Forum - Banjo Ben Clark

Rule of law vs Rule by law

#62

Which is why I used control within quotes. Not in the sense of controlling your free will. I meant, in the sense of controlling intruding into others in an unapparent way. Anyway I have to give you an example. I will provide along with for Mark.

Ooops my bad. It was meant to be “brawn power infraction” and “brain power infraction”. You need to cut some slack for my English. :wink:

I’m fine then but I believe Mark is more for no regulation so I was a little concerned. Say for example, you are a family with kids. Poor but happy. Now a free market candy man or the pied piper of Hamelin comes. Trouble, isn’t it?? I’m not expecting a government to do a father/mother role, but the protection for the gullible mass from candy man etc.

You figured it!

What I meant was, anything allowed to be done (market regulations) should be founded on these law principles - judgment, mercy and faith. By judgment, being fair; by mercy, as less punishment as possible; by faith, never discount and provide room for hope to someone. Regulations should make the impacting one provide these to the impacted one, The impacting one should not be able to get away with fine prints etc. I see “life is not fair” as a cop out. Individual may not do it, you can’t expect them to be… But the desired form of government, by whatever name you call it, should be derived from this principle. This reinforces life and liberty! I think any philosophy that deviates from this should always be viewed with suspicion and refined accordingly - capitalism or socialism or whatever ism for that matter.

I live in Ohio. I’ll share the details with you sometime.

1 Like
#63

This link just came across my facebook feed.

https://fee.org/articles/fdrs-folly-how-roosevelt-and-his-new-deal-prolonged-the-great-depression

I’ve read Burt Folsom’s entire book FDR, New Deal or Raw Deal. If you’re ever interested in seeing exactly why I loath regulation, that book spells it out nicely. Under FDR’s New Deal, business leaders were allowed to come together to set regulations in their own industries. Who do you think those regulations helped, the consumer, or the authors of the new regulations?

As specific examples, a tailor was thrown in jail for pressing suits for 5 cents cheaper than his competitors that were located in better areas. Those industry leaders came together and made price fixing legal, as did countless other industries. Anyone selling a product or service cheaper than the regulations demanded were thrown in prison.

Another example is a battery manufacturer that was put in prison because his employees decided to accept less than minimum wage in order to keep the company running and not lose their jobs entirely. The owner literally had to run his company from the confines of a prison cell.

Folsom’s book has references to these stories. That’s exactly how most regulations work today, and it’s why I say the most regulation we need is protection of life, liberty, and property. The market can work out the rest.

3 Likes
#64

I’m not sure what that means, sorry. I get that we have a bit of language barrier that we’re dealing with; I’m trying. English is a second language for you then? I admire you for how well you speak and understand it. I’ve tried other languages, but have only gotten very basic skills. Just out of curiosity, where are you from?

That’s what I thought you meant.

I honestly don’t mean to be picking on you and I hope you’ll forgive me for asking, but what is brawn power infraction?

Of course, no worries, but please be patient if I do misunderstand something or ask for clarification.

I don’t think @Mark_Rocka is for no regulation, unless I’ve misunderstood him, which I don’t think I have. But I’ll let him speak for himself.

At first, the pied piper provided a valuable service, that of leading rats out of town with his pipe and the townspeople paid for this service. That’s capitalism at its finest. The townsfolk had a need and he had a solution, they entered into a contract and the exchange of service for compensation was done. He shouldn’t be expected to provide his service for free should he? When he encountered a town unwilling to pay for his services however, he should have moved on to the next town. Instead he retaliated by using his pipe to lead the children away from their parents. That’s kidnapping and yes, the government should step in. In another version of the story, Mr. Piper enters into contract with a town on the town’s promise of payment and then after the work is done, the town refuses payment. Mr. Piper then has recourse through the legal system. Government has a role to play in this scenario too. If however Mr. Piper takes the law into his own hands and goes all psychotic and steals our children, as the story goes, then yeah, government steps in there as well. There’s all sorts of appropriate purposes for government and regulation, but ONLY those stated in our Constitution. Keep in mind, I am only referring to the Federal government. States and local municipalities are free to make their own laws as long as they do not conflict the US Constitution.

Cool, I look forward to it. I’m from Chillicothe, Ohio, nice to meet you :slight_smile:

1 Like
#65

Nice to “meet” you too, Maggie! :slight_smile: Sounds like you must be an hour away from me. Now that the senator office expects me to go to federal court, I will share a copy of the letter to you. Went and got a few books on constitution law from library, Maybe will spend full time for a month on this.:frowning_face:

  1. Introduction to constitutional law 100 cases - Randy Barnett et al
  2. Represent yourself in court - Paul Bergman
  3. US Constitution for dummies - Dr Michael Arnheim

Good Mr Piper explanation! I think Candy man and Mr Piper can be good memory markers. Now whenever Free Market Capitalism discussion comes up, “Free Market Candy Man” should come to mind to everyone! And I can give at least 4 instance of conflict or improper application scenario. In one instance, I made immigration change their policy! Can you imagine? :slight_smile: So until liability can be set, the lawyers are not going to kill their cash cow.

I came here very long ago but originally from Tamil Nadu, India.

I mean, it was physical bullying (muscle, weapon etc) vs intellectual bullying (fine prints, rigging the game, bait, some other legal as well for which I will think and give example).

Agreed Mark! Less regulations would sway towards more justice. And constitution must be made to act as a “catch-all”, in practice.

In the examples you quote, I would not tie it to the regulation. Regulation just determined those violations. But it is the courts that gave the punishment. Punishment should commensurate with the crime. Judiciary should be held accountable. I would assume the courts forgot the “mercy” principle here in interpreting the law for application. I would say they should not be thrown in jail unless it was a willful violation after court’s warning.

2 Likes
#66

Well, I’m from Ohio, but I presently live in Clearwater, Florida.

So you’re from the south of India. I’ve always wanted to visit India, I haven’t made it there yet. One day perhaps. Glad you’re here.

Thanks for the other clarifications you made and good luck to you in your court appearances; please tell me you’ll have legal counsel with you.

2 Likes
#67

Thanks. I approached 3 attorneys an year or more ago, none was willing. (Democracy is dead right there!) So I’m not sure. I’m afraid, I will have to represent myself. Before I appear before court, I will have to make sure I have people court verdict in favor me. I think then it will be a slam dunk. This case would require a top attorneys or top firm representation as it involves family law, immigration law, constitutional law and I can even add employment law. Do you know of any? But even to go to the attorneys, I will need to do my homework otherwise they will easily compromise it. As it is not going to be in anyone of their interest that I get justice!

1 Like
#68

Guess what, truth is told already! I bumped into an reported admission from the president himself, and it seems like both democratic and republic parties have understood and probably have agreed in a bi-partisan manner, that immigration laws have forced feds to break up families! How come? Do not the officers of fed take oath to uphold the constitution? How then can they deprive families of their life, liberty and property violating the constitution? Shouldn’t they have used discretion, and if no discretion, shouldn’t they have escalated to a higher up level up to the congress and to the president? Keep or deport families, no in between! Now, shouldn’t the officers be impeached for constitutional violation?

Check out the link at 5:28 for a last year CNN screen shot bottom message in yesterday’s Fox News channel report.

This should pressure judges (or the deep state Goliath’s behind them!) to deliver justice!

Anyways, guys enjoy the holidays!

#69

I think the problem here is that you’re substituting “should” for “what is.”

A lot of things in this country “should” be done that aren’t. The Clintons “should” be in prison right now for a number of reasons. America SHOULD NOT have been at war during any time since WWII, because the constitution clearly states that congress must make a declaration of war before we fight one. There is no provision in the constitution for congress to delegate their power to the president, as they did with the war powers act. That law is unconstitutional, but it has been law for over 40 years.

The constitution demands the states are to make nothing but gold and silver money. Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 10 - Powers Prohibited of States
Paragraph 1 - No State shall …make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts…

There is no provision for the federal government to make paper or digital currency.

Our government is corrupt just like every other government on the planet. Governments naturally have a monopoly on the use of force against innocent people, so they naturally attract the type of people who want to exploit that power.

Just take a look at how many people become millionaires while working a job that pays around $200k a year. Does that sound legit to you?

Happy Thanksgiving all!

5 Likes
#70

Mark, thanks for acknowledging that this country is stained! The people who brag about democracy or rule of law are unable to correct their government, strange isn’t it? I’m with you on declaration of wars, gold/silver reserve etc. I think it is better they need corrected whatever be the after-effects of doing so.

Senator Clinton office is probably the root of all troubles I have to go through. And maybe that’s why the Clinton’s are being exposed now. Here is the scoop. In 2004, I had filed for EAD (Employment Authorization Document) extension some 60 days prior to expiry. When EAD expired, the consulting company would not let me continue in spite of my arguments that the law had not demanded an EAD to work, and it had only demanded an Employment Authorization, which in my case was, the expired Document plus the receipt notice of a pending EAD petition. Until a decision is made one should be allowed to work, which is the proper interpretation. But they had set bad policies! After I wrote to senator Clinton in 2004, the language of the law was changed in 2005/2006 to “Employment Authorization Document” (or ID) from “Employment Authorization”. (This can be easily verified from archives unless they removed the audit trail in which case it would be obstruction of justice!). Mischief! This arbitrary or sudden change without enough thought was a constitutional violation! Maybe the office (or the deep state) didn’t like my questioning their policies, they couldn’t openly state it, and maybe they started doing things in an underhanded way??

Later on I had 2 other complaints in immigration laws/policies - one I shared privately, one I shared to an immigration attorney. I don’t know if it was a coincidence, the 3 items and only those 3 were made as a president executive proposal just before Obama left office when senator Clinton was pursuing presidency ambitions. Those weren’t acted upon immediately but are corrected now.

So I would say if people were to pressure (or expose) government to correct all bad policies and show vigor to make judges and attorneys accountable, there is hope.

I agree on people becoming millionaire in dubious ways. Everyone has 24 x 7 but some have so much “value” to the society that they are so apart from the rest?? In some cases, to some extent yes, but in most cases it is doubtful. Is that real value or looted value (doing 3 card Monte!!)?

1 Like
#71

You’re most welcome there, Maggie! Seems like Ben and Mark have already, now it is your turn! :slight_smile:

Btw, just watched Atlas Shrugged part 1. Part 2 & 3 are to go. I know how the “bad” guys play. In the largest democracy in India, EVM’s (Electronic Voting Machines) were introduced lately. So you know how that goes.

Lord to Cain in Genesis 4:7 - “7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.” But there is protection under the shadow of the Almighty which is now in Christ!

2 Likes
#72

The movies don’t do the book justice, not even close. It was a good attempt, but fell short.

4 Likes
#73

They never do

2 Likes