Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> The only freedom the ideal of USA is supposed to grant you is freedom from too much government meddling.

Really? Which amendment is that one?

There are a few prominent restrictions on particular kinds of government meddling in the US. This by no means generalizes to the rest of it.



Which amendment is that one?

The Tenth:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Of course this is a dead letter because of a misinterpretation of the Commerce Clause, but there it is. If the Constitution didn't literally give the federal government a power, it doesn't have that power.


Ok there George Wallace


Haha there's a charitable interpretation. Actually my second-favorite amendment is the Fourteenth, precisely because it knocks the states down a few pegs, and gives the federal government the power to enforce that. (In addition to, you know, extending citizenship to everyone...) I doubt old George would have agreed with that.

[EDIT:] to avoid confusion, the First is my favorite.


That's why I said 'ideal', it's not true in practice, but I was responding to the comment about the hypothetical "point of the US".


What I meant by that was individual liberty and the ability to make your own choices and decisions.

Government meddling in that in this case is forcing people to do something they are uncomfortable with simply because they paid money while simultaneously running the risk of legal action if at any point you want to abort the transaction.

The most basic example is akin to forcing somebody to sign a contract without knowing who they are signing it with.


We've tried allowing this kind of thing, and what we got was redlining, "No colored allowed" and "Dogs and Irish keep off the grass."

If complying with anti-discrimination law is a problem for you, you should generally not be in this line of business.


Redlining is an explicit government policy, started by the HOLC (a government sponsored corporation created by FDR as part of the New Deal).

Here's one of their maps: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining#/media/File:Home_Own...

Separating whites from colored was also explicit government policy. It was called Jim Crow. We never tried "this kind of thing".

http://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/links/misclink/examples/homepa...

The law was actually far more intrusive back then than it is today. For example, you might be shocked to discover that Jim Crow laws actually mandated discrimination in sexual relationships!

The closest we've come to trying this kind of thing is the present day, where at least sexual relationships have been deregulated. (This one is a biggie for me, I discriminate pretty strongly against white women and think the government should not restrict my freedom in that way.)


You're conflating personal choice with discrimination. A contractual engagement between two people should ALMOST always be a matter of choice.

A business that you can walk into off the street should ALMOST never be able to discriminate.

I say almost in both cases because absolutes are the tools by which rules are abused.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: