RANT: Tell our representatives to take their hands off our organs!

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

http://www.slate.com/id/2156220/?nav=tap3

Hands Off My Kidney!
Who owns a donated organ?
By Kathryn Lewis
Posted Tuesday, Dec. 26, 2006, at 6:14 PM ET

*** begin quote ***

Two weeks ago, New York state’s highest court ruled that you can’t sue an organ donor network for giving away a kidney, even if the donor’s family wanted you to have it. The case began several years ago, when a widow named her husband’s childhood friend as the recipient of his kidneys. The friend died of renal failure in June, and his family wants to sue the network for donating one of the kidneys to someone else. Who owns a donated organ?

*** end quote ***

Libertarian believe that we own ourselves.

Really, if you don’t own your own body, who does? The essence of non-aggression principle begins with self-ownership. Who gave the State, Government, or anyone else control over one’s own body. In principle, we agree with the feminist argument “my body; my choice”. In fact the whole argument over abortion boils down to the government telling people what they can or can’t do. As a pro-life Libertarian, I grieve over the number of abortions, but I wouldn’t not dream of putting the government in change. We SHOULD be able to find better answers, but first the government has to stop mucking about with its diktats.

So, if we own our own bodies, then why can’t we own the organs?

Clearly, if there was a free market in organs, then we wouldn’t have transplant lists. And, don’t say that the poor would be prevented from getting transplants. Look at the charities that spring up for the needy. Look what hospitals and doctors do Pro Bono.

Do we need diktats to prevent people from buying and selling body parts? No, because we have that today despite laws. When we put the free market in charge, then everyone will be satisfied.

Now what am I offered for the proceeds of a liposuction? I have about a 100# I could spare.

Seriously, the gooferment makes diktats about organ transplants and we have shortages, spoilage, and high costs. (Which is EXACTLY what the dismal science of economics predicts would happen.)

Tell your representatives to get their head out of where ever it is and take their hands off our organs!


LIBERTY: Gubamint skools are just juvenile prisons!

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

http://www.suntimes.com/news/184566,CST-NWS-unskul24.article

http://tinyurl.com/y583kv

‘You have to trust that the child will learn’
‘Unschooling’ movement leaves education choices up to kids
December 24, 2006
BY ROSALIND ROSSI Education Reporter

***Begin Quote***

Eighteen-year-old Abby Stewart got word this month that she won early admission to elite Princeton University, even though she has never set foot in a high school classroom.

She also wrapped up a huge challenge — dancing the Snow Queen role in “The Nutcracker Suite” at the Athenaeum Theatre — largely because she has never set foot in a high school classroom.

Five years ago, frustrated with the pace and depth of a Chicago Public School gifted program, Abby withdrew from eighth grade and entered uncharted territory — a branch of home schooling often called “unschooling.”

***End Quote***

And, I have to be robbed at gunpoint to pay for the state to run the equivalent of juvenile prisons, why?


GUNS: Deactivated guns … yeah, right!

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/24/ngun24.xml

http://tinyurl.com/yfnp3y

‘Deactivated’ guns made lethal in four minutes
By Tom Harper, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 12:37am GMT 24/12/2006

*** begin quote ***

Gun crime victims have criticised the Government for failing to close a loophole that allows criminals to legally buy “deactivated” firearms that can be turned back into lethal weapons within minutes.

*** end quote ***

When will people realize that human beings are dangerous. When motivated, we can do ANYTHING! There’s a reason we’re at the top of the food chain. Adaptability.


RANT: Elderly are not well treated by “billers”

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

As most know, I poa on a now two relatives. I think it is interesting that companies try to slip stuff by the elderly. My Mom’s retiree benefits plan changed administrators and they sent her some stuff that I found downright condescending.

“Do not include any correspondence with your bill. And correspondence returned with your bill will be discarded.”

Now in this time of Holy Day peace, I hate to tell you what I was tempted to scribble on their bill.

“No written correspondence will be accepted or processed for address changes or coverage changes / terminations. If you wish to make changes, you must call the …”

No, the only thing I must do is pay taxes.

I intended to make a fuss about this. They have a lot of nerve. Talk about unilaterally changing the terms of a contract.

I think I am going to go on the warpath with these bozos.


TECHNOLOGY: ROBOFORM continues to prove its worth

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

I have complicated web form that I fill out often. So today, (DUH what took so long), I said “Hmm, wonder if roboform can do this. Even in part would be helpful.” Bingo! I created an extra identity. And, tested it. Seems to work right the first time. Sigh, what was I thinking all along?


LIBERTY: Fight Poverty With Capitalism

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

http://www.mises.org/story/2406

Fallacies of the Negative Income Tax
By Henry Hazlitt
Posted on 12/27/2006

[This essay is from Hazlitt’s book Man vs. The Welfare State (New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House, 1969, pp 84–100; available in PDF). It is an early critique of a proposal made by Milton Friedman that later came to be proposed by Richard Nixon and a version enshrined into law as the Earned Income Tax Credit, which is now the largest cash transfer program for low-income people. See Friedman’s Mistake.]

***Begin Quote***

Fight Poverty With Capitalism

“But would-be income guarantors ignore or despise the capitalistic system that makes their dreams dreamable…”

Capitalism brought the Industrial Revolution, and the enormous increase in productivity that this has made possible. Capitalism has enormously raised the economic level of the masses. It has wiped out whole areas of poverty, and continues to wipe out more. The so-called “pockets of poverty” constantly get smaller and fewer.

The condition of poverty, moreover, is relative rather than absolute. What we call poverty in the would be regarded as affluence in most parts of Africa, Asia, or Latin America. If an income sufficient to enable a man “to live with dignity” ought to be “guaranteed” as a matter of “absolute right,” why don’t the advocates of a guaranteed income insist that this right be enforced first of all in the poor countries, such as India and China, where the need is most widespread and glaring? The reason is simply that even the better-off groups in these nations have not produced enough wealth and income to be expropriated and distributed to others.

One of the guaranteed-income advocates, in a footnote, admits naively: “We must also recognize that we still have no strategy for the elimination of poverty in the underdeveloped countries.” Of course they haven’t. The “strategy” would be the introduction of free enterprise, and of incentives to work, to save, to accumulate capital, better tools and equipment, and to produce.

But would-be income guarantors ignore or despise the capitalistic system that makes their dreams dreamable and gives their redistribute-the-income proposals whatever plausibility they have. The capitalist system has made this country the most productive and richest in the world. It has continued to achieve its miracles even in the present generation, and to increase them year by year. It has raised the average weekly factory wage from less than $17 in 1933 to $130 in 1969. Even after the rise in prices is allowed for, it has nearly tripled our real per capita disposable income — from $893 in 1933 to $2,473 in 1968 (in 1968 prices).

Allowed to continue to operate with even the relative freedom that it has enjoyed in recent years, the capitalist system will continue to produce these miracles. It will continue to make progress against poverty by a general increase in income and wealth. But shortsighted and impatient efforts to wipe out poverty by severing the connection between effort and reward can only lead to the growth of a totalitarian state, and destroy the economic progress that this country has so dearly bought.

***End Quote***

Seems so elementally simple.

Allow people freedom and miracles happen.

Poverty in Africa seems to be directly related to dictators and government corruption. Not sure about Asia, but it seems logical to me. Just as it takes a government to commit genocide, it’s also need to really make the people poor.

America’s foreign policy should end at the water’s edge. Washington’s “trade with all; entangling alliances with none” is also a good rule of thumb. Trade between people; not gubamints.

I add another set of imperatives. If your country is poor, then you’re not welcome here. If you loot your country’s treasure, then don’t look for the protection of banks here. AND, if you kill your citizens, then don’t try hide here.

Capitalism is the road to peace and prosperity for everyone.


%d bloggers like this: