LIBERTY: What will be foisted upon us now!

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/01/27/what_are_they_buying?page=2

Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Thomas Sowell :: Townhall.com Columnist
What Are They Buying?
by Thomas Sowell

*** begin quote ***

What are the Beltway politicians buying with all the hundreds of billions of dollars they are spending? They are buying what politicians are most interested in– power.

In the name of protecting the taxpayers’ investment, they are buying the power to tell General Motors how to make cars, banks how to bank and, before it is all over with, all sorts of other people how to do the work they specialize in, and for which members of Congress have no competence, much less expertise.

This administration and Congress are now in a position to do what Franklin D. Roosevelt did during the Great Depression of the 1930s– use a crisis of the times to create new institutions that will last for generations.

To this day, we are still subsidizing millionaires in agriculture because farmers were having a tough time in the 1930s. We have the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) taking reckless chances in the housing market that have blown up in our faces today, because FDR decided to create a new federal housing agency in 1938.

Who knows what bright ideas this administration will turn into permanent institutions for our children and grandchildren to try to cope with?

*** end quote ***

It’s no doubt that politicians use crisis to consolidate and enlarge their power over us.

What will the serfs be saddled with now?

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Nationalization is one more step to the death camps

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

http://www.ablueview.com/2009/01/the-nationalization-debate-comes-out-of-the-closet.html

The Nationalization Debate Comes Out Of The Closet

*** begin quote ***

We’re finally beginning to remove the ideological blinders (socialism, socialism!) from our eyes and look at all possible ways to fix the liquidity crisis. This otherwise good NY Times article explores the pros & cons of nationalization but leaves out an important pro they’ve reported on in the past: it’s the most transparent, honest approach

*** end quote ***

Yeah, the gooferment is sooo honest. So good at everything they touch.

Sorry, it’s all about control.

Think Japanese Internment, the Civil War, and the Carter Inflation.

We’re all sheep. Being herded. Lucky if we just get sheared.

Government is dangerous.

Where’s my pitchfork and torch?

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Fix it before it kills us!

Monday, December 15, 2008

Monday, December 8, 2008
The End of the World…Maybe

*** begin quote ***

“Commandments” is an incorrect translation; “Utterances” or “Words” is much more accurate. I prefer “Laws,” as in “Natural Laws.” If you break them, bad things automatically happen. No cops are needed. The 20th century was a time of worshipping the false idols of Man and State, in violation of the First Law (“have no other gods but the one true God”). It doesn’t matter to me if people believe in any sort of God or not; these Ten Laws still exist, and violation of their practical wisdom brings unhappiness, destruction and death. You can say, “As you sow, you reap,” or “What goes around, comes around,” or karma (“the moral law of cause and effect”) or kismet, or the Tao, or whatever name you want to give it. Those laws are part of human nature.

*** and ***

And if people can’t do it, it’s doubly forbidden for governments (which in a sense don’t really exist, since they are composed of people). The big difference is that governments try to claim a monopoly on force, which makes them unimaginably destructive. I’ve read estimates that up to 200 million people died in the 20th century at the hands of various governments. And all because of the violation of “You shall not murder.”

*** and ***

If I was King, I would take all the Christians and Jews who support Israel (and send money there) and deport them all over there. I would do the same with Muslims here who support the Islamic countries. As it stands right now, the US government is involved in 4,000-year-old tribal warfare, and is in fact supporting both sides in the conflict.

*** end quote ***

Interesting.

First, the author points out timeless principles. Then, he proceeds to break them by using force on people.

I think one of those timeless principles is the “Zero Aggression Principle”. In my mind, I am moral, as admonished by most major religions or philosophies, to not initiate force on others. ZAP as the Libertarians call it.

Government — be it Kings, Presidents, or Tyrants all the same — seeks to force youto conform to its wishes. It robs Peter to enrich Paul while deducting a huge chuck for its “services”.

Sorry, sovereign individuals need no tyrants to tell them what to do. Government’s only legitimate role is to preserve the peace and ensure rights. The jury is still out if it can do that. Not very successful so far.

Maybe it’s time for a new meme to replace “government”. Examine your paradigms and memes for a replacement? I don’t have one but I’m looking.

Fix it before it kills us!

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Free market medical care

Monday, December 1, 2008

http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/34953434.html

VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Free-market medicine and a ’74-week rolling average’

*** begin quote ***

“I have just such a medical practice in Cartersville, GA. I have the nicest office, most up-to-date EMR, digital EKG, next-day turnaround for any lab known to man and my prices are the lowest around. Office visit: $50. EKG, Labs, Injections, are all a small fraction of what you would pay anywhere. I make house calls. Check us out at thephysicianspractice.com.

“I take payment at time of service only, have almost no overhead and pass my savings on to the patient. I have been open for 18 months and my wife and I are the only staff we have and we are doing just fine. …

“I’m not the best doctor, I just have the best system: the Free Market! Everyone else is asleep and having a nightmare.

“If Universal Healthcare passes, my practice will BOOM! Oh wait … unless they make it illegal for me to work outside the system. If that happens, Nevada here I come!”

*** end quote ***

Here’s an example of what the cost of medical care COULD be. Extrapolate that across the whole spectrum and you can see what savings could be found in the current mess.

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Getting rid of the Washington DC gang!

Friday, November 28, 2008

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2008/tle485-20080921-03.html

DumpDC.jpg

The “50 State Secession” meme is being propagated.

# – # – #

US out of New Jersey, Vermont, Oregon, New Hampshire … …

:-)

# # # # #


LIBERTY: The proper role of Government!

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

http://channel-surfing.blogspot.com/2008/11/rutgers-gets-blitzed-by-committee.html

Monday, November 24, 2008
Rutgers gets blitzed by committee

*** begin quote ***

I graduated from Rutgers in 1988 with a degree in English and have been a backer of the school as an academic institution since before I arrived on campus as a junior, having transferred in from Middlesex County College and Penn State.

*** and ***

The sports program is another story. It’s history is, at best, uneventful — a couple of good basketball seasons (a magical 1975-1976 season that saw the team make the Final Four, the football team a couple of years ago, and the girls basketball team).

*** and ***

The result — disappointment on the field after the team’s surprising 2006 season and questions about the impact that spending on football has had on other sports and other programs. (A report issued last week called for tighter controls and more transparency in the department after a sports marketing contract was issued without formal bidding, its stadium expansion failed to gain funding and it extended the contract of football coach Greg Schiano.)

