Forum Replies Created

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Treaties #15939

    Yeah Sorry, I realized that when I hit send. There is no option to delete.

    I did post it in the correct section though, right after.


    in reply to: History Channel: The Men who built America #19398

    @ enron Yeah I did see that blog post. The commentators that I saw seemed like a weird fit, Alan Greenspan, Jim Cramer..???

    @ Porphyrogenitus I’m with you on the Ancient Aliens, maybe a show or two, but not a whole day or week or year devoted to it.

    The Universe was one of my favorites on the History Channel.

    in reply to: US Constitution #14743

    I agree, the definition of “regulate” applies to Foreign Nations and Indian Tribes but the “intent” behind those is different than the Among the several States part.

    In Nullification, Tom Woods quotes Madison explaining “Among the several states’ …grew out of the abuses of the power by importing states in taxing the non-importing, and was intended as a negative ad preventive provision against injustice among the States themselves, rather than as a power to be used for the positive purposes of the General Government” pg.27

    That intention falls in line with the following clauses, I think.

    In Art 1 Sec 9 “No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another; nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.”

    and in Art 1 Sec 10 “No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection Laws”

    My question was probably a little convoluted. It seemed that in this dissent they point to the definition but disregard the intent. Which they came to the right conclusion that the bill is not constitutional under the commerce clause but for the wrong reason. That bothered me.

    I agree, it would be easier if they just stated that “there should be a free trade zone among the States,” that would have solved a lot.

    I apologize, I don’t even know what I wanted answered. I withdraw my concern 😉

    in reply to: US Constitution #14741

    I was reading the Dissenting opinion of the PPACA and came across this definition of “Regulate”

    “In Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, 196 (1824), Chief Justice Marshall wrote that the power to regulate commerce is the power “to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed.”

    That understanding is consistent with the original meaning of “regulate” at the time of the Constitution’s ratification, when “to regulate” meant

    “[t]o adjust by rule, method or established mode,” 2 N.Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language (1828);

    “[t]o adjust by rule or method,” 2 S. Johnson,A Dictionary of the English Language (7th ed. 1785);

    “[t]o adjust, to direct according to rule,” 2 J. Ash, New and Complete Dictionary of the English Language (1775);

    “to put in order, set to rights, govern or keep in order,” T.Dyche & W. Pardon, A New General English Dictionary (16th ed. 1777)”

    I’ve read in “Nullification” and “Founding Father’s Guide” that the intent behind “To regulate Commerce…among the several States…” was to establish a free trade zone between the States. Essentially giving the Federal Government the power to keep the States from putting tariffs on each other.

    Is this an example of using the definition of Regulate (to make regular, which they didn’t use) from the time of the founding but disregarded the intent behind it from the founding?

    in reply to: Broken Window Less Fallacious? #15666

    The Broken Window is fallacious.

    The story of your grandfather is a testament to the resiliency of the free market. It’s a natural human tendency to solve problems by innovation to improve their situation. If he lived in an environment where resources weren’t being destroyed he could have accomplished much more and progressed faster.

    When resources are consumed by government then we are like salmon swimming up stream. We are getting up there but at a slower pace than if the stream wasn’t flowing at all.

    It’s true that tough situations do help build character but artificially creating those situations, by destroying resources, is not the most productive way to do so. It’s best not to add insult to injury.

    in reply to: The Puritans and the Indians #14613

    Good Lecture.

    Dr. Woods mentioned that the Puritans were not racists towards the Indians because they thought of them as ‘tanned’ whites. Does this part of the Puritan culture filter through the American culture over time to influence abolitionists? The fact that color is irrelevant should logically apply to Africans.

    in reply to: Lecture 2: Virginia and the Cavaliers #14599

    Very good lecture. I wanted to understand this correctly, are you saying that the “southern drawl” is proper English coming from the culture in southern England?

    I never thought of reading Shakespeare with my southern accent. That’s awesome.

    Culture, I think is very neglected in history class (or maybe I didn’t pay close enough attention because of the boring fact memorization). These cultural understandings put everything in a better perspective because you can see the how and why of human action that led to the events that happened.

    in reply to: Introductions #14630

    My name is Daniel Bledsoe and I graduated from UNT with a BA in Radio/TV/Film in 2005. I went to college with the misunderstanding that I would come out on the other side with knowledge that would make my life prosperous. Well, my naivety got the better of me b/c I came out with absolutely no understanding on how the world works. Don’t get me wrong, my time at college gave me experiences and friends that I never would of had but with respect for my parents who are responsible enough to save and send me, I think that money could have been way better spent to reach my ends.

    I considered it a hobby but History has always been a love of mine and if I would have stayed a little longer for one more class I could have minored in it (whoopee). After the Ron Paul ’08 run and the economic downturn I was determined to understand how the economy works. With the direction of the Campaign for Liberty website’s education page, after I watched the videos on Economics in One Lesson everything just clicked, it’s so simple. I literally never read, I mean never, and I found The History of Banking in the U.S. by Rothbard online and read it online till about halfway through the book over a weekend, until I bought it.

    Some of the Austrian concepts were tough to wrap your head around at first but through History, much like Aesop’s Fables, I was able to get it with real world examples. Through my own efforts and a little point in the right direction I have been able to makes sense of the world faster and more efficiently than all of my years in public school.

    “History should teach us to recognize causes and to understand driving forces; and when we understand everything, we will forgive everything.” ~ Mises

    I don’t mean to tell my whole life story or anything but I really expect to love this site and I would like to thank anyone who sacrificed personal gain in pursuit of the truth, so that I can learn it today.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)