should not drive.  In this type of economic environment where taxes are minimal, philanthropic organizations should thrive, to include free clinics or hospitals, as was the case in the early 1960’s , before government got into the healthcare business.

Conclusion.  In this post we continued our discussion on what a free society could look like.  If you have any comments, questions, suggestions, please send them my way.  Next time I’ll explore ways to implement these ideas.

Posted in District/County Issues, National/International Issues, Oklahoma Issues | Tagged , | 1 Comment

A Modest Proposal Part 3


RECAP.  So, let me briefly recap what has been discussed. I am looking at a new form of governance which will maximize liberty and minimize government intrusion. We have looked at citizenship being a contract between the local (county) region and the individual that is renewed every year for people 18 years and up living within the geographic location comprising a county. Taxes are paid at the same time the citizen contract is signed and are a capitation tax of $100/year for citizens and $200/year for aliens. Taxes are distributed based on the will of each individual paying the tax where the individual lists the projects they wish to fund, placing their portion toward each project desired in $5 increments. Taxpayers are also given blanks where they can write-in projects not currently listed on the tax election sheet.  Finally, defense, emergency management, and tax project contract management were discussed.  Read Parts 1 and 2 for a more complete explanation.

UNFUNDED PROJECTS.  Now, let’s discuss what happens when some taxpayers/residents wanted a project funded with their tax money but not enough others had the same thought so that the project was not funded.  Is using government force (by getting their guy in charge) the only way for those wanting the project to be funded to get it funded, essentially forcing others not wishing to fund the project to do so while also taking money away from the projects they wished to fund?  Well, that is currently the way the US governmental system works.  Group A wants something but is a minority and can’t get the votes to get the thing passed because Group B is in the majority.  Group A goes all out during the next election cycle and gets the majority. Now Group A is able to pass the desired thing but now Group B is upset.  It is a vicious cycle constantly pitting Group A against Group B.

The new system, however, allows those who wish for a project to be worked to pool their resources and contract for the project to be completed privately.  With the lack of income taxes, property taxes, consumption taxes, corporate taxes, social security taxes, medicare/medicaid taxes, etc., those wanting the project will have more money to put toward these things.  Additionally, this avenue of resolving project issues conforms to the non aggression principle in that no one is forced to fund something that they feel is not important to them or is against their principles/religious beliefs…both groups have the opportunity to have what they wish without being forced to provide something they would rather not.

For instance, there are some that believe drug use is not a government issue and others believe it is.  The US Congress and the Supreme Court have upheld the “war on drugs” as a lawful cause and decided to place tax funds toward drug enforcement.  The current system requires (with threat of force) all taxpayers to fund this endeavor no matter the personal belief of the taxpayer.  [As an aside…why was it necessary to pass a constitutional amendment to prohibit alcohol but no amendment was necessary to prohibit “drugs”?] A similar issue that comes to mind is abortion.  The current US governmental system is against the non-aggression/zero-aggression principle.

PRIVATE PROPERTY.  What connotes private property?  Would you consider your body private property?  If so, and you believe owning property is a fundamental right, not granted by government but granted by being human, then should the government be able to use force of law and arms to steal your freedom because of the way you decide to use your private property (your body)?  The fundamental question is “Do you own yourself or does the government own you like a cow or dog or a piece of property?”

If you believe you own your own body, then, as long as you do not attempt to force your will on someone, you are free to do with your body as you wish.  This also means you are responsible for any bad consequences that may arise from your drug use, such as loss of a job, family, home, etc.  Like the beer commercial says, “With great beer comes great responsibility.”  The same goes for freedom…it requires great (personal) responsibility.

MARRIAGE.  Since this has recently come up in the news, I’d like to touch on marriage.  To some it is a religious ceremony, sanctified by holy scripture.  To others, it is a way to obtain services such as insurance for the family through the workplace.  Before the recent Supreme Court ruling, same sex marriage was a state issue with some states allowing it and others not allowing it.  Without the “license”, same-sex partners could not receive the insurance coverage offered in workplaces.  This is another area where Group A was disenfranchised by Group B through government action.  The new ruling has given Group A what it wanted and Group B is disenfranchised.  The question is never asked “Why is the government in the business of granting a person the right to marry in the first place?”  In the society I’ve been proposing, marriage would be handled like any other contract, within the law.  If someone wanted to be married by a church, it would be possible.  If the church did not want to marry a same-sex couple, it would not be forced to.  Also, divorce would be handled as the break in any contract would be handled.

LEGAL STRUCTURE.  What about the law?  Of what would laws consist?  Am I talking about a libertine society where anything goes?  Absolutely not!  All laws would be based on private property, contracts, and personal responsibility.

Each county would keep a roster of citizens and would choose an odd number (possibly 13) to hear any case involving crimes of aggression.  The 13 would elect one of their number to act as judge in the case and the other 12 would be the jury.  This court would be randomly selected, with no person being selected again until all citizens within the county had been selected.  Additionally, one of the militia members within the Adjutant Generals’ branch would be randomly selected to be the prosecutor in the case.  There would still be lawyers for defense for hire by the accused.  In crimes such as theft, the thief, if convicted, would compensate the person from which they stole whatever the value of the item was plus any damages that occurred in order to effect the robbery.  If they were unable to pay, the thief would work for the victim at an agreed-upon wage until the debt was paid.  In the case of murder or intentional bodily injury, the jury could decide to assign the guilty party to the aggrieved family for a certain number of years (not to exceed 7 years) as a servant/worker or allow the guilty party to be banished from the county in-perpetuity.  If found guilty, the guilty party could request a retrial any time new evidence is found that could change the verdict.  The aggrieved family would have the option of lessening the sentence amount after 1 year.  There would be no death penalty because of the fallibility of people and the possibility of making a wrong decision, executing an innocent person.  Each accused would be innocent until proven guilty.  Finally, if the jury decided the law under which the accused was being tried was bad, the jury could annul that law and acquit the accused.

