On what grounds are you saying that there is no Brexit?
On the grounds that the Brits have lost their ballz and will go crawling back to their EU Weenie Masters and beg to be let in when the vote fails.
You seem like you're good at being on your stomach.
By lost their balls do you mean realised the consequences?
No - I mean realizing the consequence and cowering like scared little children instead of saying fuck you EU - we'll be fine on our own without you.
Have some confidence in the resilience of the British people for crying out loud. Unless you believe the British people are incapable of succeeding on their own....which in that case...you are a bunch of wankers.
Article 50 has been evoked. The government has agreed a plan to leave with the EU and next week Parliament will vote on whether to accept it. If it fails to pass the Government has 3 days to tell us what plan B is.
On what grounds are you saying that there is no Brexit?
The Transition Plan is written with so many provisions and catches that it will drag out for decades, with the intent to bring another vote on the subject at a later date when they can assure the results. It's a BREXIT in name only.
Read that piece I linked; Rockwell addresses it pretty well.
What we believe in are private property rights. No one has “freedom of speech” on my property, since I set the rules, and in the last resort I can expel someone. He can say whatever he likes on his own property, and on the property of anyone who cares to listen to him, but not on mine.
The same principle holds for freedom of movement. Libertarians do not believe in any such principle in the abstract. I do not have the right to wander into your house, or into your gated community, or into Disneyworld, or onto your private beach, or onto Jay-Z’s private island. As with “freedom of speech,” private property is the relevant factor here. I can move onto any property I myself own or whose owner wishes to have me. I cannot simply go wherever I like.
. . .
By admitting someone onto its territory, the state also permits this person to proceed on public roads and lands to every domestic resident’s doorsteps, to make use of all public facilities and services (such as hospitals and schools), and to access every commercial establishment, employment, and residential housing, protected by a multitude of nondiscrimination laws.
. . .
Free immigration would appear to be in a different category from other policy decisions, in that its consequences permanently and radically alter the very composition of the democratic political body that makes those decisions. In fact, the liberal order, where and to the degree that it exists, is the product of a highly complex cultural development. One wonders, for instance, what would become of the liberal society of Switzerland under a regime of “open borders.”
Switzerland is in fact an interesting example. Before the European Union got involved, the immigration policy of Switzerland approached the kind of system we are describing here. In Switzerland, localities decided on immigration, and immigrants or their employers had to pay to admit a prospective migrant. In this way, residents could better ensure that their communities would be populated by people who would add value and who would not stick them with the bill for a laundry list of “benefits.”
Obviously, in a pure open borders system, the Western welfare states would simply be overrun by foreigners seeking tax dollars.
. . .
Crime isn’t the only reason people may legitimately wish to resist mass immigration. If four million Americans showed up in Singapore, that country’s culture and society would be changed forever. And no, it is not true that libertarianism would in that case require the people of Singapore to shrug their shoulders and say it was nice having our society while it lasted but all good things must come to an end. No one in Singapore would want that outcome, and in a free society, they would actively prevent it.
In other words, it’s bad enough we have to be looted, spied on, and kicked around by the state. Should we also have to pay for the privilege of cultural destructionism, an outcome the vast majority of the state’s taxpaying subjects do not want and would actively prevent if they lived in a free society and were allowed to do so?
The very cultures that the incoming migrants are said to enrich us with could not have developed had they been constantly bombarded with waves of immigration by peoples of radically different cultures. So the multicultural argument doesn’t even make sense.
Also Rothbard:
Now for solutions:
1. Eliminate all governmental incentives for freeloaders. Remove all welfare incentives to come into our country for gibs. No government databases, no ID cards; just ZERO GIBS. Legal and illegal immigrants alike will receive no state benefit of any kind that is excludable. This includes schooling, medical care, food stamps, &c. To the extent that we have Gibs programs, they will be for citizens only. Self-deportation FTW.