The New York Times referred to the assorted failures as “The Rutgers Mess .”

Rutgers, the biggest and most important public university in New Jersey, has spent millions of dollars furthering its ambition to become a major football power that might otherwise have been devoted to academics. It has done so during a period of rising tuition and budgetary cutbacks in academic departments, and, worse, without any real oversight from the university’s president, Richard McCormick, and its Board of Governors.

*** end quote ***

# – # – #

Libertarian at 08824 said…

Might you Rutgers alums explain why I have to pay taxes for Rutgers boondoggles? Or anything to do with Rutgers at all.

I’m sure there must be a reason that the gooferment subsidizes “education” with taxes, but for the life of me I see no benefit to me. Guess I just have that crazy notion that I should pay for things I receive and not pay for things I don’t receive.

It’s sad that a lot of people get to “chip in” for Rutgers, who have better use for their money, who get no conceivable benefit from their “contribution”.

Pass the hat; not rob folks at gunpoint!

12:36 AM

# – # – #

Anonymous said…

Education is an investment in the future. Ever hear of the GI Bill? Millions of veterans were given tax money to go to college, to buy homes and to open up new businesses. It was an investment in America and it paid off. Of course I would not expect a goofy goofball goooooooooofertarian to understand the concept. In many west European countries, university is tuition free to the qualified because they are investing in the brain power of their youth. I met a brilliant UK biologist who came from humble origins and would not have been able to go to university save for the fact it was free in the UK.

1:01 PM

# – # – #

Libertarian at 08824 said…

>Education is an investment in the future.

Yes. “Investment” by someone in expectation of a “return”. Unfortunately, the parties that benefit are not the people who pay ther freight and get the return. Depending upon how you define the various roles, the taxpayer is robbed for the benefit of politicians, teachers’ unions, and vast number of beneficiaries. Almost by chance, some people get “educated” and go to make more money that they would have without the “education”. But the “poor old taxpayer” doesn’t participate in the benefits, other than inderectly. Sorry, but I don’t want to “invest” in that. I’d like a Certificate of Deposit please. Or, a something that I choose.

>Ever hear of the GI Bill?

Sure. Socialism at work.

>Millions of veterans were given tax money to go to college, to buy homes
>and to open up new businesses.

Sorry, but just cause there is “good” done with the proceeds of a crime, that doesn’t absolve the criminal class. And, as Basat taught us, let’s look for the many victims of the crime. Many people were taken from. All those small “thefts” precluded people from doing good things for themselves. How many educations, homes, and business were “stolen” to transfer them to the returning veterans.

>It was an investment in America and it paid off.

It was NOT an investment. An investment is made by a person with their savings in search of a profit. Let me and my ten big friends with guns take your wallet and make an “investment”. I could go on and on, but you’re not going to look at it in the “cold light of day”.

>Of course I would not expect a goofy goofball goooooooooofertarian to understand the concept.

And, the obligatory ad hominum attack.

>In many west European countries, university is tuition free to the qualified because they are
>investing in the brain power of their youth. I met a brilliant UK biologist who came from
> humble origins and would not have been able to go to university save for the fact it was
> free in the UK.

And, how many people gave up their choices for that example? You choose NOT to see that “happy example” was paid for on the backs of other people’s preempted choices. And, you assert that there was no other way for it to happen. You don’t know that.

Besides, I wouldn’t use Europe of the example of what America should do.

I have a novel idea. Why don’t we let people alone to make their own choices without the Gooferment using force to make choices for us?

Yeah, like that’s going to happen. Pitchforks and torches. That’s the only way to stop creeping and creepy socialism.

I don’t want to pay for Rutgers. But I don’t get a choice. That’s fair?

2:46 PM

# – # – #

Anonymous said…

I am astounded that you are against the GI Bill. Are libertarians against the government being in charge of the monetary system? So who would mint the money? The states, cities, towns, municipalities? Oh, now I get it, the goofertarians would be in charge of the monetary system, the goofertarians would mint the coins and produce the paper money. Libertarians hate government so much, hate everything about government except the military. I guess goofballtarians want to privatize the police, the courts, the prisons, fire departments, libraries, schools, the building and upkeep of roads, bridges and the whole infrastructure, the list goes on and on into bizarro land absurdity. So in goofballtarian world, when you call the fire department for help their first question will be if you have paid your fire department bill to the privatized fire company, if not, tough luck. Burn baby burn. Goofballtarianism is great for a guy like Steve Forbes, it makes sense for billionaires but not ordinary Americans.

There is no successful libertarian run government in the world, not Ireland (with universal health care and free university), not India (which has socialism written into its constitution) and not Hong Kong which is owned by commie China.

3:35 PM

# – # – #

Libertarian at 08824 said…

>I am astounded that you are against the GI Bill.

Let me help relieve your astonishment. Libertarians, (in general), think that government only has a few proper functions: (1) provide for the common DEFENSE (against invaders); (2) ensure domestic tranquility (i.e., prevent crime and fraud); and (3) secure the blessing of liberty for our posterity. Surly, you will recognize the words of the Founding Fathers. I’ve read the Constitution and, not only is there NO authorization for a STANDING ARMY, there is no provision for Congress to do most of what it did to get to the GI Bill. Sorry, but I’m surprised at your “astonishment”.

>Are libertarians against the government being in charge of the monetary system?

Most “libertarians” are against the gooferment being “in charge” of anything. I’d say especially the monetary system. As much as I hate the Fed, I’d like even less for the Congress or any gooferment to be in charge of any such thing. If you remember your American History, money was whatever the PEOPLE decided they would accept. Spanish doubloons, English pounds, French francs, gold, silver, and script all circulated as money. Common wisdom was that Congressional money was as “worthless as a Continental damn”. The Dead Old White Guys enshrined that gold and silver were money! This launched a period of peace and prosperity with declining prices from 1780 to 1860. There were experiments with central banks and printing press money, but they were discarded as abuses abounded. Then the tyrant Lincoln brought us inflation and printing greenbacks without backing. Can’t fight a war with out paper money. Sorry, but fiat currency allows the gooferment to spend more than it takes in. It allows the Congress and the Executive to escape the chains of “poverty”. Can you envision a war that the people had to pay for in the form of taxes? I can’t. It makes it obvious who are the big losers in any war. The people. Libertarians are generally very peaceful people who will never arress but will defend themselves.

