Saturday, December 28, 2013

What's so Great About Government Health Care

I am at a loss to figure out why anyone with healthcare coverage would want to support Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act), especially those working in the public sector where quality is akin to HMO plans today. Maybe that is being too generous. To see the final result of a widespread policy, we only need look at the public sector. As regulation and rising costs forces private firms from the market, government will fill the void, and we will all end up with the same low level of coverage government workers receive. In that transition, costs will likely rise significantly as few large firms are left creating a monopolist market conditions. Obamacare was known to anyone with an introductory education in simple economics would have this effect. Except, of course, those making public policy.

Governmet in a nutshell: providing ineffective solutions to the problems it creates.

Saturday, December 7, 2013

Anti-Federalists Prophesied The End Of Freedom

Spooner was right, the Constitution enabled government to infringe upon individual rights. From it's inception, the federal government has been a tool of oppression against the lower classes.

"On the eve of the federal convention, and following its adjournment in September of 1787, the Anti-Federalists made the case that the Constitution makers in Philadelphia had exceeded the mandate they were given to amend the Articles of Confederation, and nothing more. The Federal Constitution augured ill for freedom, argued the Anti-Federalists. These unsung heroes had warned early Americans of the "ropes and chains of consolidation," in Patrick Henry's magnificent words, inherent in the new dispensation."

"After 200 years of just such "consolidation"—in the magisterial “Liberty, Order, And Justice: An Introduction to the Constitutional Principles of American Government”—constitutional scholar James McClellan distilled the Anti-Federalist argument with the respect it deserves."


Friday, November 22, 2013

LBJ Killed JFK

With all of the political corruption and murder conspiracies, Johnson is the most likely candidate as the motivating person behind the murder of president Kennedy.

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Another Boom-Bust Example from the Fed

An interview with Mark Thornton of the Mises Institute, in which the scholar discusses the Austrian Business Cycle, the Skyscraper Curse, and how Federal Reserve policy enables out of control government spending to demonstrates the former in the form of the latter. Debt is not wealth, and a government cannot spend, through increasing debt, an economy into prosperity. But bad monetary policy can debase the very commodity that policy intends to prop up; the US dollar.

Unfortunately, good intentions do not guarantee good results. Without natural market corrections, reallocating resources through price signals, entrepreneurs will continue to make bad long-term investments. By allowing interest rates to rise and monetary volume to readjust properly and signal spending reductions and savings increases.

When all major economies are in a race to the bottom to debase their currencies to make exports more competitive. But there is only one end-game; the bottom. Our politicians are playing "chicken" with those in the oligarchy, and we in the proliteriat are the cars.

Elizabeth Warren 2016 ~ Wall Street's Worst Nightmare

"There are three words that strike terror in the hearts of Wall Street bankers and corporate executives across the land: President Elizabeth Warren. Anxiety over Warren grew Monday after a magazine report suggested the bank-bashing Democratic senator from Massachusetts could mount a presidential bid in 2016 and not necessarily defer to Hillary Clinton — who is viewed as far more business friendly — for the party's nomination." Cenk Uygur, host of The Young Turks discusses a Presidential bid by Senator Elizabeth Warren.

Considering the economic ignorance of Warren, I would think that it would take quite a campaign to garner much public support. Then again, we did end up with Bush and then Obama, which is why I have little faith in the political process.

Monday, October 7, 2013

Shutdown shows the Civil War never ended

Alternet sometimes get it right. Here, they posit that the latest government "shutdown" is simply a continuation of the division that led to the US Civil War. I won't argue against the idea, but will argue that the government never gets shut down, only a handful of services that it shouldn't be running do. If they are considered non-essential, why should the government run them at all? Why not let the private sector take over, since public debt and out of control spending is what causes these supposed shutdowns every few years?

Monday, September 30, 2013

Ohio State Gets Armored Fighting Vehicle: “Specifically Designed for Asymmetric Warfare”

If you don't think the US is a police state, then why would a vehicle such as this be acceptable for a public university when it looks designed for duty in Afghanistan? What a gross waste of taxpayer funds.

"Gary Lewis, a senior director of media relations at OSU, told The Daily Caller via email that the "unique, special-purpose vehicle is a replacement" for the "police fleet." He called the armored jalopy "an all-hazard, all-purpose, public safety-response vehicle" with "obviously enhanced capabilities.""

Pentagon denies $200 million request for Guantanamo upkeep

First the request is denied, then disavowed?

"A US military request for funding to renovate the prison base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba was denied by Pentagon officials in the Obama administration who, while pledging to close the prison, have been consistently prevented from doing so by Congress."


Sunday, September 29, 2013

Army Veteran Takes A Stand Against Obama

"The primary charge being that the national leadership of Veterans For Peace for the past 2+ years since the organization passed at its 2011 national convention a resolution directing Congress to immediately begin impeachment proceedings against President Obama for war crimes has refused to send an official letter to Congress directing them to do so. The national leadership of Veterans For Peace in that time also has done nothing to alert the public to the 2011 impeachment resolution passed by its rank and file membership at the national level at its national convention in 2011, or of the rank and file of Veterans For Peace reaffirming its call for impeaching Obama at its 2012 national convention by defeating by an even wider margin a 2012 resolution introduced to rescind the 2011 impeachment resolution."

Why after so long has no action been taken toward supporting impeachment proceedings?

Sunday, September 15, 2013

Politics and Anarchism

Politicians like Harry Reid are always proving their ignorance, but this one takes the cake. He says that Republican politicians and Occupy protestors are anarchists who promote violence. The trouble with that description is that is is quite incorrect. Anarchism simply means "self rule" and not any sort of lawless society. Anarchists simply aren't keen on other people making the rules that govern their lives. Anarchism does not equate violence.

Friday, September 6, 2013

Hollow Words from another Empty Suit

No that the warmongering is very civil lately, but Obama's speech is hardly substantive, or responsive to criticism by the overwhelming majority on the potential Syria invasion. Ever the narcissist, he seems to see himself as the king of the world, as did many of his predecessors:

"I just want to say thank you to all the participants in this roundtable.  This is an incredible and very diverse group of civil society leaders.  And this is something that I really enjoy doing at every country that I visit because it is my firm belief that a country's strength ultimately comes from its people and that as important as government is -- and laws -- what makes a country democratic and effective in delivering prosperity and security and hope to people is when they've got an active, thriving civil society. 

Empty words as always...

And all of these leaders, ranging from business leaders to youth leaders to environmental leaders, those who are advocating on behalf of a free press, the rule of law, all of them contribute in one way or another to continuing to strengthen Russian society and helping to make progress on behalf of all people. 

And the same is true in the United States.  I'm now in government, but I got my start as a community organizer, somebody who was working in what would be called an NGO in the international community.  And the work I was doing was helping poor communities have a voice in what was happening in their lives.  And I got elected as President by engaging people at a grassroots level.

So the kinds of activities that are represented here are critically important to Russia's development, and I'm very proud of their work.  And I think it is important for us to remember that in every country -- here in Russia, in the United States, around the globe -- that part of good government is making sure that we're creating a space for civil society to function effectively:  freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, making sure that people can join together and make common cause around the issues that they care deeply about.

Freedoms which every global superpower are curtailing at breakneck speed.

So I appreciate you taking the time.  I'm not going to do all the talking here.  I want to spend most of my time listening. But I want to thank you again and I hope all of you continue the good work."

Thursday, August 22, 2013

Orders To Destroy Guardian Hard Drives Came Directly From PM David Cameron

The difference between organized crime and government is that the mafia has no illusions that anything it does is in anyone else's best interests. 

"Government is good at one thing: It knows how to break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, 'See, if it weren't for the government, you wouldn't be able to walk.'" - Harry Browne

Saturday, August 17, 2013

Everyone Should Be Fuming At The NSA

The thing about government corruption and lies is that when its a left-statist politician, the Liberals tend to hold back their criticism.

"The Obama Administration repeatedly has assured us that the NSA does not collect the private information of ordinary Americans. Those statements simply are not true. We now know that the agency regularly intercepts and inspects Americans' phone calls, emails, and other communications, and it shares this information with other federal agencies that use it to investigate drug trafficking and tax evasion."

"Worse, DEA and IRS agents are told to lie to judges and defense attorneys about their use of NSA data, and about the very existence of the SOD, and to make up stories about how these investigations started so that no one will know information is coming from the NSA's top secret surveillance programs."

Friday, August 16, 2013

NewsBusters Catches Piers Morgan's Falsity, Gets Him to Apologize

If only we could get Morgan to stop talking now.

Monday, August 5, 2013

Exposing War Crimes is not a Crime

"Military prosecutors claimed that PFC Bradley Manning was guilty of "aiding the enemy." A federal judge dismissed that charge—the most serious of the lot—but the army intelligence analyst still faces many other counts, which could keep him behind bars for the rest of his life. The key ethical question, one that may be debated for decades to come, is this: Was Manning's unauthorized distribution of war videos, diplomatic cables, and top-secret documents to the WikiLeaks organization treasonous—or was it legitimate whistleblowing? According to Independent Institute Research Fellow Anthony Gregory, the author of The Power of Habeas Corpus in America, the latter label applies: Manning did Americans a favor by exposing war crimes—such as the execution of ten innocent civilians in Ishaqui, Iraq, in 2006, and the use of air strikes to cover up any evidence."

