"The FBI has the right to obtain a court order to access any records we have of your transactions." Those words mark notices posted by conscientious Santa Monica, California librarians. Similar notices have been posted in several other libraries across the southland.(1) Those signs may be the only avenue of free expression left to our cities' curators when the inappropriately named USA PATRIOT Act rears its ugly head into the picture. Section 215 of the Patriot Act paves the way for law enforcement to peer into our reading habits and internet activity, not only at our nation's libraries but in bookstores as well. Furthermore, the act criminalizes anyone at any of those institutions who reveals that a warrant has been served on their patrons.(2)

South Pasadena city librarian, Terri Maguire, sums up the concerns of many biblio-caretakers and retailers across the country: "Privacy and access to information are important to libraries. Do we have an obligation to inform our patrons? We decided that yes, we did."(3) Not so long ago, when our civil rights existed on paper, law enforcement officials were required to show probable cause to a judge, and recieve a court order before gaining legal access to our reading lists and internet activity logs. Now, these court orders are issued in secret federal courts who readily hand out permissions for such privacy violations at the hands of agencies like the FBI with minimal restraint.(4) In response, 32 organizations and businesses across the country including the American Library Association (ALA), the California Library Association, the Association of Ameriacan Publishers, Barne's and Noble, Border's Books, and others have rallied to publicly condemn provision 215 of the Patriot Act.(5) The ALA has reaffirmed our privacy rights and directed library staff to be very protective of any sensitive information regarding its patrons: "Privacy is essential to the exercise of free speech, free thought and free association."(6)

On May 20, 2003, the House Judiciary Committee investigating the ramifications of the Patriot Act compelled the Department of Justice to admit that the FBI has visited 50 libraries within a year of Sept 11, 2001. While Emily Sheketoff, director of the ALA's Washington office was releaved by this revelation as official proof that the feds are actively engaged in our libraries, she revealed that "[they] haven't been fully forthcoming."(7) An anonymous survey conducted by the Library Research Center provides a clearer picture than the DOJ's clearly glossed over figures. The survey was sent to 1, 505 of the nation's 5094 U.S. public libraries that serve a population of greater than 5000. Out of only 906 respondents, the following statistics were revealed: One year after 9-11, federal and local law officials asked 545 libraries for their records and 178 libraries recieved visits from the FBI. Even these numbers paint an optomistic picture of reality since 130 libraries didnt fully answer the anonymous survey questions. The warning statement detailing the provisions of the Patriot Act as it relates to respondents further inhibited participation and truthful disclosures in the survey. Again, it is illegal for the librarians to answer these questions under section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act!(8)

Those who criticize opposition to the Patriot Act often cite the events of 9-11 as the reason why we need to relax restrictions on law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Yet revelations by the secret FISA (Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act) court in an opinion issued on May 2002 indicate that these agencies apparent contempt for our civil liberties didnt aid them in preventing the September 11 atrocities. The FISA court made public that in September of 2000, "the government came forward to confess errors in 75 FISA applications related to major terrorist attacks directed against the United States-the errors related to misstatements and ommissions of material facts." In March 2001, "the government reported similar misstatements in another series of FISA applications in which there was supposed to be a 'wall' between seperate intelligence and criminal squads in FBI field offices to screen FISA intercepts, when in fact all of the FBI agents were on the same squad and all of the screening was done by the one supervisor overseeing both investigations."(9) The location and nature of these operations were not cited.

In 1976, the Select Committee to Study Government Operations with Respect to Intelligence Operations, headed by Sen Frank Church, condemned the method's of the FBI's Counter-Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO). The committe described their methods as, "indesputably degrading to a free society." COINTELPRO was described as a "sophisticated vigilante operation aimed squarely at preventing the exercise of First Amendment rights of speech and association." That FBI program was a far reaching illegal effort to spy upon and ruin activists, most of whom were innocent law abiding citizens. Despite Sen Church's promise that "never again will an agency of the government be permitted to conduct a secret war against those citizens it considers a threat to the established order." The methods of COINTELPRO have continued up until today. Indeed, they enjoy renewed vigor under the Patriot Act.(10)

In the post-9/11 world, the rat is king. That is, the FBI and local cops can capitalize on informant tips, whom also largely remain annonymous to destroy people's lives. The New York Times reported that false tips on terrorism have already ruined the lives of many people. Those peaceful citizens found themselves jailed, uprooted, unemployed and one even lost custody of his children and was forced to leave the country. All of the above on FALSE tips! Four individuals found their names listed in a national crime registry as "accused of terrorism," even though they were never charged. Subsequently the four men were unable to board an airplane, rent a home, or find any work. These too, are the victims of false tips.(11)

These events and others like them have prompted 3 state governments and more than a hundred counties and municipalities across the country to pass resolutions condemning the patriot act. The people of Alcata, California elected a city council, some of whom believe that the federal government has gone stark raving mad. They passed a law making it illegal for government employees to cooperate with the feds when they invoke the Patriot Act.(12) Resistance to these repressive measures is thankfully growing and, hopefully, the day will come again soon when our civil rights exist (at least on paper).

Footnotes:
(1)Pelisek, Christine, Check THIS Out, Libraries Quietly Sound Alarm Against Patriot Act; LA Weekly, July, 4-10, 2003, p3
(2)Estabrook, Leigh S.; Lakner, Edward; Lou, Lidan; Michel, Anitz; Public Libraries And Civil Liberties: A Profession Divided, The Library Research Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
(3)Check THIS Out
(4)Trudeau, Dan, Privacy Bill to Prevent FBI Info Probes, The Michigan Daily, March 4, 2003
(5)Check THIS Out
(6)Flanders, Laura, Librarians Under Siege, The Nation, July, 25, 2002
(7)Oder, Norman, FBI Has Visited About 50 Libraries, Library Journal, June 15, 2003
(8)Library Research Center(Public Libraries and Civil Liberties)
(9)Shenon, Philip, Secret Court Says FBI Aides Misled Judges in 75 Cases; New York Times, August, 23, 2002
(10)Solomon, Alisa Things We Lost in the Fire, The Village Voice, September 11-17, 2002
(11)Moss, Michael, False Terrorism Tips to FBI Uproot the Lives of Suspects, New York Times, June 19, 2003
(12)Check THIS Out

Hey! Another reason to support your local library by sitting in on city counsel meetings or otherwise pressuring the same to increase funding, if by bond measures failing
other methods. Furthermore, it would be good to take the offensive and push for assurances that the 4th amendment is stringently upheld. Are we going to let ourselves be intimidated into reading only what is on
the supermarket check out rack? Shameful. Before television, when the great depression hit, libraries were held sacrosanct.
John Judge said that Gobbles would have cut off his saluting arm for TV.... hmm they DID do the pioneer work on it. Good thing we
finished what they began, eh? NTSC or PAL it's all the same.
Garbage and shuckterism wraped in a fantasy where everyone is
beautiful, happy, well fed and living in a clean safe new home.
With new toys.
[cut for commercial break- yeast infection ladies?-shake your thing at my kids mr. leather Pepsi-this car will make you a babe-.....

"in a libertarian society, libraries would be privately funded (whether by customers, foundations, or companies)."

from "Libertarian Solutions: Before we can fight censorship, we first must properly define it"

by Bill Winter and Jonathan Trager
LP NEWS EDITOR and LP NEWS STAFF WRITER

------------------------------------------

Did you get that? Libertarians want to dismantle our Public Libraries and sell them off to corporations!

LIbraries are indeed valuable and necessary parts of a democratic society; libertarian air-heads obviously miss the point when they call for privatizing them - we already have privatized libraries. They are called book stores, and if you don't have 35-50 dollars to shell out for a hardback book you don't get the book. That is called reading for the affluent only.
At the same time, the article was a little too kind to library administrators, including those who publicly protest against the Patriot Act. The purpose of these protests, lodged by careerists who got their present jobs in the first place by unthinkingly obeying orders from "superiors," is to avoid taking heat from civil libertarians or their own staff and patrons. As a poster pointed out on this site two or three months ago, the Long Beach Public Library, which has protested the Patriot Act, also has a standing policy of turning over the names of "suspicious" (read Arab or Middle Eastern) library users who ask questions about the architecture of local buildings over to the Long Beach Police Department. As the poster pointed out, this is not only illegal under the California Constitution and various state privacy laws, it could also lead to innocent people losing their jobs or being evicted from their homes after police question their employers or landlords. Bureaucrats are bureaucrats - don't trust any of them.

No. Sell them off to Corporations? I don't think so. Privately funded means Charitable Donations, it means a Non-Profit Status funded by VOLUNTARY contributions as opposed to ENFORCED contributions.

The first Library I ever used was a Private Library established by the Hearst Foundation. It worked just fine. They even let a precocius 8 year old check out books from the Adult Reserves.

There is nothing wrong with Private Libraries.

Look at how many different Web Sites are available as a free service made possible by Private Voluntary good will towards others.

Gutenberg.Org has over 6,000 FREE Books available for download.

Private does not mean a bad thing. It means Non-Government. It means no nosy Bureaucrats poking their snout in where it is neither needed nor wanted.

The main beneficiary of Public (meaning Government) run libraries is above Market Salaries for employees, feather bedding and all the other traditional abuses of the Tax Payer - meaning YOU.

MARK TWAIN'S LETTER
Fairhaven, Feb. 22, 1894

To the Officers of the Millicent Library:

I am glad to have seen it. It is the ideal library, I think. Books are the liberated spirits of men, and should be bestowed in a heaven of light and grace and harmonious color and sumptuous comfort, like this, instead of in the customary kind of public library, with its depressing austerities and severities of form and furniture and decoration. A PUBLIC LIBRARY IS THE MOST ENDURING OF MEMORIALS, the trustiest monument for the preservation of events or a name or an affection; for it, and it only, is respected by wars and revolutions, and survives them. Creed and opinion change with time, and their symbols perish; but Literature and its temples are sacred to all creeds, and inviolate. All other things which I have seen today must pass away and be forgotten; but there will still be a Millicent Library when by the mutations of language the books that are in it now will speak in a lost tongue to your posterity.

Truly yours,

Mark Twain

...synonymus with Government Library in Twains Time. Many "Public" Libraries were founded with Private Donations and funded by same.

There is no way to tell whether Twain meant Public Library i.e., one that was open to the Public or Government Library.

I would tend to suspect that to him "Public Library" meant one open to the "Public" regardless of it's source of funding.

I am always puzzled by this fetish some people seem to have that for something to be "Public" it must be Government Funded. Good People with "Public" Spirit are perfectly capable of founding, and funding, such with Voluntary Donations as opposed to those Enforced Exactions known as taxes. It is certainly something I would donate to. And no one would have to threaten the implied use of force to get me to do it.

Most of the Great Concert Halls in this Country were established by Private Grants and continue to be supported by a combination of Private Donations and Ticket Prices. This is why it costs to go to most Symphonies. You are paying to support that which gives you pleasure. Anyone notice any touring Rock Groups doing their Concerts for Free? (Not counting the occaisional CHARITY BENEFIT.)

This doesn't work in areas being squeezed by local economics.
Knowledge is a common heritage regardless of environmental fate.
This is an investment. It is naive to believe that communities strained by numerous possible financial troubles would maintain equal resources
as another library in an affluent neighborhood. It seems classist
and indifferent. Sorry, you lose.

The inequities whereof you speak i.e., the differences between affluent neighborhoods and poor neighborhoods exists regardless of whether you talk Private funding or Forced funding. If you speak of an economy that is doing poorly then you may litterally be taking food off someone's table. The Tax Base of a small Farming Community is obviously going to be much less than that of a Large City. When you talk about enforced equality you are talking about using government as Agent to take from one person and give those takings to another for their benefit. Something they did not earn with their own efforts. If done by an individual we call it Robbery and lock them up.

I keep going back to the Library I experienced as a child. However, I like it because it is a good contrary model. It was established with private money in a poor mining community. Upkeep was subsequently picked up by a levy on Property Owners so it did have an element of taxation used to maintain it once it had been established. The Concert Hall where I currently live is a similar arrangement. Basic funding for Construction and Expansion all came from Private Grants from Wealthy members of the Community. Upkeep is covered by ticket sales and a small subsidy from the City. With a larger endowment they could be totally self-financing.

If you go back to the turn of the last Century you will find that there were many Charitable works done and many public spirited projects in poor neighborhoods supported voluntarily by the affluent. Not all of the "Robber Barons" were Robbers, and many gave back to the Communities in which they lived. It is only the ones who were crooks that keep getting notoriety when we should also remember those who gave back freely and of their own accord from their bounty. Andrew Carnegie at the end of his life devoted much of his forturne to public good and voluntarily restricted his household budget to a lifestyle much less extravagant than he could have afforded.

In part we get down to a basic view of human nature. Regardless of whether it is Libraries, Schools, etc.,... the question is do you believe the basic nature of Man is good or Bad? Since I believe that the fundamental character of humankind is Good I believe that many of these things that we consider desirable can be accomplished without coercion. Anytime you bring Government into the picture you are talking force. That is what Government is: Sanctioned Force.

I am not necessarily opposed to Libraries funded from the Public Purse. However, at what point do you decide what is sufficient or what is reasonable? What can ordinary people afford to pay and still maintain their own priorities for how the earnings of their labors are spent? Are there workable alternatives? It is easy for someone of affluent means to argue that a few dollars more is not a big deal. Where it matters is when you take that money from someone who needs it for necessities as opposed to paying for your, or my, entertainment. And as the late Senator Everett Dirkson once commented: "A Million here, a Million there, and pretty soon it adds up to some Real Money."

I do think Libraries are more than mere entertainment but the fundamental question is where do you draw the line? At what point does the enforced taking of taxation then spent on someone else’s priorities become unreasonable? When does it become tyrannical?

It becomes tyrannical when we STOP funding Public Libraries because a handful of selfish Libertarians don't want to pay taxes.

NEWS FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF CALIFORNIA
Office of the Executive Director
11966 Moorpark St., #1
Studio City, CA 91604-1720
=======================
For release: May 8, 1998
=======================
For additional information:
Juan Ros, Executive Director
Phone: (818) 980-8833
E-Mail: juan@myself.com

..."The Libertarian Party of California recognizes that parents are best qualified to supervise children, not the government. And the Libertarian Party has the ideal solution: PRIVATIZE THE LIBRARIES," suggested Hinkle. "That way library users can choose which library to patronize depending on the particular library's Internet access policies.

Libertarian National Committee
Region 2 Alternate: Mark Hinkle - mark@garlic.com

...that which they have earned by their own labors that is tyranny.

"Taxes are enforced exactions not voluntary contributions." Learned Hand

Is it selfish to want to use the product of YOUR labor for those things which you deem important?

You earned it. Nobody else did. Perhaps libraries are your first priority - well good - I applaud that. However when you point a gun at me and insist that I donate to your priority that is theft. You may try to rationalize it by giving it some other name, but using government to take from someone is the use of force. It is the implied threat of a Gun. Try not paying your taxes and see how long it takes for the guys with Guns to show up on your doorstep. Taxes are not voluntary; they are extracted by force. Whether you or I agree with the use of that money does not change the mechanism; it is force, implied violence if you don't do as you are told.

And the selfishness argument is bogus - it is used by every person who wants other people to forced to pay for what someone else wants. "You won't support my pet project therefore you are selfish." I can almost see the puckered face scowling outward at the world raging that someone would dare to have different priorities. How dare they! The Nerve! It is a Bull Shit argument. It boils down to nothing more than name calling.

Don't relesh the idea of a federal tax....
Hey, without the constant drain upon the tax base by corruption and conflicts of interests and national security and all the other dark scams in place now, these taxes you mention would be a fraction of their current rate with an improved life value for everyone.
This socialism you fear in solidly in place already in the form of corporate subsidy. Many snouts in the barrel as our non functional production (war toys, etc.) goes into the hole while
major stock holders get rich
We need a sunlight approach and this means education. Among other things it means equal opportunity for all. Including the access to information.
What you propose sounds an awful lot like the 'thousand points of light' pap that Bush I was feeding us as the social programs were put on the block.
Come now Diogenes you are surely aware of the framework of socialism you grew up in. Why do resent your money spent to share in the infrastructure? I grew up country myself in a low
prosperity area of ignorance and bigotry.
It was a community driven by the economies of the near by Army instalation The schools were shit and the services were poor. Until we moved into california there
was little reading mater outside of an Army post. I also believe that there would be small incentive for the industrial intrests in areas of low wages and no unions to provide information on such subjects as labor rights and struggles or institutional critics. I think you are merely resentful of the fraud, waste, favoritism and other signs of a kleptocracy. After the [social] revolution we can
work on it because more voices will be heard. I still believe in a shared load. Just not for the yoke we drag around for the roach droppings. We should decide where it is spent.

"I am not necessarily opposed to Libraries funded from the Public Purse." by Diogenes • Sunday July 13, 2003 10:05 PM "Perhaps libraries are your first priority - well good - I applaud that. However when you point a gun at me and insist that I donate to your priority that is theft." by Diogenes • Sunday July 13, 2003 10:50 PM

The thread started with is it acceptable for the FBI to see what "Joe Public" read at the PUBLIC library.

You turned it into a debate about how libraries are funded.

Getting BACK to the point. There should be NOTHING in PUBLIC libraries that should pose a threat to national security in the first place.

Secondly, why shouldn't any reading material you access in a PUBLIC library be of PUBLIC record?

I have NO problems with ANYONE knowing what I take out of my local library. Have you???

You will get no argument from me on the fraudulent use of public funds for the benefit of a private operation i.e., a business. That this is done I object to strongly. Politicians who support such should get a double helping of Tar and Feathers. It is just as much theft in my mind to take money, in the form of taxes, from some poor working stiff and then use it to subsidize business as it is to take money from anyone for any non-governmental purpose.

I also agree that given the massive corruption to be found at all levels of government that were the money collected in taxes used wisely and honestly then many of those social needs which your side of this debate argues for could be accommodated with a much smaller tax load. Most people, I do believe, are unaware of the true size of their tax load because Politicians have done a good job hiding it as “excise taxes”, “fees” and other inventive names. Look at any Utility bill and read the fine print and you will see taxes and fees from all levels of government tacked on.

I object to the use of enforced exactions, taxes, for many of these services not because I object to helping people or believe that some of these things do not need to be done. What I object to is the use of force to do it.

In part the large amount of money in the Public Purse is what invites the corruption in the first place. Return funding of many of these “Social Goods” to the realm of individual choice and you remove the money that attracts the Crooks to begin with.

Charities are a self regulating mechanism for achieving these ends. The reason is really simple - if a Charity is caught misusing money donated the word gets around and people do not donate to them any more. Look at the ruckus the Red Cross went through when the National Leadership said they were going to use donations for the victims of 911 for something else. They ended up firing the National Director and having to do a big PR Campaign to repair the damage. The money stopped coming in as soon as people got pissed off. Taxes get collected and spent regardless of the level of corruption because they are not voluntary and therefore there is no incentive for the Government to spend them honestly or have people stop paying. As I mentioned before if you don’t pay the Paid Goons with Guns show up. The Mob calls it “Protection Money”.

While I am not by any stretch a Reagan Apologist I would note that following the first Reagan Tax Cut Charitable Donations to all types of Charities went way up. The only declined when George, no new taxes, Bush increased taxes and broke his worthless word. People will donate to worthy causes without having a gun pointed at their head.

You can see all sorts of selfless activities by people done every day. Most people like to help, and desire to do so. Take for example “Life Flight”. This is an organization of small Plane owners who donate their time, their plane, and the cost of the fuel to fly people around the country for medical care when they cannot afford the travel costs them selves. Often times the medical care the person is going for has been paid for by another charity. I am alive today because of the action of a Charitable Hospital that picked up the many thousands of dollars it cost to save the life of premature baby who had a life threatening defect.

I started School in a poor Mining Community and the Schools were excellent. The people were certainly opinionated and some were bigoted but the Schools were great. They even required taking a Foreign Language starting in the 5th Grade (French, Spanish, or German). I’m sure that we probably were not any richer than the community you grew up in - but the money was spent more wisely. More money is not always the answer.

I agree also that we need a lot more Sunshine on Government Finances. Sunshine is one of the best disinfectants. The only 2 things that stop that are entrenched interests and public apathy.

Well I could go on but I won’t - I don’t want you to think I’m trying to kill you by length of post.

I do think your heart is in the right place. I agree with your motives but I disagree with some of the means.

The point is Libertarians use the first problem (snooping) to justify the privitization of our Public Libraries.

What a Normal, Rational Person wants is to prevent snooping and censorship at their Public Library (not private)

And I have to ask; why does Diogenese talks out of both sides of his mouth? Geez, you'd think he was a Politician!!

the 4th amendment. Something about reasonable cause. Thank you RNP for being you. an idiot.

..."the ankle biter" - there is nothing inconsistent in the two views you cite. Think it through.

As for Irrational Abnormal Shill - perhaps you don't mind having your Civil Liberties stepped on but I do. Perhaps you would like to live in a Police State but I don't. If you can't handle freedom move to another country.

"I have NO problems with ANYONE knowing what I take out of my local library. Have you???"

Now that you mention it - yes. It is none of your Goddamn business nor anyone elses. If you have Probable Cause and a Warrant that is another matter.
That is why we have that quaint old document called the Constitution to protect our liberties from pusilanimous worms who would surrender their liberties to have somebody protect them from some imagined bogeyman. It exists to restrict the power of government and protect the Liberty of individual Citizens.

Why don't you move to China? Their system seems to be more in keeping with your views.

The 4th?.. Reasonable cause?... I think you may be confusing your home and your bank accounts with the PUBLIC LIBRARY!

I would even like my local library to let me see WHO borrowed a book (they already have the complete listing online and you can see which books are in or out and you can even reserve a book) so I can call that person and ask if they are finished with that PUBLICALLY accessable book that is there for us to PUBLICALLY access.

as for Diogenes join a fucking PRIVATE library then!

perhaps you have too much faith in the goodness of others in position of wealth. Real wealth that doesn't recognize the meaning of needing a job or even working due th the fact that they live off the dividends of massive stock ownership. These are the real owners and shapers of America, don't kid your self. These guys only build a hospitals or donate to a colleges in order to counter very bad PR otherwise they continue to rape the people with government hand outs.
Extreme wealth is mostly a form of compulsive delayed reward behavior. These roach droppings are NOT generous but more likely to merely have a PR budget. Trickle down BS, my friend. Can't buy it.
Any tendency to allow a class economic division through
isolating the public from information free from local prejudices is
dangerous. For everyone. Also different communities could be played off from one another to cut tax bases and subsequent services in order to draw in industry. An old tactic. Wont work.
I call for fair taxes according to the wealth one makes doing business here. Or the property they own here. And then a public consensus as to the priorities and disbursement of their treasury

And at my local library we get the new release HARDBACK editions about 2 weeks after they hit the stores.

Awesome.....

Looks like they are all out, and we got 10...

Copies In: 0
Copies Owned: 10
Book

TITLE: Harry Potter and the order of the phoenix / by J. K. Rowling; ill. by Mary Grandpre.
AUTHOR: Rowling, J.K.
SERIES: Harry Potter.
PUBLISHED: New York: Scholastic, 2003.
DESCRIPTION: 870p.: ill.; 24cm.
EDITION: First American Ed.
NOTES: Book 5, sequel to Harry Potter and the goblet of fire.
SUBJECT: Fantasy--fiction.
SUBJECT: Wizards--fiction.
SUBJECT: Schools--fiction.
SUBJECT: England--fiction.
ADDED ENTRY: Grandpre, Mary: ill.

just this little doom's day device I built with only the materials I learned in the public library. And 12,000,000 tons of neutronium ( about 1/16
of a square inch) worth. Please don't tell anyone.
I also read about Cointel Pro, project MOCKINGBIRD and other things.

and l-------I +++[)OO00<> I don't see you or any of your buddies bitching about the fact the site owners captured my IP and traced me.

The Anarchists are doing far more intensive tracking of citizens than the "government" is, but I don't see any protest about that here.

Getting back to the library topic.... The Spanish version of "Order of the Phoenix" is not in yet... Why is that??????

wow guys all i have to do is throw some chum programs out.
see ya later.

The rights of patrons not to have information about what they have borrowed disclosed to various "authorities" would be even less protected in private libraries (provided such insititutions were ever established, which is about as likely as Bush finding vast numbers of wmds in Iraq) than it is in public libraries. Such institutions would be less likely to fall under the privacy provisions of the California state Constitution and various privacy laws, state and Federal. Librarians would also find it much more difficult to enforce their professional code of ethics, which prohibits them from disclosing information about patrons to police agencies without a court order , than they would in public libraries because they would be far less likely to enjoy the protections of unionization and civil service rules which prohibit firings without due process.

Good morning Compadre - I agree in principle with much of what you said, but with some limitations or exceptions.

I have had occasion to deal with some very wealthy individuals. Some are Pricks, some are nice people. It is like with any group of people you will run into all different types. Some are magnanimous some would yield nothing to Scrooge in their miserly and misanthropic views. The Wealthy are after all people - not some other species. Some acquired the Wealth by honest means, or inheritance, some are nothing more than crooks with a big bank account. Some of them are really quite vile and deranged, and you will not hear me singing their praises. Wealth in and of itself is not a virtue - although their are those individuals who, because their Great Grandfather was able to steal a huge pile, think that merely having money elevates them to some exalted status. Delusional at best, Psychotic at worst. (Although we sadly do have those who will toady to the Wealthy so as to suck up a few crumbs.)These are the people most likely to support Eugenics type programs as they irrationally believe that they are Genetically superior because Great Grandpop was a successful Crook.

Certainly we have a group of individuals, of the very wealthy type, whose behavior is anything but beneficial to the country. I know you are aware of this from prior comments. I do not disagree that these individuals are dangerous and belong in a nice comfortable Cell. However, that is really a different issue from deciding what is fair to the great majority, and that which will promote the general welfare and happiness of the greatest number of people. (You are never going to make everybody happy with any policy so I no longer even make the attempt.) I have no desire to be an apologist for the Wealthy but in terms of fairness I want to see all people stand equal before the law regardless of wealth or station. I am an idealist in that regard and make no apologies for it. However because I am a Realist with Romantic Tendencies I do not expect perfection. We can however, do better.

Like you I do believe in fair taxation. Fair does not mean confiscatory or taking a disproportionate amount from someone merely because we are jealous of their pile. That is just as petty as old Scrooge counting over his piles of Coin in some insane delight. In a truly free country you have the right to be a Prick as long as you do not infringe on someone else’s liberties or property. Such behavior is a guarantee of an unhappy life and so they punish themselves very effectively.

A Flat tax which I believe I recall you commenting upon favorably would be one way to fairly tax. No loopholes, no exemptions, no exceptions. Certainly the insane maze of conflicting tax laws that we have now is not fair. The percentage should, in my opinion, never exceed 10% at Federal and 15% total for State and Local Taxes. That is still 25% - which I really consider too high. Frankly I would prefer seeing the total somewhere around 15% between all levels of government.

The other advantage of a Flat Tax is fairness. If you earn 10,000,000 you pay more than someone earning 10,000. It is proportionate to income and levies an equal load based on ability to pay.

The drawback to a Flat Tax is the tendency to both ratchet it upward and carve out “exemptions and exceptions” for Politically favored groups. This means that over time it becomes less “flat” and less fair. Our current Income tax, when originally introduced, had less than 20 pages in the entire tax code. At last count I read we were at TEN THOUSAND PAGES and growing. Even the IRS admits they do not fully understand the Tax Code they administer and will not even guarantee the information given over their “Help” Lines.

As you are aware my preference would be a National Sales Tax. My reason for preferring a Sales tax is several:

1. Simpler - no more April 15th, no more wondering weather you have dotted all the “t’s” or crossed all the “i’s”. The tax is paid every time you buy something. (Their are ways to mitigate it falling too unfairly on people in low income groups.)

2. No more unfair “Audits” where every person has to worry about some nosy Bureaucrat coming in operating from the assumption that you are a Cheat and that it is their job to find out where you were crooked. And it is hard to avoid missing something in the insane maze of our psychotically corrupt tax system. IRS abuses are so bad that at the Senate Hearings a few years ago IRS employees were testifying with hoods over their heads to protect their identities to prevent reprisals. That in and of itself says a lot about our tax system.

3. People are confronted with the cost of Government every time they buy something, and this creates a natural barrier to increasing taxes without end. When the taxes start getting too high people can see immediately what is occurring and can take remedial action. Of course people who favor stealth taxation particularly hate this because they fear that people might revolt, figuratively, if taxes get too high. I cannot emphasize strongly enough the benefit of open taxation, such as is provided by a Sales Tax, as it forces everything out into the Sunshine.

4. The cost to the Economy would be less than the current insane system which requires Lawyers and Accountants to successfully navigate. No one beyond someone with just a minimal job and simple W-2 fills out their own taxes. it is too complicated and Dangerous. This represents a lot of time and labor that could be put to more productive use - even if it is just reading a good book.

I prefer simplicity. I do not like solutions that are more complex than they need be. That fundamentally is why I like a Sales Tax - it is simple and fair.