>So who would mint the money?

Anyone who wants to. See you fall into the Socialist’s trap that there is “the money”. It’s that trap. That meme. That locks you into a “central gooferment” paradigm. People could never figure out “money” without gooferment. Why do you think the gooferment objects to e-Gold, the Liberty Dollar, the Lakota dollar, or the Ithaca dollar? Remember that dollar originates from the word “thaller” which was the name of a silversmith that made fine coins and became the standard. In short, money becomes what ever you want to take as money.

>The states, cities, towns, municipalities? Oh, now I get it, the goofertarians would
>be in charge of the monetary system, the goofertarians would mint the coins and
>produce the paper money.

Heaven forbid. We don’t want to be in charge of anything but ourselves. I have enough problems just managing “me”. I can’t possibly mange you, Herb, and my neighbors. I just would give people the liberty to run their own lives. Repeal the “legal tender” laws and you can use whatever money you would like. The FED (the Federal Reserve Bank, which is not Federal, has no “reserve”, and is not a “bank”), which is a private banking cartel unaudited and uncontrolled, would have to figure out what to do with its pretty green peices of paper. Forget centrally set interest rates, forget inflation, forget the 5T$ in FRB that China has. We’d be back in the messy world of lots of competing monies.

>Libertarians hate government so much, hate everything about government except the military.

Don’t leave out the military. Remember the DOWGs didn’t want a standing army or “private army or militias”. (I know Socialists are weak on their history. The three letter “police” gangs that you love so much like the FBI, CIA, DEA, BATF, and things like the “Park Police” are what the DOWGs would call “private armies”.) So, there is no reason for the Federal Government to have such things. State Governments have SOME limited ability to form these things, but that we will leave to the State Constitutional scholars.

> I guess goofballtarians want to privatize the police, the courts, the prisons,
> fire departments, libraries, schools, the building and upkeep of roads, bridges
> and the whole infrastructure, the list goes on and on into bizarro land absurdity.

Yes, privatize everything. Really privatize it. Not this Socialistic public-private regulate privatization. Libertarian theorists predict that Insurance Companies, (true mutual Insurance organizations; not the jokes you see now), would provide dispute resolution, police, fire, and adjudication services. In competition with each other, they would seek to deliver such “services” quickly and cheaply. (Imagine Judge Judy without the cap of “small claims court”. As I understand it, the backlog for Judge Judy type “private dispute arbitration” is less than three months.)

>So in goofballtarian world, when you call the fire department for help their first question
>will be if you have paid your fire department bill to the privatized fire company, if not,
>tough luck. Burn baby burn.

Sorry. But one would envision, what better way to get more customers than to save your house BEFORE you were a customer. Right now, if California, crappy socialistic insurance companies are visiting communities where they have insureds and making suggestions, doing “wood and brush” work, and deploying “funny chemicals” that stop wildfires on houses that they DO NOT INSURE. Why? It’s cheaper than paying off a loss. You are so locked in your current paradigm of “big gooferment good” that you can’t eve see the possibilities of another path.

>Goofballtarianism is great for a guy like Steve Forbes, it makes sense for billionaires
>but not ordinary Americans.

I, obviously, don’t agree with that. Liberty, for EVERYONE, allows EVERYONE to make choices.

>There is no successful libertarian run government in the world

Well, Somalia has no central government. Iceland for about 250 years had no central government. Just because we have not been able to see our way past the concept of “big government”, doesn’t mean that it’s not a good idea. What that means is that “entrenched interests”, the aristocracy, and the blindness of the common man prevents it from forming. Eventually, just as the Kings fell to liberty, so to will the Socialists fall to liberty. See the natual state of human beings is to be free. If you can’t keep your prisons “secure”, what makes you think you can succeed at life. And, remember only Big Governments commit genocide. Big Governments are oppressive.

>

Feel free to drop back anytime for a lesson on liberty.

I would like to make one disclaimer. “Libertarian” is a label applied to a wide swath of folks. I am a little L Libertarian. Currently estranged from the “Libertarian Party” because they abandoned their principles to try to get elected. I’m some where between a “miniarchist libertarian” and an “anarchist libertarian”. At my end of the Nolan Chart, there are no fans of “big government”. While we can disagree heatedly on orthodoxy of libertarianism, we all agree what we have now ain’t it.

I don’t pretend to speak for any libertarian of any flavor other than myself.

:-)

(OK, Fred? We have some other libertarians here in South Brunswick. And, he quibbled about one of my representations about “libertarians”. I am sure that I could live very comfortably in Fred’s world. As he probably could in mine. But, I don’t want to “defraud” anyone by misrepresentation! )

;-)

alibertarianin08824

7:55 PM

# – # – #

Anonymous Anonymous said…

Ahh, the old it’s not in the Constitution game. Lots of things aren’t in the Constitution: there is no right to travel or marry in the Constitution, no right to vote, no right to privacy, no right to smoke, nothing about a Pledge of Allegiance, etc. The Supreme Court gets to decide what the Constitution means. They got to rule what the 2nd amendment “really” meant. The 2nd amendment is actually kind of ambiguous with its enigmatic wording and odd punctuation and so a different supreme court might have ruled differently.

In 1939, the S.C. ruled in U.S. v. Miller that a sawed-off shotgun transported across state lines by a bootlegger was not what the amendment’s authors had in mind when they were protecting arms needed for military service.

An Earl Warren court would be very different from the present supreme court. In June 2005 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Jessica Gonzales had no Constitutional right to police enforcement of her restraining order against her estranged husband who killed her 3 daughters. They decided that there is no right to police enforcement in the Constitution. If libertarians hate government so much why would they like the Constitution which is the underpinning of our democratic republic.

The more I hear about libertarianism, the less I like it. It’s a scam run on the gullible who think that they can live in a civil and civilized society without paying any taxes. Libertarianism is a cult, an unbending hide-bound sect-like ideology.

1:05 AM

# – # – #

Blogger Libertarian at 08824 said…

>Ahh, the old it’s not in the Constitution game. Lots of things aren’t in the Constitution:

Yeah, that dog gone old scrap of paper. Your big gooferment purports to be “bound” and “limited” by it. (What a joke!)

>there is no right to travel or marry in the Constitution

So that means that the FEDERAL GOOFERMENT should have ZERO to say about those issue.

