People can freely associate. They shouldn't expect their liability to be limited though. Any free association should be able to donate unlimited amounts, but limited liability is not a right, it's a privilege. When speech is filtered through a fiction which limits the liability of the speaker, they are no longer exercising their right to free speech, they are exercising their privilege of limited liability.

It should be tied to liability. If a group operates under a limited liability construct, that group should not be allowed to make political statements.

No, they just shouldn't be able to do it under a liability shield.

Not if the construct under which the group operates limits their personal liability. If it does not, they should not be limited in their political expression. If it does, they should not be allowed to.

Yup, and it should apply to any umbrella of limited liability. If your personal liability is limited by a construct of law, you should not be allowed to exercise any rights through that construct, only privileges granted by the jurisdiction in which that construct is created.

And all those farms not dependent on human labor are dependent on oil. For everything. If the flow of oil stops, or is significantly disrupted, you have no food production or distribution aside from those few acres not dependent on oil.

If the internal mic and speaker on a standard laptop can be used to maintain the ultrasonic connection, I don't think this requires an ultra-hifi mic in order to capture the frequencies being used.

Unfortunately, there are people who remain illiterate by choice (for many reasons), and do see the use of polysyllabic words as a form of self-aggrandizement by the speaker. It's a form of jealousy about something they can fix in themselves, but which they simply can't be bothered to do. It's easier to point the finger at someone else than it is for many to point it where it really should be pointed: at themselves.

Unless you're Amish and work for yourself or another Amish employer, the US government doesn't recognize any objections to participation unless you don't want to be employed at all.

You can opt out (well, your parents can; you can't rescind participation once you reach the age of majority, unlike every other legally binding agreement your parents enter you into) as long as you never try to make any money. And of course the IRS doesn't allow for the cost of your time and effort, which you can never recover, as an exemption against "income" earned. Time is only worth something in their eyes if it increases your tax burden.

If I'm working, I have zero income, because I'm trading something which is absolutely unrecoverable in exchange for that paycheck. It's too bad so many either fail to understand that or, worse, don't care.

Actually, Japan's population problem stems from the fact that it is a net decrease. While over-population is a problem, so is a declining population (unless you're already over-populated).

that you know the language and that you can support yourself

And this, rather than race, is likely the primary reason why some people cannot immigrate to Japan. Many other countries do not have restrictions on language fluency before they allow others in, and in my estimation that's a large reason why those countries have immigrant enclaves where a large percentage do not speak the national tongue (and hence have low job prospects, leading to radicalization).

Visiting an enemy's actions upon them isn't necessarily justified by their own actions. Those with any sense of honor should know that.

And those who rose up from exploitation swing hard the other way, and are just as evil and extreme as extremist capitalists (who are really no more capitalist than those lefties are communist).

I agree wholeheartedly. I'd assume it was intended humorously, if not for the rest of the comment.

It's always a vocal minority that gets the most attention in any group. Libertarians and pseudo-libertarians are no different. The same goes for the 1% whiners.