This is one of those debates where, while I think we have similar motivations, see a different solution to the problems. I, of course, am right. (Just joking - don’t get your nose out of joint.)

Peace.

Irrational Abnormal Shill as usual has it's head somewhere other than looking outward.

The term is "Probable Cause" not "Reasonable Cause". It means you MUST have a justifiable, and provable, belief that someone has committed a crime before you go digging into their affairs. It is the difference between Freedom and living in a Police State.

To any Bureaucrat with a badge digging into somebodies personal affairs is "reasonable". Which is of course Bull Shit. The Founding Fathers were well aware of the abuses which had gone before and that is why the standard is "PROBABLE CAUSE" to believe a crime has occurred AND that the search will yield substantiation of the crime.

As for joining a "Private Library" I AM a Private Library. You ought to see my house. Hello, my name is Diogenes and I am a Bookaholic. My place is wall to wall bookcases and CD Racks - with more out in my storage shed. Everyone measures their wealth in different ways - for me it is Books and Friends (sometimes Books are friends).

So, Irrational Abnormal Idiot, get a fucking life. Snooping around other people's affairs without Probable Cause to believe they have committed a crime is the actions of a Police State - not a Free State.

Maybe you would be more comfortable in North Korea?

So we have a jr. Hitler in our midsts (Diogenes) -- knowledge should be witheld from the public?!

How can anyone but a facist be against public libraries and for corporate libaries?!

I get told to, and I quote:-

"If you can't handle freedom move to another country. "

"Why don't you move to China? "

"Maybe you would be more comfortable in North Korea?"

Now Diogenes, It is I who is happy with the system of government in the USA, it is I that support my President and his actions, and it is I that have no problem with the current measures been put into place that protect the freedom of the USA in total.

It seems you are the unhappy one, you are against the system of government, and you don't seem to like it here.

I respectfully suggest that you go away and live somewhere else.

Thank you in advance.

The poster known as Rational Normal Person is neither rational nor normal. Discuss amongst yaselves.

The fascist are taking over. What's next? We are losing our freedoms by the second.

...distorting the other person's position to make a dishonest point.

"So we have a jr. Hitler in our midsts (Diogenes) -- knowledge should be witheld from the public?!

How can anyone but a facist be against public libraries and for corporate libaries?!"

So, let's use loaded words like "corporate", distort your opponents position and then pretend dishonestly that because you disagree with distorted position that they are the philosophic Heir of the Third Reich.

How brain dead can you get?

You really cannot get much more dishonest.

Do you have a legitimate argument? Or are you simply content to engage in knee-jerk name calling? Coward.

Try defending your position with an honest argument and maybe you might earn some respect. So far you have engaged only in dishonest argumentation and I will give your position the respect it has earned. NONE.

I said that I saw nothing wrong with financing libraries PRIVATELY I did not say anything about turning them over to "CORPORATIONS". It is perfectly possible and doable to have libraries financed by public donations VOLUNTARILY rather than doing so at the point of a gun.

What makes a Library financed by forced levy i.e., taxes more legitimate than one financed by Voluntary Cooperation?

What is wrong with having a Private, open to the Public, NON-PROFIT organization run libraries?


What makes a Library supported by Gun Point morally superior? And that is what you are talking when you insist on using Taxes TAKEN from someone who earned the money by the sweat of their brow to support something. You should have a better rationale than "anybody who disagrees with me is Hitler".

Further I did not say I was unalterable opposed to Publicly financed libraries my primary point is that it is not the ONLY Way to do it.

Chew on this: Of the Top Ten Universities in the Country how many are Privately Run and How many are Government Run?

So Hilter j. finally exposes his true beliefs: "What makes a Library supported by Gun Point morally superior?"

As we have seen time and time again, the wealthy are simply not charitable enough to support the nations public libraries. Besides being a positive force for communities and providing FREE access to knowledge for all, there are effecienies of scale when people band together.

But Libertarians are the supreme examples of selfishness -- let the poor suffer the consequences of the stinginess of the rich.

So that is how you plan to spread your anti-Library propaganda is it? Libraries hold a gun to your head? Libraries are the yoke of oppression??!!

You are one sick puppy.

...you are a dogmatist. You are not capable of recognizing that someone can have a position different than yours without assuming they have evil motives.

You are still Brain Dead.

You are still being dishonest.

You would appear incapable of defending your position with a reasoned argument.

KMFA

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

You call the argument that PUBLIC LIBRARIES HOLD A GUN TO YOUR HEAD rational???!!!

I guess Grandma waves a Colt .45 in your face every time she recieves a social security check too?

...because it would appear in your narrow little world that anyone who believes differently than you is Der Fuhrer.

You are the one supporting the use of force to achieve your ends.

In the immortal words of the great Jurist Learned Hand: "...taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions."

I don't care how you sugar coat it or for what lofty purpose it is done taxation is the enforced taking of money, or property, with the implied threat of physical force if you don't "pay up". That is what taxation is: enforced exactions.