>no right to vote, no right to privacy, no right to smoke, nothing about a Pledge of Allegiance

So, there are no defined FEDERAL interest in these things. And, the Pledge! Written by a Flag Salesman who was a NAZI. And, we tolerate this intrusion.

>The Supreme Court gets to decide what the Constitution means.

It’s no surprise that the GOOFERMENT COURT decided that it has the power to DECIDE what the limits of GOOFERMENT POWER is. Then it’s a surprise that it expands GOOFERMENT power. (Please stop making me laugh!)

>The 2nd amendment is actually kind of ambiguous with its enigmatic wording and

>odd punctuation and so a different supreme court might have ruled differently.

It’s really clear. IMHO! Similar to the First Amendment? When you read it in the terms of the DOWGs, “well regulated” means hitting what you aim at AND “the Free State” is the ideal government entity. First Amendment says you have free speech; Second gives you the tools to protect your rights.

>In 1939, the S.C. ruled in U.S. v. Miller that a sawed-off shotgun

Miller is a good example of the GOOFERMENT making rules for itself. It was an unopposed adversarial proceeding. (The defendants never showed up.) And, it was flawed in its findings, during WW1, American troops used sawed off shotguns in trench warfare. (Some were even sent from home.) So that decision was and is flawed. AND, the Constitution is very clear “shall not be infringed”!

> no Constitutional right to police enforcement of her restraining order

SO you are arguing for a GOOFERMENT that has no duty to protect its citizens?

>If libertarians hate government so much why would they like the Constitution

YOUR GOOFERMENT asserts that it follows the Constitution, us Libertarians would like YOUR GOOFERMENT to leave us alone. The only tools we have to do that is to demand it follow its own rules!

>The more I hear about libertarianism, the less I like it.

So we’re even. The more I hear about YOUR GOOFERMENT, the less I like it.

>It’s a scam run on the gullible who think that they can live in a civil and

>civilized society without paying any taxes.

Absolutely right! No one should pay TAXES! You should buy “services” from truly competing service providers. Exactly how much “service” (i.e., police, fire, garbage, education, etc. etc.) I want to buy and at a mutually agreed price. I don’t want or need GOOFERMENT SERVICES, that I have to pay for, that I may or may not want, that are “offered” at a price I can’t afford, that are just oppressive. Sorry, keep your GOOFERMENT. I’m happy to allow you to do whatever you want. Just don’t impose it on me. Keep your GOOFERMENT to yourself.

> Libertarianism is a cult, an unbending hide-bound sect-like ideology.

Yup, it’s a principled movement. Unbending, yup! Driven by an idea that human beings should be able to make choices as they see fit free of force or fraud which don’t impose on others by force. If you don’t like “libertarianism”; how about “voluntarist”?

:-)

Drive by comment anytime.

8:07 AM

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Time to end “government education”?

Saturday, November 15, 2008

>The book is called “Raising the
>Grade: How High School Reform Can
>Save Our Youth and Our Nation.”

Maybe as a society, we are finally going to escape the “government education” paradigm. We can’t ‘afford’ it from both the input side (i.e., taxes) and the output (i.e., quality of what it produces). Socialists have used it to undermine our national commitment to individual achievement and rugged individualism that made America great. And, put them in control of everyone’s lives.

The purposes of the education system we imported from Prussia was to make cannon fodder soldiers and malleable factory workers. All that could be easily let by a powerful “elite”. Seems to have worked.

Unfortunately, cannon fodder soldiers are not how wars are fought today. Factory workers don’t exist any more in the USA. And that “smart elite” isn’t very ‘smart’ and have clay feet.

Time for a paradigm shift? Not just more meaningless diplomas.

imho!

# # # # #


LIBERTY: DRINKING AGE?

Friday, November 14, 2008

http://www.wdel.com/story.php?id=636617775922

Autopsy performed on UD freshman By John Lewis

*** begin quote ***

Authorities were looking into the possibility of an alcohol overdose in the death of the freshman from Kendall Park, New Jersey.

*** end quote ***

Does any politician who has voted for “drinking age restriction” feel any shame about the death of this young man?

Of course not!

No one holds them accountable!

If there was no “drinking age” — an absurd concept since you can’t keep people from putting stuff in their bodies; you can make it difficult or more expensive, but you can’t stop it with a law!! Suppose “children” were allowed to drink anything, anytime, anywhere. Would they drink? Sure. They do NOW! Only an “ostrich” would think differently.

So, make the drinking age ZERO and let people learn in much safer circumstances. We don’t hear of European kids binge drinking themselves to death. Do we?

I remember as a sixteen year old going to Nevada where I could drive as fast as I wanted on the open high way, drink, and gamble. They even had no age on the “chicken ranches”, but my Mom wouldn’t have approved.

A much “free-er”, and safer time!

Victimless crimes have terrible consequences!

Argh!

I pray for this poor lad and his parents. A casualty of gooferment!

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Progress in NH

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

http://www.freestateproject.org/intro/2008_election

Libertarian Free State Project elects four of its members to the New Hampshire State House of Representatives — Ridley Report

Low tax activists amend Rochester, New Hampshire charter to cap all spending increases to the rate of inflation — Union Leader

# – # – #

The Free State Project is showing some results in New Hampshire!

# # # # #


LIBERTY: I think this about says it all

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

chesty

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Computerized Voting

Thursday, November 6, 2008

http://www.wxpnews.com/archives/wxpnews-352-20081104.htm

>Computerized Voting: Is It Trustworthy Yet?


No!
As IT types, we KNOW how lame the system is.
Personally, I think, imho, we need PAPER.
We have to have a machine that collects the vote and produces a printed receipt. That receipt can be visually verified by the voter. Then that receipt should be deposited into the “ballot box”. The machine can be the quick fast collection tool. If there are disputes, then the printed receipts can be counted.
We SHOULD use the Iraqi low tech system to prevent fraud (i.e., the thumb dipped in indelible ink)! We SHOULD require photo identification to vote. We SHOULD have photos in the registration records that election officials use to very who is voting.
If long lines bother you, we really should go to a more representative system. All this “voting” makes no sense. Vote for your local politician and have them represent you.
!:-)fjohn

LIBERTY: Stossel on “politics”

Saturday, November 1, 2008

http://vimeo.com/2052724?pg=embed&sec=2052724

Stossel’s Politically Incorrect Guide to Politics

*** begin quote ***

The brilliant John Stossel takes some powerful pro-liberty ideas and delivers them effectively to a wide audience. Here’s his latest 1 hour special, the “Politically Incorrect Guide to Politics”. This is a great video to show anyone still “in the system” and new to liberty. Stossel makes it crystal clear that government doesn’t work and that it creates devastating unintended consequences:

*** end quote ***

I saw it live and, if you missed it, it’s an excellent way to spend forty minutes.

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Marriage? Gooferment MYOB!

Monday, October 27, 2008

Op-Ed Contributor
Taking Marriage Private
By STEPHANIE COONTZ
Published: November 26, 2007

*** begin quote ***

WHY do people — gay or straight — need the state’s permission to marry? For most of Western history, they didn’t, because marriage was a private contract between two families. The parents’ agreement to the match, not the approval of church or state, was what confirmed its validity.

*** end quote ***

Why indeed do WE, the free sovereign individuals, need the Gooferment’s permission, pay them, and give them allegiance to their interference?

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Morality v Moralism or MYOB!

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

http://ncc-1776.org/tle2008/tle487-20081005-06.html

Morality v Moralism
by A.X. Perez
perez180ehs -+at+- hotmail.com
Attribute to The Libertarian Enterprise

*** begin quote ***

Morals come in two flavors, morality and moralism.

Morality is that which some people practices in their own life to achieve freedom. Moralism is what some people try to impose on others to enslave them.

For example,let us consider alcohol. A person may choose to refrain from (or at least limit) consuming whiskey and beer to maintain his judgement and to avoid addiction. This is a moral decision to maintain control of his own life. He may be guided by religious precepts but it is ultimately an exercise in determining his own destiny.

Others decide that no one should be allowed to drink. they seek to use the power of the state to stop others from enjoying wine and rum even if they do so responsibly. They may seek to bolster their arguments by pointing to the role of drunk drivers in fatal accidents (like the bitch who ran over my old man, and yeah I’m not setting an example of Christian forgiveness. Deal.) and alcohol in general on homicide and other acts of violence. However, their goal is not to solve these problems but rather to prevent anyone from drinking, even the vast majority who use alcoholic beverages responsibly.

*** end quote ***

Interesting. I never made that distinction. I am well familiar with the “different sets of rules” for what I do and what you do. It’s annoying when you get preached at; it’s slavery when the guns of gooferment are used on you.

Argh!

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Don’t privitize Social Security. It’s too risky!

Thursday, October 2, 2008

http://channel-surfing.blogspot.com/2008/10/market-meltdown-is-best-argument.html

Thursday, October 02, 2008

Market meltdown is best argument against privatizing Social Security

*** begin quote ***

It has always been pretty clear to me that the notion that we could fix our retirement system by handing it over to Wall Street was, well, nuts.

*** and ***

American workers shouldn’t have to face this kind of uncertainty. The cautionary tale is before us — listen to this NPR Morning Edition report on soon-to-be retirees who thought they would live off their savings and investments, but whom the experts now council to “keep on working.”

Posted by Hank Kalet at 3:00 PM

*** end quote ***

Of course, I was enraged and commented:

fjohn said…

Arghhh!

So let me understand this.

It’s OK to rob poor black men to pay off rich white women? (Who designed this one out, the KKK?)

It’s OK to rob the future generations in an intergenerational transfer of wealth. (Like eating your young?)

It’s OK to have a forced savings plan that has an implied interest rate of negative 2 percent. (OK, you may not have enough left from your job, but nanny gooferment will save you some dog food for your retirement.)

It’s OK for a poor person’s largest asset (i.e, “their” social security accrued benefits) to “evaporate” when they die. Absorbed back into the gooferment till for a $225 ‘death benefit’. (Even a passbook savings account can be inherited.)

Argh!

Yes, save us from the Stock Market that earns an average of 8% a year over LONG periods of time.

Save us mommy gooferment from the big bad real world. The fact the the gooferment — specifically the congress critters took payoff from the monsters they created — caused the problem and you seek to save us by MORE gooferment.

Really explain it to me again. Use littler words. Cause I’m getting screwed by all you socialists and I can’t stand it any more.

Explain to me how Chile privitized their social security in 1970 with a population so illiterate they had to use pictures for the investment companies because people could NOT read the names. (Haven’t heard about dying old folks in Chile lately. Maybe everyone died of privitazation there and we have NOT had it reported yet?)

Argh!

It must by the fault of those Liberty loving dead old white guys.

I’m sure they must have mentioned Social Security in the enumerated powers.

Please give me a break with this circular logic on an un-Constitutional un-Liberty disabling disempowering Socialist program.

Karl Marx must be laughing in his beer at us! Him and his cousin Groucho. They couldn’t have made a funnier skit.

4:39 PM

# – # – #

In summation, don’t fix a failed program because of stock market volatility. What caused the volatility, criminal negligence by the ploiltical class.

OK. Lets kill the porgram completely.

Even if one stipulates that a bunch of dead old white guys 200 years ago can bind me to an obligation, let’s see where it says that you Socialists can steal my money “for my own good” of course.

Argh!

Leave me alone. Take your Socialism and keep it to yourself.

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Who does own the gas station? Or, anything else for that matter.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/bilger2.html

Government Gouging by Aaron Bilger

*** begin quote ***

Unfortunately, the free market price system is currently being forbidden in Georgia and several other states. Politicians have enacted anti-“gouging” laws to punish sellers of gasoline who request too high a price. Whether such politicians are well-meaning but economically ignorant, or know the consequences but are cynically manipulating public distaste for higher prices despite this is up for debate, but the results are the same. Ethically, the results are detestable. Gas station operators are told in effect that they are not free; they must sell their product as an altruistic service to others rather than serving their own individual interests. Legislating an exact price ceiling (a maximum price at which gas could be sold) would be bad enough, but to compound the issue, an exact price is not given in anti-gouging laws. A supplier cannot even know if they may be violating the law, and must be constantly fearful of someone accusing them of charging “too much.” In Atlanta for now, the de facto result is gas station operators being afraid to price gasoline above $4–4.29/gallon. Asking a half-dozen local operators who ran out of gas as to why they do not raise prices resulted in the same general response; as one put it, “I cannot raise my price. It would be a crime.”

*** and ***

The culprit behind the gas shortages this time is individual state governments rather than federal government, but the solution is the same now as it was then – for politicians to stop their harmful efforts to control prices. End anti-gouging laws, end the shortage.

*** end quote ***

# – # – #

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Stop the bailout!

Saturday, September 27, 2008

http://tinyurl.com/4brspa

Download “Stop the Bailout!” 26-09-2008 (2.97 MB)
Duration: 8:05 m – Filetype: mp3 – Bitrate: 51.28820816953 KBPS – Frequency: 44100 HZ
Lew Rockwell on the Michael Reagan Show

# – # – #

Well worth a less than ten minute listen.

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Fiat money ALWAYS fails!

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Ron Paul Discussing his Bernanke Confrontation 9/24/2008

Like the old Fram Oil Filter commercial, pay for it now or later. Pay now is better in the long run. Don’t bail them out. “Too Big To Fail” is an illusion. Capitalism REQUIRES us to let them fail. TO teach EVERYONE a lesson!


LIBERTY: Calling Taxachusett’s voters — CARLA HOWELL’S OP-ED

Monday, September 22, 2008

===========================================================

CARLA HOWELL’S OP-ED COLUMN FOR THE SUNDAY BOSTON GLOBE
===========================================================

Below is Carla Howell’s final draft of her Op-Ed Column for the Sunday,
September 21 edition of the Boston Globe:

Why Haven’t You Been Told These Things About Ballot Question 1?

by Carla Howell

Why are 1,350,000 Massachusetts voters already planning to vote YES on
Question 1 to end the state income tax?

First let’s look at what happens if you join those YES voters – and what
happens if you don’t.

If you vote YES, we end the state income tax, let 3.4 million workers
get back an average of $3,700 each, every year, and roll back annual
state government spending to $34.7 billion.

If you vote NO, we keep the state income tax, require those workers to
keep paying an average of $3,700 each every year, and maintain state
government spending at $47.3 billion.

Which choice, which vote is better for the 3.4 million workers and
taxpayers of Massachusetts? Let’s look at some key Massachusetts
government numbers.

The $28.2 billion “budget” figure tossed around is only part of it –
called the Statutory Budget. There are three other parts of the complete
budget: NON-Budgeted Spending, Capital Spending, and Expendable Trust
Spending(1). These four budgets come to $47.3 billion in state
government spending for this year.

Massachusetts cities and towns are spending $27+ billion(2) this year.

That totals $74.3 billion in Massachusetts government spending. Subtract
$5 billion in state funds given to cities and towns (to avoid double
counting) and subtract another $12.6 billion from the state income tax.

What’s left? $56.7 billion for city, town and state governments AFTER we
end the income tax – way more than needed to fund every essential
government service.

Government waste is one reason why so many voters already plan to vote
YES on Question 1. Last April, Fabrizio Surveys asked Massachusetts
voters this question: “How many cents out of every dollar you pay in
state taxes would you say is wasted by the state government?” Their
average estimate was “41 cents.”

Ending the income tax will cut state spending by just 27%, leaving
billions of dollars in state government waste still to cut – without
even touching the waste in local government spending.

There’s one more number that will make you feel at home if you’re
inclined to vote YES on Question 1.

45% of Massachusetts voters already plan to vote YES on Question 1 –
according to three polls, approximately the same number that polls show
will vote against Question 1. With a November 4th voter turnout of 3
million, that comes to a whopping 1,350,000 votes to end the state
income tax.

The numbers show we can easily afford to end the income tax and how many
voters want it. But it’s the benefits to the people of Massachusetts
that make a YES vote on Question 1 a real winner.

Voting YES will give back over $3,700 each, on average, to over 3,400,
000 Massachusetts workers and taxpayers. That’s a $3,700 pay hike for
each of them, not just once, but every year.

It will take $12.6 billion out of the hands of Beacon Hill politicians –
and put it back into the hands of the men and women who earned it. Every
year.

In productive, private hands this $12.6 billion a year will create
hundreds of thousands of new jobs in Massachusetts.

This tax cut will force the state legislature to streamline and cut the
waste out of the Massachusetts state budget.

It will force the state legislature to get rid of the failed, flawed
government programs that don’t work – and often make things worse.

It will make the state legislature accountable to Massachusetts workers
and taxpayers – instead of the government employees, lobbyists, and
special interests who profit from high government spending.

With less government and no income tax, Massachusetts will become a
magnet to private, productive businesses and individuals. This will
bring the state more good jobs and more good workers.

A YES vote will enable Massachusetts families to pay off their mounting
bills and debts – and save thousands of them from home foreclosures and
bankruptcy.

By making the Massachusetts total tax burden more affordable, we’ll
allow more of our young people to stay in Massachusetts near their
family, their friends, and their home.

These are the reasons why you should vote YES on Question 1 to end the
income tax. It’s not just what’s best for you. It’s what’s best for 3.4
million Massachusetts workers and taxpayers – and their families.

(1) (http://www.mass.gov/Aosc/docs/reports_audits/SBFR/2007_SBFR.pdf
Pages 308 – 312)

(2)(http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=dorterminal&L=3&L0=Home&L1=Local+Officia
ls&L2=Municipal+Data+and+Financial+Management&sid=Ador&b=terminalcontent
&f=dls_mdmstuf_aag_aagindex&csid=Ador , See Fiscal Year 2007 Schedule A,
Actual revenues/expenditures for each town. Adjust up $1.3 billion for
all towns to bring budget current.)


LIBERTY: Abortion is a “third rail” issue; laws by the gooferment aren’t the answer!

Monday, September 22, 2008

http://ncc-1776.org/tle2008/tle485-20080921-02.html

Abortion: An Excerpt From Hope
by Aaron Zelman and L. Neil Smith
Attribute to The Libertarian Enterprise

*** begin quote ***

“Abortion,” Alex said, “will remain legal. But not one red cent of federal tax money will ever be spent on it again, and I will do my level best to persuade the authorities at the state, county, and municipal levels to follow my example. As you know, gentlemen, I can be pretty persuasive.”

*** end quote ***

A national disaster. MYOB Let folks find their own way to the truth. Certainly, the gooferment shouldn’t be involved, pay for it, or stick its nose into a very painful personal process. It appears that a “roe v wade” industry has grown up around the government paying for this. That’s a industry that has to go away. Let’s have those, that feel abortion be free to the woman, put up their bucks to pay for it. Let’s have those, that want to save every life, put up their bucks to pay for it.

It’s a moral outrage to rob either side to pay for the programs of the other side.

See that’s what politicians do: They get us arguing among ourselves by framing the question wrong. In each one of these tough issues, we should always be asking: “Why is the gooferment involved in this?”

99% of the time the answer is “It shouldn’t be!”

Argh!

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Here’s another “Kelo” like opportunity

Friday, September 19, 2008

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_re_us/ike_beach_houses

Some Ike victims may not be allowed to rebuild
By MICHAEL GRACZYK and CAIN BURDEAU, Associated Press Writers Thu Sep 18, 6:46 PM ET

*** begin quote ***

GALVESTON, Texas – Hundreds of people whose beachfront homes were wrecked by Hurricane Ike may be barred from rebuilding under a little-noticed Texas law. And even those whose houses were spared could end up seeing them condemned by the state.

Now here’s the saltwater in the wound: It could be a year before the state tells these homeowners what they may or may not do.

Worse, if these homeowners do lose their beachfront property, they may get nothing in compensation from the state.

The reason: A 1959 law known as the Texas Open Beaches Act. Under the law, the strip of beach between the average high-tide line and the average low-tide line is considered public property, and it is illegal to build anything there.

Over the years, the state has repeatedly invoked the law to seize houses in cases where a storm eroded a beach so badly that a home was suddenly sitting on public property. The aftermath of Ike could see the biggest such use of the law in Texas history.

“I don’t like it one bit,” said Phillip Curtis, 58, a Dallas contractor who owns two homes — a $350,000 vacation home and a $200,000 rental — on Galveston Island’s Jamaica Beach. “I think the state should allow us to try to save the houses. I don’t appreciate the state telling people, `Now it belongs to us.’ It breaks your heart.”

The former state senator who wrote the law had little sympathy.

“We’re talking about damn fools that have built houses on the edge of the sea for as long as man could remember and against every advice anyone has given,” A.R. “Babe” Schwartz said.

*** end quote ***

Ahh, yes, those “damn fools” who thought THEY owned their property. Still person, the Almighty State owns everything. Just wait, soon everything will be owned by the Gooferment. They hold 50% of all the mortgage market now. Property taxes will soon condemn the rest.

The Supreme Court nuked your Fifth Amendment rights against property seizure in the Kelo decision.

So, you citizen have a tshirt. You know been there, done that, and got the tshirt to show for it.

Sheeple!

# # # # #


LIBERTY: How to fix healthcare? Boot the gooferment out.

Thursday, September 18, 2008

http://duckdown.blogspot.com/2008/09/does-this-make-me-liberal-or.html

Enterprise Architecture: From Incite comes Insight…

James McGovern is an industry thought leader whose focus is on the human aspects of technology around open source, SOA, software security, enterprise architecture and agile software development.

Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Does this make me a liberal or conservative?

*** begin quote ***

Today’s blog is slightly offtopic but I feel compelled to comment on the absurdity of making a profit from healthcare. I believe that the principles of open source when applied to this problem could make things better…

One of my cousin’s is a recent graduate of a nursing program and has started to learn first hand how people suffer and die because of HMO’s, big insurance (Aetna, Cigna, United Healthcare, etc) and Pharmaceuticals (Pfizer, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, etc) and their decision making process. They are, by law, beholden to their stockholders and the bottom line, and therefore have an ethical conundrum in that at times they have an incentive to deny needed care in the name of profit.

I am not for government healthcare because it suffers from much of the same problem as the current system. The government also is beholden to many of the same financial burdens. Imagine if the principles of open source were applied to healthcare where HMO’s had to make their business rules publicly available in a well-formed XML format that could be inspected by others? Imagine the ability for a consumer to use an open source rules engine such as JBoss Drools and could proactively tell whether a claim is going to be approved or denied. The current model requires consumers to expose themselves to financial risks as they don’t have a clue upfront as to their own liability.

{Extraneous Deleted}

*** end quote ***

I’d say it makes you a Libertarian.

You’re rightly suspicious of the gooferment in your healthcare. I’d suggest that the gooferment get the boot and we begin to unwind the mess we are in. Step One imho is to disconnect employment from health insurance and equalize the tax-deduct-ability of it.

The gooferment should be the insurer of last report; not, like in Medicare, or the VA, the provider, insurer, and the regulator.

If health insurance was like life insurance, there’d be very little regulation (i.e., only what was needed to prevent fraud) and it would be cheap and easy.

Oh, and let’s not kid anyone, that all the gooferment in health care, does ANYTHING but make it expensive and oppressive. And, people die unnecessarily!

When we allow liberty and the free market place to work, it will do wonders. It took “us” a hundred years to screw things up, hopefully we’re smart enough to fix them a lot faster. But give the attitude that “gooferment will save us” I’m not so sure we’re up to the task!

# # # # #


LIBERTY: Should the Fed bailout failing corporations like AIG? NO! The FED shouldn’t even exist.

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

http://www.intuitive.com/blog/should_fed_federal_reserve_bailout_failing_corporations_aig.html

The Business Blog at Intuitive.com
Dave Taylor has been involved with the Internet since 1980 and is widely recognized as an expert on both technical and business issues.
Should the Fed bailout failing corporations like AIG?

*** begin quote ***

As an investor and citizen, I have been following with increasing concern the shenanigans in the financial market. First it was the huge problem with greedy banks and an overextended Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM) and Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE) that had underwritten loans to more and more risky borrowers, gambling that the upside of high-interest-rate loans would offset the tremendous risk of default.

*** and ***

Which is why I find it so interesting that when I read the WSJ headline that Feds Plan $85 Billion Rescue Deal for AIG [sub required] or the Bloomberg report that the government is considering an AIG conservatorship plan, I dislike the notion and feel that if we really were a free market capitalist economy, we’d let the companies fail, knowing that new ones will spring up to replace them, stronger, smarter companies that will avoid these poor management decisions.

Fannie Mae – fanniemae – logoFannie Mae and Freddie Mac were bailed out by the government. So was Chrysler, years ago, in a quite hotly debated rescue from mismanagement, Lee Iacocca’s hubris, and poor strategic planning. But Enron wasn’t bailed out and the Enron investors were left to their own personal financial nightmares.

The rule seems to be that if it’s a big enough company or enough people are adversely impacted then the never-empty wallet of the Federal government opens up and billions of taxpayer dollars are allocated to alleviate the impending crisis.

