Besides Bitcoin, what do you think can help to limit the power or size of gov't? \ stacker news ~libertarian

Besides Bitcoin, what do you think can help to limit the power or size of gov't?

4546 sats \ 42 comments \ @kytt 17 Feb libertarian

I'm mostly referencing things that individuals can do to help accomplish this. The more different ways we attack them, the faster change could potentially be made.

This can include attacking other larger systems that governments are likely or proven to be in bed with.

view all related items

921 sats \ 6 replies \ @siggy47 17 Feb

Vote with your feet. Go where you're treated best.

215 sats \ 0 replies \ @KLT 17 Feb

THIS!

42 sats \ 4 replies \ @kytt OP 17 Feb

Sure, but that ultimately doesn't help to solve the issue if you end up funding another government.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 18 Feb

It does help actually, because governments compete for tax cattle. People moving in response to authoritarian policies makes it harder to implement them.

Political migration and the high degree of fragmentation is one of the leading hypotheses about why Europe became so prosperous. Rulers simply couldn't exert power to the same extent as those in other parts of the world.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @anon 17 Feb

So its preferable to stay in a corrupt and inept local/state government and continue to pay them taxes and just blindly hope that your actions somehow eventually make them get their act together? This is supposed to be preferable to leaving and paying taxes to a government that is well run and treats you well? I'm not trying to criticize. I just genuinely cannot wrap my mind around your argument. Could you clarify?

11 sats \ 0 replies \ @kytt OP 17 Feb

My post is asking for ways of limiting governments, not avoiding those that mistreat you.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 17 Feb

Well, sly subversion goes without saying, no?

524 sats \ 1 reply \ @kytt OP 17 Feb

Fixing your health with diet, exercise, etc would obviously remove a lot of pharmaceutical company involvement

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 18 Feb

God bless Moderna

544 sats \ 3 replies \ @kytt OP 17 Feb

A big one that I like is that I'm seeing a lot of groups filing lawsuits as Pro Se (without a lawyer). This gives them more power as they don't need to worry about trying not to piss off a judge for future favorable rulings. Even if you don't win, this costs them a lot of money and time to litigate your suit.

Or you may win and get cut a check.

There are also MANY opportunities to file bar grievances and judicial complaints against lawyers and judges when they don't do their jobs correctly (which as we know is most of the time). This hurts their insurance rates and promotional potential. Many of these groups have caused lawyers to retire and firms to shutdown and/or rebrand because their insurance premiums were raised too high or their insurance carrier dropped them altogether. This can be done simply as a court watcher.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 18 Feb

Umbrella insurance

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Signal312 17 Feb

This is interesting. Do you have any more info on it?

34 sats \ 0 replies \ @kytt OP 18 Feb

Highly recommended but not 100% required Jurisdictionary course: --> www.howtowinincourt.com?refercode=TT0054

PERTINENT TRLEGRAM GROUPS:

Alphonse Faggiolo —> https://t.me/AlphonseFaggiolo —> https://t.me/AlphonseFaggioloPinnedMessages

BigSib Law —> https://t.me/BigSibChat

The Law Society —> https://t.me/thelawsociety —> https://t.me/mask_law_society

Jurisdictionary --> https://t.me/Jurisdictionary

Case Law Resources --> https://t.me/c/1942774517/1

Speeding Ticket (example) —> https://t.me/b_speeding_texas_dps

Keep in mind: EXPECT to lose in lower courts. You will almost always appeal if you file suits.

478 sats \ 5 replies \ @go 17 Feb

Unpopular opinion:

It's a little counterintuitive, but the stronger you grow your local gov - your county officials - the stronger you can protect yourselves and oppose the nation state. Local law enforcement is your shield. Local legislators are your advocates. Spend time and money finding good ones and getting them elected. Put everything you can behind someone who'll stick it to the man.

14 sats \ 0 replies \ @tomlaies 17 Feb

Law enforcement is inefficient governmental central planning too. Capitalism and private companies can solve all of it more efficient and better.

I recognize this isn't implementable over night. But people in the western world spend a third of their paychecks on government central planning. A third! Do you know how fuckin much that is? This is insanity. And even on a site with Bitcoiners people are defending it. Insanity.

15 sats \ 2 replies \ @KeynesianClowns 17 Feb

To an extent, I agree. However, many local jurisdictions are hopelessly corrupt in themselves and the only way to fight them is "vote with your feet".

There is also only so far that localization can go post-industrialization. How can a local area possibly be autonomous when they are dependent on utilities for example? It's difficult to unwind.

