RantardoMontalbon

quote:

---

Don't care

---

Came here to type these exact words.

quote:

---

No, the Nazgul and Sauron would have struck the Eagles down. It’s a retarded plan that would just get everyone killed. It had to be done in absolute secrecy and stealth, because they were no long term match for Sauron.

---

Not if Gandalf also puts Harry Potter and one of those tall blue indigenous jungle warriors on the same eagle.

When the Nazgul come, Harry casts 'expeloramus' to hold them at bay, and blue guy shoots and arrow into Sauron's eye as they fly past to the volcano.

Which is when the Hobbit throws the ring down to Optimus Prime who dunks it into the lava juice before he makes sweet sweet love to Vin Diesel.

See? Simple stuff.

quote:

---

Look closely. That chick tried to pickpocket him.

---

I think you're onto something.

Which, if true, fully justifies an Air Jordan to the solar plexus in my world.

quote:

---

GOF research - what I don’t understand

---

The deeper question - why is there a consortium of global governments using tax payer dollars to take a virus and make it have more "function"?

Also, why is that more functional virus now currently circulating around the world?

:lol:

Even the French rifles are built to surrender.

quote:

---

She shows her monkey ( vagina) on her Twitter

---

Monkey?

You know you're old when hatchet wound, fish taco, and whisker biscuit have fallen out of style.

quote:

---

Our Lady of the Lake

---

Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

Our government is such a steaming pile of dog shite.

Trump did well to fire the 7th floor at the State Department but he should have burned it down to the basement and rebuilt it around whomever worked in the mail room.

Same with the FBI and CIA who ran a soft coup attempt for which only a dozen of people or so were fired or demoted. The only guy who actually faced a criminal repercussion was Clinesmith who falsified evidence to the FISA court and got, IIRC, probation.

Rather than score well on aptitude tests, people who work at the State Department should be required to attend basic training, strap on some battle rattle, and actually visit these countries they want to write policy for.

State Department spokes-persons (/s) complaining that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan wants for women's rights and inclusion is embarrassingly cringeworthy.

As the title asks, what is the legal framework in relation to government coercing private business and where are the boundaries, if any?

I’ve been mulling this topic in response to Federal, state and local rules and regulations that require, for example, the shuttering of “non-essential” business, imposing fines on businesses that do not enforce mask mandates, and, most recently, the possibility of the State requiring businesses to impose vaccination requirements as a condition of employment.

And, honestly, I haven’t been able to get very far. The topic is far too complicated to get sorted out in one poli-board thread, but input from anyone with insight or a link(s) to some written authority would be greatly appreciated. I’d like to advance my thinking.

Most private businesses exist as a function of state law. Others, such as your local Federal credit union, are the creation of Federal law. In general, a business is authorized to engage in lawful commerce and to sue/be sued. Businesses also have the right to contribute to political campaigns. Depending on the business a whole host of obligations also exist, such as paying income withholding, worker’s compensation, etc.

There is also a broad spectrum of business types, from the sole proprietor operating with a business license to multinational publically traded companies.

At the Federal level the outermost boundary seems to be Wickard, which permits the regulation of intrastate commerce when related to a broader Federal regulatory scheme. At the state level, though, I’m not aware of any restriction on government to define and regulate private business however the legislature/city council sees fit.

Is there a liberty right to engage in your own livelihood? And, if so, where is that written?

About the only arguable inroad I’ve come up with is that a sole proprietor would be more advantaged to resist government coercion because they are legally operating as an individual, and therefore could defend upon a basis of individual rights vis-à-vis government action, as opposed to a business entity which seemingly exists at the pleasure of the State.

I know that one remedy is the ballot box, but I’m concerned that the socialists have figured out that instead of having government implement authoritarian policies directly on the citizen they can simply use the levers of government power to enact/enforce policy on the citizen via private business.

So what.

The ugly underbelly of the US failing (yet again) at trying to build ancient civilizations into civilized societies is that somebody will always fill the power vacuum after the fact.

We left and the Taliban is now the central authority in Afghanistan.

I don't give a frick that they invited their continental neighbors to some low rent third world goat worshiping ceremony.

We should have never been there to begin with.