*** and ***

Since then both Clinton and Bush aggressively promoted home ownership, even for homeowners who couldn’t afford it. The magic solution? adjustable rate mortgages that had a low interest rate when the prime rate was low, but could rapidly grow to create unmanageable mortgage payments as the rate went up. Now those high risk subprime loans back almost 40% of private-sector mortgage bonds and that’s the root of the financial problem we now face.

Back to the central dilemma, though: should we bail out AIG or not? Should our hard earned dollars paid to the government as taxes be used to prevent these massive corporations from facing the dire consequences of their stupid, myopic actions?

I have to say that, yes, I think that we should. Or at least, we should have some sort of program that helps out those most affected by the demise of these companies. When mortgage holders find that their adjustable rate mortgages prove a nightmare because the rates have gone up, that’s one issue, but when a large corporation actively and aggressively markets to these subprime borrowers without fear of consequence, that’s very, very bad for the market.

The consequences are what we’re feeling today, with a dramatic drop in the financial market, the bankruptcy of Lehman, Federal bailout of AIG, and more to come as the ripples affect other markets and industries. Bailout because too many regular Joes are affected by these failures, but for goodness sake, tighten regulations and fix things so that we can prevent this happening again in the future!

*** end quote ***

Interesting.

The politicians get to pick winners and losers. Lehman loses; AIG gets bailed out. Freddie and Fannie shareholders get wiped out and the CEOs walk away with taxpayer-paid golden chutes.

The taxpayers get 80% of AIG; in bankruptcy, the common stockholders would get zero and the taxpayers would get 100%. Who died and left the Fed as the bankruptcy court?

IMHO we need to let biz be biz and the chips fall where they may. Nuke the Fed! Return to honest money.

# # # # #

# – # – #

# # # # #


LIBERTY: You can’t support ANY gooferment program

Monday, September 15, 2008

http://kentmcmanigal.blogspot.com/2008/09/building-libertys-gallows.html

Saturday, September 13, 2008
Building Liberty’s Gallows

*** begin quote ***

Are you supplying rope, nails, assistance, or knowledge to those who are building the gallows they plan to hang you on?

If you support ANY government agency, program, branch, or function, you are.

*** end quote ***

Bottom line: You can’t support any gooferment program. There’s NOTHING that they can do right. BECAUSE they start from the immorality of theft, continue on using force, and wind up giving you a benefit that isn’t something that is good for you. Everything is broken, underfunctional, or costs too much!

No, thanks, nothing from the gooferment for me.

# # # # #


LIBERTY: federal government has now become the nation’s mortgage lender

Monday, September 8, 2008

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080908/D932GH280.html

US government takes on big role in mortgage market

Sep 8, 7:08 AM (ET)
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER and ALAN ZIBEL

*** begin quote ***

WASHINGTON (AP) – Uncle Sam has just become the 800 pound gorilla in the U.S. mortgage market. The Bush administration’s announced Sunday it was seizing troubled mortgage giants Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) in a bid to help reverse a prolonged housing and credit crisis.

But private analysts worried that it may not be enough to stabilize the slumping housing market given the glut of vacant homes for sale, rising foreclosures, rising unemployment and weak consumer confidence.

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com predicted that 30-year mortgage rates, currently averaging 6.35 percent nationwide, could dip to close to 5.5 percent. That’s because investors will be more willing to buy the debt issued by Fannie and Freddie – and at lower rates – since the federal government is now explicitly standing behind that debt.

“Effectively, the federal government has now become the nation’s mortgage lender,” he said. “This takes a major financial threat off the table.”

*** end quote ***

Another step towards socialism. What about all the big bonuses that were paid out to the bozo management? Can anyone in DC spell ‘moral hazard’? Aggh!

Taxpayers should be outraged. Where does the 200B$ come from? Yup, you sheeple.

We better demand that they get out of the mortgage business immediately.

Where are the legislators that created this “public private partnership”? Yeah, retired drawing big fat gooferment pensions. And we are left holding the bag!

# # # # #


LIBERTY: And, you say Libertarians are insane?

Thursday, August 14, 2008

> but not the powerful capitalists who corrupt the government,
> buy politicians and abuse the law to prey on poorer folks.

These “capitalists” are creations of the gooferment that gives them life. In a
Libertarian society, there would be NO SUCH THING as a limited liability company created by the gooferment. Sam Walton, Ray Kroc, and all the others would still do business but gooferment wouldn’t insulate them from marketplace discipline.

>How do you not blame the rich predatory capitalists who engineer these
>eminent domain frauds.

It STARTS with the guns of gooferment. I can LUST over Herb’s stately Kalet’s manor, but it’s the gooferment that allows me to take it from him by force. Legally.

>It would be even worse under a libertarian government which is no government
> at all, no rules , no regulations.

Sorry but the fifth Amendment that we used to have before the Socialist Supreme Court gave us Kilo came from the DOWG’s liberty loving ideals.

>Just survival of the fittest, that’s the libertarian way.

NO! It’s just that NO ONE will be FORCED to do ANYTHING. That’s survival of
the fittest. Charity will bloom because people will get to keep their earnings instead of giving it to heartless bureaucrats to dole out. With a tremendous handling fee.
Americans have always been very charitable. But they insist on EFFECTIVE and EFFICIENT charity. Not just hand outs; hand ups. Everyone will be stronger as a voluntary society.

>Rich athletic teams use tax money to build their stadiums and use eminent
> domain to confiscate land from unsuspecting home owners.

That is a function of YOUR system; not mine.

>As bad as it is now,

Finally we agree on something!

>it would be even worse under libertarian rule

It couldn’t possibly worse. Let’s try it. Visualize the prosperity of the 1880 to 1913 before the big gooferment really started to manipulate us. Visualize the peaceful society prior to Lincoln’s War of Northern Aggression. Visualize the effect of honest money on the whole size of gooferment, the ability to grow unrestrained by fiscal discipline, and it’s ability to fund welfare / warfare by theft from the hated central bank that Jefferson and Jackson warned about.

And, don’t get me started on Social Security!

Don’t blame the Libertarians for proposing something different. What you advocate CAN NOT work. Force never serves as a basis for a peaceful honest society.

Insanity is doing more of the same and expecting different results. More force aka more gooferment will NOT yIeld different results.

And, you say Libertarians are insane?

# # # # #