I welcome any thoughts concerning these concepts.  More to come in Part 4.

Posted in District/County Issues, National/International Issues | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A Modest Proposal Part 2


So, how do you start crafting a new system of governance?  I’ve attempted to look at the good and bad in the current system and then visualize how the individual could possibly have the most freedom and not infringe on another’s freedom at the same time.

First of all, let’s discuss citizenship.  What does that mean?  Just because you are born in a certain location, should that automatically make you a citizen of that place?

Citizenship Proposal.  Initial Creation of a New Government.

Citizenship would be a yearly activity and would occur at the same time taxes were paid.  Upon creation of the new government and within the next 30 days, people within that particular area being governed by the new government, would go to their current voting places.  They would read (or have someone read) a two-page document stating how the government would be executed for the next year.  The individual would then be allowed to sign a statement, either declaring citizenship or declaring alien status and requesting a work-visa or other type visa to be able to remain in the new governed area.

As stated, taxes would also be paid at this time.  There would be no payroll taxes, consumption taxes, or any other tax other than the one time capitation tax.  All tax proceeds would stay within the county where the individual resides.  If one elected to be a citizen, the tax would be a flat $100 or the equivalent.  If alien was chosen, the tax would be a flat $200 or the equivalent.  The taxes would apply to everyone 18 years old and up.

Before paying the tax, the individual would be given a list of projects with several blanks.  This list would provide the individual the choice of where he would want his tax money to go.  He would be allowed to choose those he wished to fund and list the amount he wished to go to that particular project, with the minimum amount being $5 to any one project.  If there was an area where the individual wanted the government to be involved and it was not listed, he could add the project in one of the blanks and put money toward it.  These projects would be things like roads, bridges, trash pick up, water, sewer, etc.

Each citizen would be a part of the militia for that particular county.  The militia would encompass medical, financial, contractual, emergency services, and others, as well as policing and combat.  The individual citizen would be allowed to choose where he wished to participate.  He would make his initial selection after his 18th birthday and be able to change or keep his selection at the same time every year.  Those who chose the profession they were in, such as a doctor choosing medical services, would not need to drill.  Those choosing a field that is not their profession, such as infantry, would be required to drill with the county militia an agreed upon number of times during the year.  The militia would consist of those citizens 18-60, with those beyond 60 filling non-combat roles.  The militia would not be deployed outside the county unless the county had reciprocity agreements with other surrounding counties for mutual aid.  There would be no standing military.

Militia members in the contracting field would be the ones administering all contracts let by the county.  After the taxes were collected, these militia members would oversee the projects that received enough money to be awarded.  They would be periodically audited by other militia members within the finance field.  Since these contracting officers would require extra time to manage these contracts away from their regular jobs, they would receive 3% of the total amount for the contract they were managing.

If the project did not receive enough money to be actioned in a current year, the money would be placed in an account until the following year.  If that project received enough money from the new year and the previous, then the project would be placed on contract.  If the project still did not have enough money to contract, the money for that project (both past and current) would be evenly distributed to the other projects that had been listed for that year, possibly making some of the underfunded projects able to be contracted.  Each contract would be for one year, only.  It would have the possibility of being renewed based on the money it received the following year.

Local firms will bid on these projects and a selection board would be created to review each bid.  The selection board would consist of the militia members within the contracting field and a representative of the field for which the contract was to be let.  Any citizen with financial or other ties to the companies bidding on the contract will not be allowed to be on  the selection board.

The above covers citizenship and taxes.  As you may have noticed, it is focused at the current county level.  Also, the militia has a large roll in the government.  In fact, it is the government in that each citizen is a member.  The military portion of the militia will need to be prepared to defend the new government immediately.  As was seen before, the North did not like the idea of the South leaving.  Even though the North did not like the South, they would not let it go.

Again, I welcome comments on the above.

Posted in National/International Issues | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

A Modest Proposal Part 1


It has been quite a year since I last wrote on this blog.  ObamaCare/RomneyCare has been vetted more than once by the Supremes, all states must recognize and license homosexual marriage, Colorado is allowing medicinal marijuana, and Texas has decided to repatriate its gold and create a gold depository in the state.

From these decisions, it should become painfully obvious that government is not a friend to the people.  In fact, a national government is very adept at pitting one group against another.  The US government has done this every time it has breached the bounds of the US Constitution.  Abortion, for instance, is such a ruling.  The Supremes granted the “right” ensuring enmity between those who support abortion and those who do not.  In this case, it is the non-religious vs the religious but the ruling is beyond the powers granted by the Constitution.  Prohibition was another case where, in this instance, the religious were the majority and those who didn’t think drinking was so bad were the minority (at least within the political sphere).

This continuous back-and-forth, always trampling on the minority’s rights is how the government feeds itself.  There is always a struggle to get political control to work the majority’s will on the minority.  The minority wants to get control so they can right all the wrongs the majority has done to them while in power.  Once the minority take control, they enact their own laws that are odious to the majority.  It never ends…there has to be a better way.

How can the cycle be broken?  Can it be broken in the US?  Is there too much money and power at stake to allow it to occur?  Can it be done and keep the US territory as it is it too late to reform the national government?  In the next several posts I plan to outline a government that would use at its core the non-aggression (zero-aggression) principle and would allow people to be as free as they wish to be.

These are thoughts I’ve been working on for a while and would appreciate any criticism or comments concerning the ideas I will be sharing.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment