This is not double-talk, you said in your comment, "Show me where the Libertarian party platform and some actual party candidates who reject numerically unlimited immigration. Till then Adios." I was responding to that statement.
To speak in plainer English, if you go through the different libertarian candidates and notice which ones are Mises Caucus members, they are not for "numerically unlimited immigration."
No one ever stated you were for "unlimited immigration, what, if anything, in my comment suggested you did?
For those keeping track at home I have now been called:
Ignorant
Uneducated
Inexperienced
Leftist
Unintelligible
A Double-Speaker
Loser
Spoiler
Lazy
If I collect a full twenty ad hominem attacks I get a free toaster.
I'm paraphrasing YOU, not me. If the Mises camp or Hoppe were relevant factors, Weld would never have been the "L" nominee. Moreover, you're evading your support for effectively unlimited immigration and what that means to US sovereignty, redistribution etc. The issues you can't handle. All you have is red herrings, diversions, strawmen, games. No time for it. Go play on a toll road.
So what is your definition of "effectively unlimited immigration"and how do you see its effect on US sovereignty? The below position by Dave Smith sounds reasonable and consistent with the values.
I am not for "effectively unlimited immigration" and the libertarian policy regarding it shouldn't be for it either...as you should not be able to come where you aren't invited. The idea that people should wander into your house, take what they want, is a ridiculous notion and definitely is not considered "peaceful" in the way they arrived.
If I was polite, invited myself into your house, and then raised your refrigerator and stole all your possessions, that wouldn't be very peaceful.
Where did you go to doubletalk school? Ask for your money back.
"I'm not for unlimited immigration. I'm just for letting everyone in who is here peacefully."
This is not double-talk, you said in your comment, "Show me where the Libertarian party platform and some actual party candidates who reject numerically unlimited immigration. Till then Adios." I was responding to that statement.
To speak in plainer English, if you go through the different libertarian candidates and notice which ones are Mises Caucus members, they are not for "numerically unlimited immigration."
No one ever stated you were for "unlimited immigration, what, if anything, in my comment suggested you did?
For those keeping track at home I have now been called:
Ignorant
Uneducated
Inexperienced
Leftist
Unintelligible
A Double-Speaker
Loser
Spoiler
Lazy
If I collect a full twenty ad hominem attacks I get a free toaster.
I'm paraphrasing YOU, not me. If the Mises camp or Hoppe were relevant factors, Weld would never have been the "L" nominee. Moreover, you're evading your support for effectively unlimited immigration and what that means to US sovereignty, redistribution etc. The issues you can't handle. All you have is red herrings, diversions, strawmen, games. No time for it. Go play on a toll road.
How many ad hominem attacks are we up to now? I hear with fifty, you can get a rain slicker.
1. Ignorant
2. Uneducated
3.Leftist
4. Inexperienced
5.Unintelligible
6. Extreme Arguments.
7. Double Speaker
8. Lazy
9. Loser
10. Spoiler
11. Incompetent
12. Diversive
13. Game-Player
14. Speed Bump
Mises principles at least are relevant factors for because they speak to the factors that libertarian ideas were predicated upon.
Speaking of Weld, in my effort to educate myself, I ran across this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Yj851NgjUA
So what is your definition of "effectively unlimited immigration"and how do you see its effect on US sovereignty? The below position by Dave Smith sounds reasonable and consistent with the values.
I am not for "effectively unlimited immigration" and the libertarian policy regarding it shouldn't be for it either...as you should not be able to come where you aren't invited. The idea that people should wander into your house, take what they want, is a ridiculous notion and definitely is not considered "peaceful" in the way they arrived.
If I was polite, invited myself into your house, and then raised your refrigerator and stole all your possessions, that wouldn't be very peaceful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GWM8Ne20WY
But why listen to me or these examples, you believe my only use is as a speed bump.