2. Facilitate orderly immigration for people who want to work and/or attend our universities and can pay their way.
3. End all of our foreign wars and misadventures. The threat of domestic terrorism would be about as serious as the threat of UFO attacks.
4. End the drug war in its entirety.
That's a good start. If we do all that, how big of a deal will the fight over the wall be?
1. Eliminate all governmental incentives for freeloaders. Remove all welfare incentives to come into our country for gibs. No government databases, no ID cards; just ZERO GIBS. Legal and illegal immigrants alike will receive no state benefit of any kind that is excludable. This includes schooling, medical care, food stamps, &c. To the extent that we have Gibs programs, they will be for citizens only. Self-deportation FTW.
2. Facilitate orderly immigration for people who want to work and/or attend our universities and can pay their way.
3. End all of our foreign wars and misadventures. The threat of domestic terrorism would be about as serious as the threat of UFO attacks.
4. End the drug war in its entirety.
That's a good start. If we do all that, how big of a deal will the fight over the wall be?
Non sequitur based on no DNC votes and no cheap labor - keep drinking your fucking cheap ass Tennessee Whiskey. :go team drunk:
1. Eliminate all governmental incentives for freeloaders. Remove all welfare incentives to come into our country for gibs. No government databases, no ID cards; just ZERO GIBS. Legal and illegal immigrants alike will receive no state benefit of any kind that is excludable. This includes schooling, medical care, food stamps, &c. To the extent that we have Gibs programs, they will be for citizens only. Self-deportation FTW.
2. Facilitate orderly immigration for people who want to work and/or attend our universities and can pay their way.
3. End all of our foreign wars and misadventures. The threat of domestic terrorism would be about as serious as the threat of UFO attacks.
4. End the drug war in its entirety.
That's a good start. If we do all that, how big of a deal will the fight over the wall be?
Non sequitur based on no DNC votes and no cheap labor - keep drinking your fucking cheap ass Tennessee Whiskey. :go team drunk:
You're being about as imaginative or brave as a dried out dog turd.
I'm fine with your dumbass plan though, so long as it keeps the federal government shut down. How long can you deliver?
1. Eliminate all governmental incentives for freeloaders. Remove all welfare incentives to come into our country for gibs. No government databases, no ID cards; just ZERO GIBS. Legal and illegal immigrants alike will receive no state benefit of any kind that is excludable. This includes schooling, medical care, food stamps, &c. To the extent that we have Gibs programs, they will be for citizens only. Self-deportation FTW.
2. Facilitate orderly immigration for people who want to work and/or attend our universities and can pay their way.
3. End all of our foreign wars and misadventures. The threat of domestic terrorism would be about as serious as the threat of UFO attacks.
4. End the drug war in its entirety.
That's a good start. If we do all that, how big of a deal will the fight over the wall be?
Non sequitur based on no DNC votes and no cheap labor - keep drinking your fucking cheap ass Tennessee Whiskey. :go team drunk:
You're being about as imaginative or brave as a dried out dog turd.
I'm fine with your dumbass plan though, so long as it keeps the federal government shut down. How long can you deliver?
On the grounds that the Brits have lost their ballz and will go crawling back to their EU Weenie Masters and beg to be let in when the vote fails.
You seem like you're good at being on your stomach.
By lost their balls do you mean realised the consequences?
No - I mean realizing the consequence and cowering like scared little children instead of saying fuck you EU - we'll be fine on our own without you.
Have some confidence in the resilience of the British people for crying out loud. Unless you believe the British people are incapable of succeeding on their own....which in that case...you are a bunch of wankers.
Fucking torries....
On our own under WTO rules without a single trade deal with any country on the planet. How does any country "succeed" under those conditions.
On our own with free trade deals with our largest trading partner is how we succeed and any delays in exiting lie at the feet of those fighting that position.
The British people are resilient enough but being made to compete with our hands tied behind our backs and our legs in shackles is not a fair fight.
I don't think any of the "out means out" crowd have any idea of what a no deal Brexit means.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
