Dupin Posted February 14, 2022 Report Share Posted February 14, 2022 (edited) Yesterday Amy featured Leonard Peikoff on her podcast. He's late to the party but better late than never: https://rumble.com/vuv5ak-leonard-peikoff-salutes-the-truckers.html On all the issues of the title of this post he differs from the so-called Ayn Rand Institute. Edited February 14, 2022 by Dupin necrovore 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boydstun Posted February 15, 2022 Report Share Posted February 15, 2022 (edited) I watched this chat, and these are the same "small potatoes" curtailments of individual liberties today relative to the giant curtailment, ever-growing today and for a long time in the US. And that really big one is not even mentioned, let alone put as the top-priority current policy issue here, just as in almost all media and voices of political leaders. I'm embarrassed to to have to state the obvious for an audience of this caliber: the greatest stab against individual liberty in America since 2001 (and many, many of the years before that) are federal budgets in the red. There is indeed something seriously undermining liberty here, and that is the governmental plundering of property in America. Your right to your property together with your rights over your body and your labor makes for much of what is your freedom. Every federal budget that is in the red is an acceleration of the taking of your property and your making of a life for yourself (ditto for posterity yet to be). This is the most import stab against liberty going on today. All the chatter on masks or which bathroom to go to or stopping illegal crossings of the Mexican border or the stopping my maple syrup at the Canadian border is small potatoes compared to our failure to get these deficit budgets stopped. It should be the top political issue you see gets talked about. In April 2017, with both chambers of Congress in the same Party as the White House, a federal budget in the red was passed. The leaders all congratulated themselves for compromising with the other Party. Was that comprise “I’ll cut this if you’ll cut that”? No. It was “I’ll agree to you raising that if you’ll agree to me raising this.” This is the serious issue on which voices should be sounding. Edited February 15, 2022 by Boydstun Easy Truth and necrovore 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boydstun Posted February 16, 2022 Report Share Posted February 16, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.