23 sats \ 1 reply \ @anon 17 Feb

I agree, local government is at best only marginally better than federal government, and in many cases they are far worse. For every Texas or Wyoming with a fairly well run government (though all are still at best only fair imho) that are many Flint Michigans that charge exorbitant taxes and fees while literally poisoning their citizens. I agree voting with your feet to support well run local and state governments is the best choice, though it is much easier said than done unless you're self employed or independently wealthy. However, even moving 1 suburb or county further out can be a big factor if enough people do it, and this is happening in SF and forcing SF to at least kinda try to be less crazy. More people are leaving SF for the suburbs than moving to Texas. Staying and protesting or complaining about your local government usually does little to nothing. Actions speak louder than words. The only reason SF or NY are even kinda sorta somewhat coming back from the edge is the fear of even more people leaving. It emboldened moderates to speak out and demand change, and the government ultimately does at least somewhat respond to financial incentives.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @KeynesianClowns 21 Feb

Right on the money. I'll point out though that while your point about it being difficult to pick up and move for most people is true, adopting a defeatist mindset about never being able to do it just sticks you in an open air prison. Not saying that's what you're doing, but there are too many things you can do with very little money upfront not to at least try to developp some degree of independent income, which I see as an increasing necessity as time goes on.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 18 Feb

Federalism which is foreign to everyone puts USA

468 sats \ 0 replies \ @kytt OP 17 Feb

Since they are in bed with the banks, if you must use USD at all, I would argue that you should:

keep as much of your cash out of the bank as possible to decrease their reserves
pay for things with cash to reduce the fees they receive from credit/debit card payments

95 sats \ 3 replies \ @tomlaies 17 Feb

Fight the narrative.

Many young people want to live way beyond their means. And then they want their stuff for free. And then they want the government to bail them out.

Teach them humbleness instead. And that senseless consumerism doesn't make happy. That fiat is a vicious cycle.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 18 Feb

Student loan forgiveness being the most egregious

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @tomlaies 18 Feb

Exactly. I don't care about the money personally - but I care that we're teaching the young generation that financial decisions don't have consequences. That's egregious like you said. But it's also the wrong lesson to learn for the future!

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 19 Feb

As if youth today are not entitled enough

50 sats \ 1 reply \ @stackernews_9inky 18 Feb

Family, friends, and close communities.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @kytt OP 18 Feb

My dream is to have a family/close friend compound

64 sats \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 17 Feb

An independent thinking populous. I was just having this discussion with a friend of mine regarding Trudeau and how Trudeau for 3 elections now has been able to sway people but just saying things that are in fashion like "diversity is our strength" meanwhile being a hypocrite and complete failure. Yet people keep voting against their interests for him. Why?

Probably because the media is corrupted and they don't think for themselves.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 18 Feb

After 10 years people can’t figure out Trudeau???

People don’t think for themselves because of peer pressure or fear of being ostracized.

39 sats \ 2 replies \ @KeynesianClowns 17 Feb

Lack of participation (voting and other political actions) to a degree that the process loses legitimacy in the eyes of the much of the public.

26 sats \ 1 reply \ @Bell_curve 18 Feb

I encourage people not to vote

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @KeynesianClowns 21 Feb

As you should. It's a stupid circus that gets louder every cycle.

29 sats \ 1 reply \ @justBrian 17 Feb

black markets..or rather illegal free trade

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 18 Feb

grey markets, too

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @cascdr 21 Feb

What if red states started enforcing civil/criminal penalties for constitutional violations? That would put the brakes on some pretty tyrannical overreaches real quick if the Nancy Pelosi's of the world know it could land them in hot water...

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kytt OP 21 Feb

You can start doing that yourself. Look through my older posts.

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 18 Feb

To me the biggest one (and surprisingly no one said it yet) is to act like a free person.

The state lacks the power to actually enforce it's edicts. What it relies on is the compliance of the population.

Live the way you want to, until they make you stop, instead of seeking permission for everything before doing it.

29 sats \ 3 replies \ @kytt OP 18 Feb

That is easier said than done when an uneducated lacky who just wants a paycheck and enjoys showing his perceived authority by throwing people in jail unconstitutionally. Unless you know how to fight back against that, you can't just "act like a free person".

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 18 Feb

You're buying into the myth that they have nearly omniscient oversight. The vast majority of serious criminals never get caught and neither do peaceful people who casually disregard arbitrary rules.

People do need to be practical about it. There are certain things you will get busted for with high likelihood and I'm not saying to ignore that.

29 sats \ 1 reply \ @kytt OP 18 Feb

Are you sure I'm buying into the myth? Living the way you want to "until they make you stop" can mean being thrown in jail or fined heavily, even if it's unconstitutional or against common law, but again, if you don't know how to fight back against that, you've screwed yourself.

Assuming they don't have the power to enforce their edicts is recipe for disaster. It's not about not asking for permission. It's about protecting yourself from negligence and corruption and those 90-95% of police, lawyers, etc. who don't know what the actual law says.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 18 Feb

Are you sure I'm buying into the myth?

Not entirely, but it seems like you are. I also wasn't as clear as I could have been in the original comment. I do not think people should just cavalierly risk being imprisoned or fined heavily.

Rather, there are a ton of things people comply with when there's basically no reason to or go out of their way to find out if they're allowed to do it. Those are the areas I'm talking about.

I feel like this is highly complementary with your point about challenging these "laws" in the courts. The first step is not complying.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @koqoo 17 Feb

Self-sovereignty

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @justanumber 17 Feb

deleted by author