"War criminality ranks among the most important types of government wrongdoing warranting transparency," Gregory writes in the Daily Caller. "The American people need to understand what U.S. occupations are like."

"As Gregory notes, Barack Obama might have agreed with that assessment way back in 2008: During his first presidential campaign Sen. Obama called for greater transparency and protection for government whistleblowers. But you can't find statements to that effect on the Oval Office website—they've recently been removed. Perhaps that's because the White House is embarrassed by the dramatic difference between Obama's original promises and the current reality—that the Obama administration is prosecuting twice as many people for leaking classified information under the Espionage Act as all previous administrations combined. Gregory continues: "This is the administration: Nearly unparalleled secrecy, daily scandals, a surveillance state unbound by law, unilateral presidential wars, indefinite detention, the power to kill any terrorist suspect anywhere without a hint of due process, a politicized regulatory state collecting limitless data and harassing political opponents at home, and the persecution of whistleblowers using an anachronistic law from the darkest days of American civil liberty."

It is quite unfortunate that the Obama we have today is nearly the polar opposite of the one that captured the hope of so many, while bringing more of the same politics as his predecessors. The more things change...

Friday, July 26, 2013

Obama Promise To 'Protect Whistleblowers' Just Disappeared From

The folks from the Sunlight Foundation have noticed that the website, which was set up by the Obama transition team after the election in 2008 has suddenly been scrubbed of all of its original content. They noted that the front page had pointed to the White House website for a while, but you could still access a variety of old material and agendas. They were wondering why the administration would suddenly pull all that interesting archival information... and hit upon a clue. A little bit from the "ethics agenda": (another unfulfilled promise from candidate Obama)

Protect Whistleblowers: Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government. Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process.

Yet we end up with the exact opposite, not really the change we were hoping for...

Yeah. That statement seems a bit embarrassing at the very same time Obama's administration is threatening trade sanctions against anyone who grants asylum to Ed Snowden. Also... at the same time that we get to see how whistleblower Bradley Manning's "full access to courts and due process" will turn out. So far, it's been anything but reasonable, considering that the UN has already condemned Manning's treatment as "cruel and inhuman." And people wonder why Snowden left the country...


Thursday, July 18, 2013

Working for the Public Sector is MUCH better than the Private Sector

This a wonderful view into a lifetime of working for the state, trying to serve our society, but finding that the nature of the state is waste and inefficiency. FedWorkerThrowaway is Reddit gold, after only 12 hours!
Government work is great from a benefits standpoint and job security aspect, but you'll soon realize that it becomes incredibly degrading for your personal life.

For one thing, government work is not meritocratic. You can work hard and do a good job, but Phil, who is currently sleeping at his desk, will get the next promotion because he was there longer than you. Oh, and the supervisor feels bad for him because he's got a wife and kids and needs to make ends meet.

Also, its degrading because of the 10/90 principle. 10% of the people do 90% of the work. Everyone else just gets in the way or works against you. But you can't fire them because of the ridiculous benefits they get (the same ones you got). Also... supervisors are afraid to shed workers, because it weakens their budgetary position next year... less workers mean less money coming into your division, which means less "work", which means less reason for your division to exist.

Think that's bad? Try ordering a component you need for a program. Try ordering a part that you could normally buy at Home Depot, but because some politicians want the Government to "play fair", you need to go to an approved vendor. Or, if its something there is no vendor for, you need to go out and have at least two different companies to bid on giving you that part. The process takes 5 months because the turnaround time on your paperwork to order something takes 2 weeks because the contract specialist you sent it to was an overworked 10%er, or a lazy piece of crap 90%er. Regardless, you filled out that form wrong anyway, try again.

Even when you do things right, the bidding process is horrific. Bids don't go to the best value, but are decided upon silly factors like these:
  • Small business (<100 employees or something)
  • Female owned business
  • Minority owned business
  • Veteran owned business
  • Disabled owned business
Figures that the company who won the contract has a lousy track record, but its small one "owned" by a female minority veteran who was injured in combat. Oh, and how do they operate? You tell them what you want to order, they then buy it from home depot, upcharge it 80% for shipping and processing, and then sell it to you.

After awhile, you slowly realize that the entire system is a grind... it just exists to burn away as much of the taxpayer dollar. You try your best to do your job right and work hard. To be a good steward of the taxpayer's dollar. But the System has got you. After awhile, you get tired of being furloughed because some morons in the Capital can't figure out how to pass a budget. You're tired of hiring freezes which limit your mobility from department to department. You get sick of the fact that when promotions open up, they go to the 90%ers and "Phils" in the office before you. Even though you get accolades and "COINS" from your superiors acknowledging your work, you can't get any financial reward. So they give you time-off awards... which are pointless since your benefits already give you excellent vacation time.

You eventually give up. The idealism of working to better your country or your state by serving it as an employee turns into a depression-inducing commentary on the state of current affairs. Regardless if you start out as a Democrat or Republican, you slowly but sure just hate this bureaucratic mess. You begin writing your resume, updating it, and looking for new jobs. But the money and benefits you get are too good... you have a home. Kids. And a new job means moving, which no one wants to do.

So one boring day at work, after turning on your computer, you fall asleep at your desk, while the boss is showing around a new intern. He looks idealistic and happy to have a job, and wants to make a difference and do well. You give him one look, and then you close your eyes.

Who cares if you're sleeping, it's not like they're gonna fire you anyways.

Edit: wow, didn't expect this to get this big. Also, thank you for the gold... this is a throwaway, but it's cool to see what that is like. Also, I haven't even scratched the surface on the bullshit American taxpayer dollars was wasted on...

Reddit is awesome:

Boom! Democrat-run city of Detroit officially files for bankruptcy

One down, hundreds to go. Even better, it happened under the reign of the far Left, showing us that high government spending, regulation and taxation of an economy and workers only ends one way; bad.

Tapper interviews Spitzer in NYC comptroller race, quotes Libertarian candidate Kristin Davis at him

Jailing the competition seems to be too common a tactic for poiticians these days...

Initial unemployment compensation claims return to lower level

It is hardly a sign of economic recovery, or improved employment rates, when we see charts that appear to show a decline in the unemployment rate. The numbers don't tell the full story. 

First, we know that more part-time jobs have replaced full-time jobs, a way for employers to cut costs as government regulations put pressure on firms. The Obama administration take credit for this creation of jobs, but burdensome regulations have created lower-paying jobs and underemployment, definitely not a net gain. 

Next, we consider that unemployment regulations make it more difficult to qualify for benefits, also not a positive shift. It also excludes the growing number of workers who's benefits have expired. These realities are definitely not positive gains in employment, but show the continue decline of the overall economy.

Trayvon Movement Occupation of Florida Capitol

You had me at Florida...

The ignorance of the general public never ceases to amaze...

"Florida Governor Rick Scott was still nowhere to be seen Thursday as protesters angered by George Zimmerman's acquittal in the self-defense shooting of Trayvon Martin occupied his office in Tallahassee for the third day in a row. 

"The doors of the Capitol locked at 5 PM with around sixty protesters from the group Dream Defenders signing and chanting as CNN's cameras rolled. The group is demanding a special legislative session to consider a repeal of Stand Your Ground laws, an end to what they call racial profiling by the police and end to what they describe as criminalizing youth.

The trouble with the protests is that they miss the mark entirely. They are protesting against a law that was entirely irrelevant in the Zimmerman trial. When Martin attacked Zimmerman and threatened his life, Zimmerman acted in basic self defense. Stand your ground law did not apply, because Martin was the aggressor. The only wounds he sustained was the fatal gunshot, while Martin delivered multiple injuries to Zimmerman. 

Given this reality, repealing stand your ground laws would have no effect on similar cases. The protestors are merely trying to politicize a tragedy for political gain. By focusing on issues of race, they are promoting racism where it was not an issue. This sort of willful ignorance plays on people's emotions and offers little in the way of reason. Ignoring the facts will not resolve perceived social problems. 

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

In 513 Days Between Trayvon Shooting and Zimmerman Verdict, 11,106 Blacks Murdered by other Blacks

To be exact, the shameful truth is that 93% of African-American murders are committed by other African-Americans. That is breathtakingly awful when you consider how incensed the African-American community is about the Trayvon tragedy, no matter what you believe about Zimmerman’s guilt.
And these racebaiting culture-hustling microphone-pimps only get riled up when a “White Hispanic” kills an African-American? It’s absolutely shameful.
To update, in the 513 days between Trayvon dying, and the Zimmerman verdict, 11,106 African Americans have been murdered by other African-Americans.

More: In 513 Days Between Trayvon Shooting and Zimmerman Verdict, 11,106 Blacks Murdered by OTHER BLACKS | Independent Journal Review

Monday, July 8, 2013

Bipartisan State

Lincoln: The Birth of Electronic Evesdropping

Think that PRISM and NSA/CIA/FBI/government spying on Americans and everyone else in the world is a recent development? Think again. President Obama seems to enjoy being compared to the "great emancipator," and there are more disturbing similarities between the two than left-statists would like to admit. 

In 1862, Lincoln authorized sweeping control over the American telegraph infrastructure for Edwin Stanton, his secretary of war. Telegraphs were re-routed through his office, and Stanton used his power to spy on Americans, arrest journalists, and even control what was or wasn't sent. It was a critical tool in wartime, but a massive invasion of privacy that surely angered citizens.

Mindich argues that despite the huge differences in scope and technology, the Lincoln-era example is a neat comparison to the current war on terror. For those that take issue with the current NSA procedures, he says, the only real solution is to end the war — that's the only way Stanton's grasp of the telegraphs was loosed. "As the war ended, the emergency measures were rolled back. Information — telegraph and otherwise — began to flow freely again." Until this war is over, Mindich cautions, invasive governmental overreaching is a fact of life; whether it's Western Union or Microsoft, Lincoln or Obama, that's how it's always been.

Via: theverge

Saturday, July 6, 2013

Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics

If everyone took the time to learn about economics from a sociological perspective, society might achieve much more than ever before, in a voluntary manner. Unless, that is, people relegate social decision-making to a small group of sad sociopaths. That worked well for Germany, the USSR, Great Britain, and many other prior empires. Now its America's turn, I'm sure the central planners get it right this time... 

Those who fail to learn from the History Channel are doomed to watch it on repeats. 

Hazlitt's gift to us both clears any misconceptions about the science of economics and reinforces it with the moral arguments against violence and coercion by the state. Statists come in all flavor. We must each take up intellectual arms against tyranny to conquer the ruling ignorance that seeks to guide society, it would rather watch us stagnate and suffer. If you think you know anything about economics, let Henry school you. 

Reviews at:
Economics in One Lesson:

Also available for free courtesy the Mises Institute's publishing efforts to bring prosperity to society.

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Obamacare sports advertising plan sacked for a loss

As more supporters bail on the collapsing "Affordable" Healthcare Act, it is becoming more apparent that the legislation needs to be repealed. The public doesn't want it, and its only making healthcare more expensive. Rockwell's Law: Imagine that, a law that has the opposite effect of its stated intentions. That never happens...

If You Like The Surveillance State, You’ll Love E-Verify

From massive NSA spying, to IRS targeting of the administration's political opponents, to collection and sharing of our health care information as part of Obamacare, it seems every day we learn of another assault on our privacy. Sadly, this week the Senate took another significant, if little-noticed, step toward creating an authoritarian surveillance state. Buried in the immigration bill is a national identification system called mandatory E-Verify.

I find it odd that left-statists protest voter registration but not this...

The Senate did not spend much time discussing E-Verify, and what little discussion took place was mostly bipartisan praise for its effectiveness as a tool for preventing illegal immigrants from obtaining employment. It is a tragedy that mandatory E-Verify is not receiving more attention, as it will impact nearly every American's privacy and liberty.

The mandatory E-Verify system requires Americans to carry a "tamper-proof" social security card. Before they can legally begin a job, American citizens will have to show the card to their prospective employer, who will then have to verify their identity and eligibility to hold a job in the US by running the information through the newly-created federal E-Verify database. The database will contain photographs taken from passport files and state driver's licenses. The law gives federal bureaucrats broad discretion in adding other "biometric" identifiers to the database. It also gives the bureaucracy broad authority to determine what features the "tamper proof" card should contain.

Hello, 1984, are you just visiting or here to stay?


Sunday, June 30, 2013

Multiple Government Agencies Are Keeping Records Of Your Credit Card Transactions

Were you under the impression that your credit card transactions are private?  If so, I am sorry to burst your bubble.  As you will see below, there are actually multiple government agencies that are gathering and storing records of your credit card transactions.  And in turn, those government agencies share that information with other government agencies that want it.  So if you are making a purchase that you don't want anyone to know about, don't use a credit card.  This is one of the reasons why the government hates cash so much.  It is just so hard to track.

Any trades in cash thwart the government's efforts to track private exchanes. Rightly so, as no external party has any right to the details of those exchanges.

Friday, June 28, 2013

The 5 Richest Cabinet Members of All Time

No. 5: W. Averell Harriman, commerce secretary, 1947-48 Estimated wealth in current dollars: $841 million Harriman earned his money the old-fashioned way: He inherited most of it from his father, E.H. Harriman, founder of the Union Pacific Railroad. No. 4: William C. Whitney, Navy secretary, 1885-89 Estimated wealth in current dollars: $1.1 billion Whitney came into his money via political 

Big business meets big government, though separating the two is nearly impossible, and both thrive at the expense of those at the bottom. Want to change things? Stop calling on the government to fix problems the government creates (corporations are government manifestations). State-capitalism is the same as fascism, which is the cousin of socialism. All of these forms of coercive social order fail eventually. We have to learn to let go before we can heal as a culture.

Thursday, June 27, 2013

Clinton gets a Major Award

Jeb Bush will present Hillary Clinton with the 2013 Liberty Medal this fall in Philadelphia. 
It could be an awkward encounter for the two, both of whom are mentioned as 2016 presidential nominees for their respective parties. 
I think that the nature of Clinton is what leaves most outside of the far Left wondering how she could be deserving of any tribute from anyone other than another politician.
Bush, the former Republican governor of Florida, is chairman of the National Constitution Center, which is giving Clinton the award in honor of her career in public service and her advocacy efforts on behalf of women.
Read more: Jeb Bush to give award to Hillary Clinton - The Hill's Ballot Box

Nice words, though they ring hollow when one considers what Clinton's actions rather than words amount to.

Wednesday, June 26, 2013

Snowden would be better off in Cuba

Cuba makes sense, as they have a long history of refusing to work with the US on most issues. Snowden likely has little intelligence to share with a foreign agency, so his asylum would probably be likely in a country with a proven record of non-compliance. 

Full interview:

Arizona Voters Look To Recall Sens.

The site originally started with a singular goal to recall Jeff Flake but due to popular demand they decided to add John McCain to their hit list.

Senator Jeff Flake is not representing Arizona voters, conservatives, or American citizens, even though he is our employee and ran under the Republican ticket.

Getting rid of McCain would be a major positive effort to restore sanity to Congress, given the horrible legislation he has left in his wake. 


Texas Attorney General Enacts Voter ID Law

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott wasted no time after the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act today. The Lone Star AG implemented Texas' voter ID law immediately.

"With today's decision, the State's voter ID law will take effect immediately," Abbott announced. "Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government."

The Dallas Morning News, in noting Abbott's decision, called the state's voter ID "controversial." It's anything but, at least outside the far left and the media. It's a law the vast majority of Texans have wanted to put in place for years to secure the state's elections from fraud. Roughly 80% of Texans across all ethnicities support requiring voter ID to vote. 

As little faith as I have for voting, I do find it funny that those in opposition to IDs for voting might be in support of folks who may not be able to acquire an ID due to citizenship status. Just saying...

The Obama administration has consistently militated against states' authority to set their own election laws, and has specifically fought requirements to produce proof of identity at the polls. That should be controversial, not the fact that the state's attorney general is implementing a law that the majority wants and which has already passed muster.


Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Trump Suggests Just Killing Edward Snowden

Once again, Trump presents another reason he is irrelavent. He calls for the execution of a nonviolent conscientious objector to the unconstitutional actions of the American regime. Yeah, he's more a hero than a traitor, since a patriot would be outspoken about the violations of law by those representing the people.

I really hope no one ever seriously considers supporting Trump for public office again. His views are no worse than Obama or Bush, but he might be more unstable. 

Friday, June 21, 2013

Government Transparency through Technology

What's this? A national security official lying to Congress? Thanks to the Internet Archive, repurposed closed-captions, and the Knight Foundation, this sort of blatant abuse of authority becomes public knowledge, disseminated through modern technology.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Minimum Wage Laws and Full Service Stations

Does anyone remember full service stations? A generation or two ago, you were able to drive your car or truck to the service station and when you pulled in, a kid would come out and pump your gas, wash your windows, and maybe even check the fluids and tire pressure. Usually, these were kids with little to no skills that employers valued, so they earned little more than the experience that comes from working, rather like an internship. Jeffrey Tucker even says that we should work for free to gain skills, and I'm inclined to see the reason in the argument. If they earned any wages, they were minimal, but the skills gained helped them gain value over time to employers. These jobs were stepping-stones that those without the means to gain an expensive education could use to work their way to better paying jobs.

Minimum wage laws drove up costs to station operators, and full service stations faded into history. Politicians sought votes, and they promised that those at the low end of the pay scale, even those without skills valued in the market, would be able to "earn" higher wages through these interventionist price controls. Kids without marketable skills took jobs like these and learned basic skills that they could carry into better jobs in the future. They earned very low wages because they offered little skill, and these wage laws have a disproportionate effect of increasing youth unemployment at an even greater rate (are these laws discriminatory?). Minimum wage laws price basic jobs like this out of the market, effectively prohibiting employment below a subjective wage rate, leading to higher unemployment. Minimum wage laws can set minimum wage rates, but have no ability to guarantee employment at a higher, more competitive level where fewer jobs exist.

Today, states like Oregon and New Jersey force gas stations to hire pump attendants, believing that this will lower the unemployment rate. All this does is to reduce the number of these jobs available, since higher input costs lower the opportunity for this type of work. . The more expensive employees become, the fewer of them that employers demand, instead demanding higher productivity out of a smaller workforce. Minimum wage laws, as Murray Rothbard noted, lead to compulsory unemployment.

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Wage Controls and Unemployment

Walter Block on wage controls from The Case for Discrimination:

"Further, any proposal that artificially raises the salaries of a given calling beyond its productivity level threatens it with unemployment. But equal pay enactments are always couched in terms of raising female incomes, never reducing those of males."

What this means is that when wages for a given service are artificially raised, the demand required for that increased input factor are absent, and the resulting decline in demand due to higher market costs will lead to, among other things, increased unemployment.

It is at times depressing, that so many downtrodden, or simply naively optimistic, still believe that such intervention can have sustainable benefits. The reality is that rent seeking efforts tend to have short shelf lives.

Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Political Ignorance

Politicians think we're idiots. There's not much more to it.

We know how to regulate ourselves for the most part, and we should never discourage that ability as our posterity relies on our ability to persevere through tomorrow. Public officials, government representatives. They say we need them. They say things are better with a ruling class, an oligarchy. Some of the sheeple believe this, thoroughly indoctrinated (cognitively intoxicated on the propaganda).

They think we need them, need to obey them. They make laws, tell us laws keep us from doing bad things. They start telling us everything is bad, that they must help us by regulating everything we do, for our own good, of course. Nevermind that government does not exist. These people have never shared a bed with reason.

If I spend too much relative to what I make, I know eventually it will catch up with me. Never fails. It is self-inflicted. When government does it, how is it any better? Collective ignorance is no less connected to individual ignorance. When government spending outstrips its revenues, coupled with a dollar near the end of it's inflated half-life,  leaves us watching and thinking why it hasn't collapsed already?

Saturday, April 20, 2013

Letting go...

Brash Obama Rush to Judgement

Despite no inclination to the motivations of the suspected Boston bombers, Obama seems more than willing to make assumptions and display double standards regarding motivations:

One thing we do know is that whatever hateful agenda drove these men to such heinous acts will not — cannot — prevail. Whatever they thought they could ultimately achieve, they've already failed. They failed because the people of Boston refused to be intimidated. They failed because, as Americans, we refused to be terrorized. They failed because we will not waver from the character and the compassion and the values that define us as a country. Nor will we break the bonds that hold us together as Americans.

Fortunately, while the lamestream media remained silent, witnesses were using technology to remind us why traditional media is nearly irrelevant and dead. Reactions by law enforcement and media were to threaten independent reporters and fire up the spin cycle, twisting the facts to support the official story.

That sounds like great advice.  Too bad nobody gave it to the whiny hyper-partisan Barack Obama who had an emotional meltdown in front of the cameras when his push for gun control legislation failed.  He certainly didn't have any trouble "jumping to conclusions" and making a "rush to judgment" about the "motivations of the individuals" who opposed him.

Fortunately, supporters of Obama and the anti-rights gun control lobby are relying on ever-declining emotional support. As the facts about gun control become more apparent, just as legitimacy of state (mainstream) media is in decline, the population begins to see that gun control is about control and guns are a sidebar. The debate has little to do with facts, and even poster children like Giffords are less that convincing, since numerous laws were on place that should have prevented her own tragedy if laws actually prevented crime.

No rational argument for gun control is advanced by the likes of Obama or Giffords.  Their entire case rests on scurrilous presumptions about the motives of those who oppose them.  They deny the very possibility of reasoned disagreement.  

Obama's philosophy treats his political enemies far more harshly than the heavily-armed and murderous enemies of the American people.

"Obama's rush to judgment"

Monday, February 4, 2013

Obama's Rules for Assassinating American Citizens

This reminds me of the South Park bit, where hunting was prohibited except for self defense, and hunters would yell out "it's coming right at me" before striking out against an innocent victim:

"[t]he 16-page memo, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration's most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the  September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes."


Any violation of the nonaggression principle is a moral deficiency, something the Obama regime displays regularly. 

Sunday, February 3, 2013

Corn, corn, and more corn

Drinking a Manzanita soda with a Starlite vodka from texas, I can't help but laugh at the fact that, by Michelle Obama's new food standards, my spiked soda is now a vegetable. The Apple-flavored pop is corn-sweetened with high fructose corn syrup and the vodka is yellow corn and wheat distilled seven times. 

Rock out with the government intervention...

Thursday, January 3, 2013

Free Market Healthcare and Mutual Insurance

The economic results of government intervention are quite well observed and documented. When the government steps into a market through regulation, it's public "intentions" may be to help increase access to a service, or to drive down costs to make certain goods and services available at costs more affordable to a wider section of the consumers, but those goals often have unintended consequences for which those who study economics can see all too well. The deadweight loss created by intervening in the functions of natural market forces is blatant, difficult to refute or ignore, but when the problems are created by intervention by the state, how can further or expanded intervention reverse that course?

