8 U.S.C. 1185(b)
"Except as otherwise provided by the President and subject to such limitations and exceptions as the President may authorize and prescribe, it shall be unlawful for any citizen of the United States to depart from or enter, or attempt to depart from or enter, the United States unless he bears a valid United States passport."

I did not see an passport requirement for departing nationals, but I may be missing it in the code.

republic

In addition to my other reply to this post, 22 U.S.C. 2705 provides justification for the claim made in the instructions, but does not clarify the issue for a third party.

There is no physical distinguishing characteristic between a passport issued to a national and one issued to a US Citizen.

The instructions provided by the state department are not legally admissible evidence, and are even self contradictory in this case. A Certificate of Naturalization proves nationality, not citizenship. The fact that most applicants for naturalization choose to become statutory US Citizens by filing 1040s and W-4s (or otherwise changing their domicile to within the statutory United States), does not convert this document into proof of citizenship.

See 22 U.S.C. 1101(a)(23)
'The term “naturalization” means the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever.'

Here is some more info on naturalization in the form of a Cite List

republic

Read 22 U.S.C. 212

The only requirement for a passport is proof of allegiance.

Then read 22 C.F.R. 51.2

A United States passport shall be issued only to a national of the United States.

The fact that the passport office deems a passport as proof of citizenship is either a mistake in terminology in the part of their instructions, or due to the fact that on the original application for the first passport issued, evidence of citizenship or nationality was provided.

A third party, who is not the federal government, would need to request the passport office to check the original records to determine if a passport was issued to a statutory US Citizen, statutory US National, or to a non-citizen national. The regular passport (as opposed to the diplomatic or official passports) itself does not provide prima facie evidence of citizenship.

If you are still interested in these issues, I really recommend the Why A National link. Even if you disagree with the conclusions, you should benefit from the compilation of relevant statutes, regulations and case law.

republic

Passports, at least for the USA, do not prove citizenship. They merely prove nationality, a.k.a. allegiance. You may, or may not need a passport to leave the country, but if you wish to return, you will need to present one at the border. I know that all international air travel, via commercial aviation, departing the USA requires a passport per regulation. I am not quite so familiar with sea and land.

For more info on nationality see "Why A National"

republic

There are tremendous economic advantages in participating in a division of labor economy. Private property rights are an essential component of the division of labor.

Anyone who individually violates these property rights will quickly be ejected from the division of labor and find himself as an outcast. If he gangs up with other bandits, they will still find themselves outnumbered and in a precarious position. If this brigand band succeed in bamboozling the productive class into paying monopolistic fees for "protection," this band still has to fear stronger bands of thieves or an internal uprising.

Finally if the band of thieves allows free entry into it's class through a universal suffrage democratic process, the line blurs between the political and productive class. This permits much higher levels of theft and regulation than would be accepted under a clear class distinction regime. The increasing theft and violation of property rights leads to the consumption of capital and the devolution of human society. With the loss of production capability, the health and longevity of members within such a society decreases until the point occurs that private property rights are rediscovered and respected once more.

The failure of a society to respect private property is that society's downfall. It is an economic certainty that this decivilizing effect will occur when property rights are systematically violated.

Democracy: The God that Failed

http://www.scribd.com/doc/37783635/Democracy-the-God-That-Failed

republic

I am sorry, but Liberty is the mother of Order.

Government provides nothing but monopolistic and continually declining "justice." You wouldn't expect a true monopoly in any other field to provide increasing levels of service at the same or reduced prices? What makes the monopoly of government arbitration and enforcement any different.

Government is disorder and chaos enforced at the point of a gun. At the first instance that government prevents competing arbitration and enforcement within its jurisdiction it has removed itself from the market and begins to work against the interests of peaceful human action. As long as it is completely voluntary to join or leave, it is a benefit to society, but then it probably wouldn't be called the state.

It is in spite of regulatory capture and the "enlightened" rulings of government judges against private property holders in favor of "public policy" and large polluters that our air is still somewhat breathable and our water mostly drinkable. You can thank government bureaucracy for permitting "acceptable" levels of pollution. Levels which are chosen by the largest participants in industry with a structure not so much as to protect the environment, but to increase the costs of competition against their "market" position. These levels are probably much higher than would be accepted if these polluters were held accountable in a system of private, competitive courts.

You may prefer getting less and paying more and living in a system of acceptable pollution, but unfortunately your ignorance forces those of us who can analyze the history and economics of statism to suffer in your sub optimal paradise.

republic

Hmm, I think it is time to bone up on the literature as central control leads to nothing but discoordination:

The Fatal Conceit
Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth

republic

Most importantly, the remedy in the FairTax for those Americans who are currently classified as non-taxpayers" would be much more obvious than it is under our current system. Being more obvious, most Americans would avail themselves of the remedy and the present system of governmental franchise and license would collapse. I do not expect any change away from the present byzantine system until more Americans educate themselves about the massive disadvantages appertaining to the acceptance of government benefits and availing oneself to licenses and franchises offered.

http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/Franchises.pdf

"He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance."

Hmm... This doesn't look like a complaint about excessive governmental intrusion into and expropriation of private property to you does it? No the signers were totally cool with an ever expanding Leviathan, so long as they could vote for who gained access to the plunder stream.

republic

If only it were so simple. There are many reasons why more and more families have two working parents, but free trade is not a major contributor in and of itself. The single largest contributor to this phenomenon is the inflationary federal reserve system. Inflation and the easy money policies that drive its existence contribute substantially to the "consumerist" mindset. This mindset is characterized by a high time preference or an aversion to delayed gratification (1). This is also the driving force behind the meme of keeping up with the Joneses. Americans have purchased themselves into massive debt. The only way to pay off all of the debts in many American households is to have both parents working. Unfortunately, many naive parents provide their children with little or no understanding of fiscal responsibility, which will have the sad consequence of perpetuating this phenomenon.

1) This mindset and course of action is a reaction to the effects that inflation has on saving and purchasing.
1a) Inflation causes the realized returns on a particular monetary instrument for a saver to be less than the face value. In the best case where inflation is relatively stable and low, and there is a strong consensus that the future inflation outlook appears to be holding a steady course, the actual return is X% less than the instrument face value %Y, where X% is the inflation rate. Any additional uncertainty will force prospective savers to discount the instrument to some value of return less than the best case scenario. This reduces the incentive to save in an inflationary society.
1b_i) Inflation increases the incentive to spend now, when things are cheaper, rather than later when they will be more expensive
1b_ii) Inflation reduces the "cost" of borrowing money. Loans taken out during steady inflation are paid back with cheaper dollars as the date of the payments advances. Wages in societies with inflation increase with time and in response to the fall in the purchasing power of the unit of account, although not necessarily in a proportion which leaves the worker at the same level of purchasing power. General asset values tend to increase in magnitude when measured with a currency that is losing value.
1c) These factors have the effect of encouraging consumption now even to the point of borrowing, and have a discouraging effect on savings and thrift.

Anyway if this sounds intriguing check out mises.org for a coherent explanation of the deleterious effects of inflation.

Republic