@no1marauder saidI said ‘government venturing into private business which is none of their business “
It's none of the government's business what is done on land owned by the State?
EVERYONE…… Marauder. 90% if the time, rewrites posts to suit him so he will, in his condescending way, look real smart.
He said that I said “It is none of government business what is done on land owned by the state”.
Jesus what a waste,
Marauder, why don’t you write about Bowl Games.
@averagejoe1 said
Really? So you think that since it changes ‘almost nothing’ , that for the government to force a private business to OPEN their doors, when they have what Marauder calls natural rights to do their private business privately, is not relevant??!
…Because this dictatorship action of the govt only affects (forces) a few stores, that we should tell owners to kiss ass? ...[text shortened]... k-Fil-A. Had a chicken sandwich at their original store (East Point, Ga) last week on way to airport
that for the government to force a private business to OPEN their doors, when they have what Marauder calls natural rights to do their private business privately, is not relevant??!
The highway rest stops are government operated, and are 30 miles apart. It does not seem to me like government creep to ask new restaurants to be open for hungry Sunday travelers. If you have a problem with this, maybe it's with the whole highway system?
@averagejoe1 saidHe thinks the state should own the rest stops because the state forced tax payers to pay for the road. All roads? Or only a steadily increasing category of roads.?
I said ‘government venturing into private business which is none of their business “
EVERYONE…… Marauder. 90% if the time, rewrites posts to suit him so he will, in his condescending way, look real smart.
He said that I said “It is none of government business what is done on land owned by the state”.
Jesus what a waste,
Marauder, why don’t you write about Bowl Games.
No1's true communist agenda exposed, the end of private property that's by a road, I didn't realise how far gone he was.
@wajoma saidBig problems, privatizing roads.
He thinks the state should own the rest stops because the state forced tax payers to pay for the road. All roads? Or only a steadily increasing category of roads.?
No1's true communist agenda exposed, the end of private property that's by a road, I didn't realise how far gone he was.
@wildgrass saidIt's another debate, what we're discussing here is property by the road. This was stated explicitly twice in the very short post you replied to, who knows what visions you must have when a post gets beyond 4 sentences.
Big problems, privatizing roads.
@wajoma saidThe People's elected representatives authorized the building of those roads. And they would not have been possible without the use of public lands and eminent domain.
He thinks the state should own the rest stops because the state forced tax payers to pay for the road. All roads? Or only a steadily increasing category of roads.?
No1's true communist agenda exposed, the end of private property that's by a road, I didn't realise how far gone he was.
You well know that I view the forcible creation of private property as the greatest theft in Man's existence. You've never gave a coherent defense of first acquisition, which was invariably done by some thug (usually calling himself a "king" ) handing out chunks of what was communal property to his relatives or most efficient allied killers.
And as been explained on this board many times, my political philosophy is most akin to that of Bakunin, who was a fierce critic of communism. Call it "libertarian socialism" for accuracy.
@wajoma saidSo you want the state to sell the real estate back to chick FIL a ? Good luck!
It's another debate, what we're discussing here is property by the road. This was stated explicitly twice in the very short post you replied to, who knows what visions you must have when a post gets beyond 4 sentences.
@averagejoe1 saidI can't help if you're too stupid to understand your own thread.
I said ‘government venturing into private business which is none of their business “
EVERYONE…… Marauder. 90% if the time, rewrites posts to suit him so he will, in his condescending way, look real smart.
He said that I said “It is none of government business what is done on land owned by the state”.
Jesus what a waste,
Marauder, why don’t you write about Bowl Games.
You're complaining about the State regulating a private business on the State's land.
How exactly is that "none of their business"?
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidYeah… that’s a sane bloody comparison.
@AverageJoe1
Lib reasoning amazes. ‘Only a few stores’. When holocaust started, only a few Jews were killed.
No big deal? God, Wildgrass, lib to the core. When y’all take over, which you will, what will your govt dictate be?
But. The only reason any government should force private business to open on a Sunday is if it involves essential infrastructural needs.
Taking that into account, if there are infrastructural needs on a Sunday, why would the government have to force a private business to open? Doesn’t capitalism automatically step in to offer services?
Surely not all capitalist private businesses are Christian zealots?
Me thinks there may be an underlying problem you are not addressing here.
