Anyone can get a restraining order with no evidence of abuse or the breaking of any law. The laws are structured that way to protect women from domestic abuse. But the laws themselves are often abused to separate families with no justification. A restraining order is not necessarily an indication of abuse. People should avoid suggesting such a thing, as it only further motivates people to misuse restraining orders.

Liar! Do you ever get tired of lying?

http://tinyurl.com/2btj3cx

Listen to that and then come back and spread your Marxist lies. "Disarmament Projects" what are those? What will you and your magic robots do once you have disarmed us all? Keep us in line with love and kindness?

Clark, machines already ARE doing most of the work.

In 1949, machines did 6% of the cotton picking in the South. By 1972, 100% of the cotton picking was done by machines. When automation hit the US Manufacturing Sector in the 1950s, 1.6 million blue-collar jobs were lost in 9 years. In 1860, 60% of America worked in Agriculture, while today it is less than 3%. In 1950, 33% of US workers worked in Manufacturing, while by 2002 there was only 10%. From 1983-1993, banks cut 37% of their human tellers, and by the year 2000, 90% of all bank customers used teller machines (ATMs).

This is only going to continue. It's a natural trend of technological advancement. Consider the purpose of out-sourcing to industry. The purpose is to cut costs. Machines don't sleep, get sick, require health insurance, etc. Those occupations that have not yet been automated often can be, it just isn't cost effective at the time. The price then drops as newer versions are introduced every year.

So, what happens when the service sector (one of the last remaining sectors not significantly displaced by technological unemployment) begins to succumb to this trend? We're already seeing cooked food vending machines, robot chef's, robotic wait staffs, self check-out, automated warehouses and so on with automated transportation on the horizon. What happens when there aren't enough jobs to go around for half the population, or more? And what happens in a few decades when human level A.I. is introduced? This isn't science fiction, it's called Moore's law. We live in an emergent world, not a static one.

If we have the capability to automate all occupations in production, distribution and transportation, why hold on to money with all the problems it creates? Ever heard of the Merva-Fowles study? Ever read up on the effects of the increasing wealth gap to mental health, general health, homicides, drug use etc.? Ever read the science literature on incentives? Competition?

Philosophy once reasoned that the Earth was flat, and that objects of larger size fell to earth faster than objects of smaller size (Aristotle). Science went about testing these assumptions and found them to be incorrect. It doesn't matter what makes sense, it matters what works. Science is what is needed, not philosophy.

Dude, even some of the Free Market Capitalists here think your being a tool. I would say you have just epically failed.

Is Neil's candidacy a way to further this agenda at the EXPENSE of BTP? No. As far as I can tell, the proposal advocated by Neil is within the written Bylaws of BTP.

Article 3 begins with:

"The purposes of the Boston Tea Party are: To empower lovers of freedom to reduce the size, scope and power of government."

This I take to be the basis of the BTP platform. Am I wrong in this observation?

Those within The Movement Neil advocates would maintain that their proposal allows for greater freedom and smaller government than would ever be possible within any variation of free market system.

Has Neil enlisted the help of outside entities? Sure. As I am sure many other candidates have done. Is it reasonable to assume that most, if not all, BTP members and candidates have pointed friends, family and fellow activists to this site to further the cause?

Abolish isn't the word I would use. The free market and monetary systems have merely grown obsolete. The idea that the alternative presented is "collectivist" depends on your personal interpretation of the term.

What the Movement advocates is the automation of monotonous labor. We are going to have to contend with technological unemployment one way or another, as we are running out of alternative sectors.

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

Three basic examples for the contention of technological unemployment:

--http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ST1TO6fQv8 (very large video compilation of automation prospects)

--http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Z8TR4ToNs (brief clip from Marshall Brain lecture)

--http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm (supporting background information for Brain's thesis in three parts)

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

With the unskilled labor eliminated, only skilled labor would be left over, for a time. As you may be aware, the skilled labor that requires critical thinking or creativity (think in terms of scientific innovation) is driven primarily by intrinsic motivation and undermined by extrinsic motivation (i.e. monetary reward). This is not a philosophical disposition, it is an observation of experimental data. It is a result that virtually nobody anticipated, but it is what it is. I can provide a multitude of studies in regard to incentives having a detrimental affect in such circumstances if you would like.

Here's a quick summarized example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc

On that basis, among many other reasons, I find the proposals of TVP reasonable. Does that answer your question?

I certainly don't agree that free market capitalism is the only economic model conducive to democracy.