The Cato Institute asked and answered that very question a few years ago, back when the public was thinking that it would be better to plunder our fellow citizens to fund our own health care. Somehow, the idea that theft is bad was shelved for a while, and we were fed that line from the government. Plunder is still immoral, even when we allow someone with guns to do so with our consent. We are still accepting spoils of violence. 

It is increasingly obvious that government solutions to health care are not effective. People often find market outcomes appealing. Proponents of free markets in health care should work to make the most persuasive case for real reform and to achieve incremental reforms where possible. 

What we need is a true free market in health care and mutual fund insurance, which has historically shown a tendency to drive costs down and accessibility up, something that socialized services fail miserably to do on all counts. 

Or we could just stick our heads in the sand and believe that the state will come to our rescue and save us from the big bad capitalists. 

Today, we are constantly being told, the United States faces a health care crisis. Medical costs are too high, and health insurance is out of reach of the poor. The cause of this crisis is never made very clear, but the cure is obvious to nearly everybody: government must step in to solve the problem.

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, one of the primary sources of health care and health insurance for the working poor in Britain, Australia, and the United States was the fraternal society. Fraternal societies (called "friendly societies" in Britain and Australia) were voluntary mutual-aid associations. Their descendants survive among us today in the form of the Shriners, Elks, Masons, and similar organizations, but these no longer play the central role in American life they formerly did. As recently as 1920, over one-quarter of all adult Americans were members of fraternal societies. (The figure was still higher in Britain and Australia.) Fraternal societies were particularly popular among blacks and immigrants. (Indeed, Teddy Roosevelt's famous attack on "hyphenated Americans" was motivated in part by hostility to the immigrants' fraternal societies; he and other Progressives sought to "Americanize" immigrants by making them dependent for support on the democratic state, rather than on their own independent ethnic communities.)

Or maybe government didn't help after all...

House Republicans Celebrate New Year By Allowing Violence Against Women Act To Die

It's all about hownthe media spin the story, not whether it has any merit:

Even after taking heavy losses in the 2012 Election, including a clear rejection by women voters, Republicans still refused to protect women and children.

Isn't it rather redundant that while we already have morality to cover issues of violence and coercion, and that violence general is prohibited (yet not prevented) by the state, further convolution through the law to prohibit specific types of violence already prohibited on the general level is ineffective, but does gain political capital with those intended to benefit from the Law. If the law benefits some disproportionately or at the expense of others (legal plunder), then the law must be abolished, in the words of Bastiat: 

But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law — which may be an isolated case — is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system.

In the political theater, opposition tonal which protects or benefits some perceived minority or subset of society is seen through the lens of media as an affront to that subset. This perception of discrimination no less unsubstantiated it than belief in a deity makes it exist. And since "discrimination" is merely the act of making informed choices, we should choose to abandon bad laws in favor of morality and reason. A system of law lacking reason is none on which to base social justice.

As usual, the market will find a natural balance, and those who discriminate against women will find themselves losing the long run. If the law intends to protect women and children, rest assured that it will have the adverse effect of penalizing and oppressing that segment of society.

Tuesday, January 1, 2013

More Fiscal Cliff BS

Krauthammer proves he does not fully understand the debt crisis, and says that the "fiscal cliff" is a "complete surrender on everything," but compromise on such an important economic issue isn't what we need to correct an economic downturn caused by intervention by the state. The disproportionate lack of spending cuts when compared to tax increases only shows the inherent lack of commitment by those in public office. As usual, career politicians have little concern to be accountable for their actions, especially when the tax eaters are living at the expense of the tax producers. 

How can anyone seriously thinking about overwhelming debt and spending believe that simply increasing the burden on taxpayers will address the underlying issue; increases in public spending. It's like taking Tylenol for cancer; it doesn't address anything other than a minor symptom. Want to get serious about the national debt and deficit spending? Cut spending by a third, and cut taxes as well. 

Texans Against Senator John Cornyn

Anyone else think it's time to see senator Cornyn removed as Texas representative? His recent support for the "fiscal cliff" compromise shows me that he enjoys spending other people's money and would rather see taxes increase so that he can continues to do without regard to that unsustainable path. Cornyn would rather ignore the realistic idea that cutting spending creases deficits, while raising taxes only increases the national debt. How can anyone so ignorant of economic principles be allowed to make fiscal choices on behalf of anyone else? There is nothing bipartisan about what politicians are doing today in regards to responsibility in government, and voting them out is one effective way to make a change in the state.


At least, with Cornyn and Pelosi holding hands-on this "compromise," we don't have to pass the billet see what's in it...