I know you are trying to avoid addressing it, but it is the truth. Regardless of what it is taken for this "isness" does not change.

Taxes are not optional. You have no choice but to pay if you don't want an 8 by 12 room, 3 meals, and a Flop.

I don't know how many ways I can put this so that you will get it.

You are the one in this argument who wants to use force to achieve your ends.

You can try all the diversions you want.

How good a shot is your Grandma?

You know deep in your heart, you agree with me, of course. It's your foolish pride. You live in this country and benefit from the infrastructure.... All residents, all property, all equal taxes. So there.
Oh, and hang the scoundrels.

I don't disagree with your "ends".

I just SOMEtimes disagree with the means.

I am a live and let live kind of guy.

Mostly I just want to be free.

Want the Government OUT of my life.

And for other people to do well and be well.

My wants are really quite simple.

And I have been reviewing my position as we have traveled through this little debate.

I am always looking at and revising my opinion as I become somewhat less ignorant and think things through.

Peace.

so we can hang the scoundrels.

...Kerneled Nylon? Or are you a Traditionalist and prefer Hemp?

Yes, well at least you admit your ignorant views about Public Libraries are harmful to our society. For that I have to give you credit.

Although by the way you carelessly label Public Libraries as "Gun Pointers" I'm a bit skeptical about who you include as a "scoundrel"

If you were ingorant enough to be decieved about the GOOD of Public Libraries, maybe you have also been decieved about Grandma and her social security too.

The worms weasels roach droppings and shills....
our opperssors and their minions. and I prefer hemp rope.

That's a very open ended answer.

Are you going to string up Grandma's who cash social security checks and outspoken advocates for our Public Libraries?

Let's talk about your wealthy friends....
How do they feel about survival in the backlash of public awakening which could occur in a number of ways. What are the conscious ones doing about it?

I'm curious. I have no circles of wealthy friends down here....
Where they can't get me as easy. Wealth, in my dealings
is ruthless and immoral. And as it increases it becomes more so while
putting a neat and caring personal front. Granting the certainty of the occasional exception, real power, the air of being beyond normal law is the focus of my
wrath. I'm not talking about the comfortable or moderate holder of real property.
We ( okay, ghost of Eric, I ) need to build coalitions to lessen the drain against this moderate investor in the private ownership idea because the real ruling class knows they require the support of the managers of this system. The intelligentsia need to regroup with the understanding of survival. They are next.
Any ideas?

...I really don't travel in those circles anymore.

My comments were made from observations of past events and acquaintances.

However, I suspect the breakdown would be something like this:

"I support the status quo because I don't want to lose my fortune."

These people are well aware that the Puppet Masters will destroy anyone who goes contrary to their wishes.

So, the operative word is Fear. Fear of losing their stuff.

Not every man is willing to dedicate "their lives, their fortune, or their sacred honor". Some are cowards.

You can see how they are brought into line:

Drexel Burnham Lambert and Michael Millken were destroyed for daring to climb the heights without being a "member of the club".

Bill Gates has likewise been attacked.

There are others.

I am sure some are courageous enough to act in secret but overt resistance would be "in bad taste", and very dangerous.

--How do they (wealthy) feel about survival in the backlash of public awakening which could occur in a number of ways.--

How have they always survived?
The answer is obvious.
Why are you even having to ask this?

--The intelligentsia need to regroup with the understanding of survival. They are next.
Any ideas?--

If they are the "intelligentsia", why would they need ideas on how to survive? Wouldn't they be smart enough to figure that out?

"the Puppet Masters will destroy anyone who goes contrary to their wishes"

Why don't you be honest for a moment and tell us who "the Puppet Masters" really are? I'm sure you have the name of at least one organization or one public figure, so why not share with the group?

while you're at it, please tell us how they destroy those who go against their wishes. Do they use the same tactics that Senator Joe McCarty used?

...frescaw. Yes I know it's you. You can piss and moan all you want. You lost your point of the debate.

P.S. Do your own homework. The exercise will do you good.

Puppet Masters are the holders of most of our national wealth and have the rest of us in debt. More?

...you are learning.

"Puppet Masters are the holders of most of our national wealth and have the rest of us in debt. More?"

Yes more -- because I don't know who you consider to be the wealth holders, nor do I know who you are in indebted to.

Personally, I don't own much nor do I have many needs, so I'm not in debt.

have another biscuit. now roll over. good dog.

Your answer is no answer -- does that mean you ignorant and have been pretending all along? Or maybe you just lack the balls to say what you really believe?

Either way it can't be that important -- you wouldn't be playing games if you had something important to say.

and attempt to stay in tune. I'll start with this cord....(ahem)
TUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNNNE.
No, no, you're still barking! Don't make me get the broom.
have another biscuit.














i

I'll take that for ignorance on your part. So you bullshitted us the whole time with this bogus "Puppet Master" crap? Wow! I could have never guessed...

Who tought you all those really clever tricks... your master?

is that dog still barking?