It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by The Old American
But, society will be self-governing and will do away with the detritus without the help of the Federal government.
/TOA
Originally posted by Runaway1977
So Ron Paul is saying we do not need the Civil Rights Act because we live in a world where it is no longer relevant, thanks to the Civil Rights Act. That would explain his stance on drugs then.
I hear that murder and rape are socially unacceptable. Why do you still have laws against such things? People would not murder or rape because they might lose the business they do not want or be looked upon poorly.
Originally posted by deesul69
Originally posted by Runaway1977
So Ron Paul is saying we do not need the Civil Rights Act because we live in a world where it is no longer relevant, thanks to the Civil Rights Act. That would explain his stance on drugs then.
I hear that murder and rape are socially unacceptable. Why do you still have laws against such things? People would not murder or rape because they might lose the business they do not want or be looked upon poorly.
"A world where it is no longer relevent, thanks to the Civil Rights Act"
Apartheid was around until 1994, way after the CRA in America, so I don't think that it's thanks to the CRA that we no longer live in a world where it is no longer relevant.
Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by ThichHeaded
Well, let me clear this up for you:
If EVERY store owner is allowed to discriminate, then who the hell are they going to sell to? Where's the logic behind this? Do you want a return to a segregated, Jim Crow America?
Ron Paul claims that this is something the markets could have sorted out. Social issues are not economic issues and therefore, should be separate.
Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic
The quality of a governing system depends more on the quality of the people implementing it than it does on the form of government. A monarchy or dictatorship can be a fine place to live, if the quality of the implementors is high. A representative republic can be a lousy place to live if the implementors are of low quality.
Here's the problem with un-restrained Libertarianism, especially in the current US culture of everybody only looking out for themselves:
Two privately owned companies:
Jim-Bob's Electric Utility company and Achmed's Food Store. They are located in a sparsely populated area, and are the only game available for electricity or food.
Jim-Bob don't like "the cuhlerds", so only white people get electric power to their homes (it's Jim-Bob's company, right? He can refuse to sell to whoever he wants right?).
Achmed doesn't care much for white people, especially now that he has to have his own electricity generation capability, so Caucasions are not allowed to shop at his food store. The only one in 50 miles in any direction. So white people have no place to buy food. Hey, it's Achmed's store, right?
And just for the hell of it, Juan owns the only gas station in 50 miles from anywhere. At this point he don't care much for whites OR Arabs, so only Latinos now can buy gas at his station.
Or failing that, sure, Jim-Bob will sell electricity to non-whites... at 10 times the rate as whites. Achmed will sell food to whites, they can pay about 10 times what non-whites pay. Same for Juan... if you are not Latino you can buy gas at his station at the "non-Latino only" pumps, which start at $15.00 per gallon.
Given a healthy culture, clearly this scenario is not likely. The current culture in the US is anything but healthy.
Originally posted by ThichHeaded
reply to post by The Sword
See that is the cool thing about this..
If i went to a store lets say.. Bob's big ass tires.. and on the front it says No black and Arabs allowed.. I would probably be like well this guy is a douche and goto Jim's big ass tires because jim likes everyone..
Sooner or later Bob will be out of business because he was a douchebag and jim will have all the business he can have and them some..
Free market at its best.
Originally posted by AndrewJay
This is basically putting words in Paul's mouth because we all know it was a straw man to begin with. Ill take it a step futher and say that anyone who owns a business should be able to discriminate against anyone they want. That is what freedom means. If I dont want to hire you or sell my good to you because you're black or hispanic ...well so be it, its my business. Now in today's society we all know that wouldnt work. If someone put a big sign in their coffee shop saying "whites only" nobody is going to walk into that shop, not even white people. But it still should be every American's right to express his freedom of speech regardless if we agree with it or not.
Originally posted by kro32
Originally posted by AndrewJay
This is basically putting words in Paul's mouth because we all know it was a straw man to begin with. Ill take it a step futher and say that anyone who owns a business should be able to discriminate against anyone they want. That is what freedom means. If I dont want to hire you or sell my good to you because you're black or hispanic ...well so be it, its my business. Now in today's society we all know that wouldnt work. If someone put a big sign in their coffee shop saying "whites only" nobody is going to walk into that shop, not even white people. But it still should be every American's right to express his freedom of speech regardless if we agree with it or not.
Don't forget that freedom also allows you to be given the same opportunity's as everyone else. People have the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of the color of their skin.
And suppose someone did put up a sign that said whites only and people did keep going in would that still be ok to you.
Remember that it was only a few decades ago when this was the norm. Do you really think people have changed that much and that racism doesn't exist anymore?
Originally posted by 547000
That guy has principles. Something lacking in the fast-food politicians of today.
Originally posted by AndrewJay
Originally posted by 547000[/i
That guy has principles. Something lacking in the fast-food politicians of today.
How cute it is to insult me rather than argue my point. Maybe YOU should be flipping the burgers while people with more potential are given these magical "opportunities".
Originally posted by 547000
Originally posted by AndrewJay
Originally posted by 547000[/i
That guy has principles. Something lacking in the fast-food politicians of today.
How cute it is to insult me rather than argue my point. Maybe YOU should be flipping the burgers while people with more potential are given these magical "opportunities".
I didn't read your point nor do I care to. Private companies have the right to hire or not hire whoever they please. It's a freedom versus equality issue, and I've realized freedom is more important. True equality will require eliminating unideal people and restricting the opportunity of those who are more prosperous.