Edit: and now having read the rest of the thread: yes. There is an underlying issue you fail to address.
And I believe Marauder had hit the nail on the head for you.
2 edits
@shavixmir saidYes, of course there are other businesses at a rest stop to cater to Americans dying of hunger when they call in for gas and to take a leak. Chic Fil A are prepared to take the hit, not the goobermint, not No1, not wildgrass. And the hit they take will be capitalized on by other businesses at the rest stop. It is a gross over step by local goobermint, it is religious discrimination. It occurs because they have no business owning and leasing land to private commercial enterprise.
Yeah… that’s a sane bloody comparison.
But. The only reason any government should force private business to open on a Sunday is if it involves essential infrastructural needs.
Taking that into account, if there are infrastructural needs on a Sunday, why would the government have to force a private business to open? Doesn’t capitalism automatically step in to offer ser ...[text shortened]... underlying issue you fail to address.
And I believe Marauder had hit the nail on the head for you.
The issue is No1 thinks because taxpayers were forced to build the road, the state can now claim control over land beside the road because it's land beside the road. You can see where this goes.
@wajoma saidLMAO!
Yes, of course there are other businesses at a rest stop to cater to Americans dying of hunger when they call in for gas and to take a leak. Chic Fil A are prepared to take the hit, not the goobermint, not No1, not wildgrass. And the hit they take will be capitalized on by other businesses at the rest stop. It is a gross over step by local goobermint, it is religious discr ...[text shortened]... im control over land beside the road because it's land beside the road. You can see where this goes.
Gawd you're simple minded and blinded by your ideological fanaticism.
NY owns the land the rest stops are located on, not Chic Fil A. Therefore, NY can impose any type of reasonable regulation it desires.
There is, of course, limited space at these rest stops, so no there aren't an infinite number of other businesses there to provide the service NYS wants its tenants to provide. And a business that is closed during one of the most heavily traveled days of the week isn't providing what NYS wants for people using the highway.
"Gross over step"? Ridiculous.
Malls generally have the same requirement:
"Tenants are required to operate their business in accordance with the landlord’s stipulated business hours, which is typically 7 days a week, from 10 a.m. – 10 p.m., including public holidays, failure of which (unless prior approval is given) will entitle landlords to be paid liquidated damages."
https://dnh.com.my/8-things-to-be-aware-of-before-renting-that-mall-space/
1 edit
@no1marauder saidLAORFML indeed.
NY owns the land the rest stops are located on, not Chic Fil A.
That is exactly my point, the local goobermint shouldn't own the land, that is what I've been saying all the way, if they didn't own the land we wouldn't be having this discussion. Rest stops and the businesses that operate there are private commercial enterprises that the goobermint should not have anything to do with.
The only rationale you've been able to give is NY should own land beside the road because it's land beside the road. Next thing we know state owned gas stations. No one owes you Chick Fil A on any given day at any given location.
In NZ local goobermints want to limit commerce at rest stops. When the control freaks have it they want to regulate it out of existence, and when it's not there they want regulate it into existence. Control freaks have got to control freak. Privatise all rest stops and allow them to compete in the free market.
Todays a pretty good day actually, for Argentina anyway.
https://shorturl.at/dmDUX
"Argentina’s new president lays off 5,000 government employees"
@wajoma saidOwnership is theft.
LAORFML indeed.
That is exactly my point, the local goobermint shouldn't own the land, that is what I've been saying all the way, if they didn't own the land we wouldn't be having this discussion. Rest stops and the businesses that operate there are private commercial enterprises that the goobermint should not have anything to do with.
The only rationale you've been abl ...[text shortened]...
https://shorturl.at/dmDUX
"Argentina’s new president lays off 5,000 government employees"
1 edit
@wajoma saidNote how he shifts from the private interest of
He thinks the state should own the rest stops because the state forced tax payers to pay for the road. All roads? Or only a steadily increasing category of roads.?
No1's true communist agenda exposed, the end of private property that's by a road, I didn't realise how far gone he was.
the citizen businessman to the interest of the state.
I feel like elaborating here to nail his communism bent, but my first sentence needs no elaboration. I think he wears grey.
Edit: Oh, and in his reference to ‘hungry travelers’ , the masses!!!! Marx would have been nothing without the masses. But then, as it turns out, he Was nothing.