The difference in Bill Gates and me - not much

Take George Washington's parents and put them in a time machine.  Let them hang out with Bill Gates for a week.  This is what would impress them.....

Do a mental experiment. Imagine resurrecting an ancestor from the year 1700 and showing him a typical day in the life of Bill Gates. The opulence would obviously astonish your ancestor, but a good guess is that the features of Gates’s life that would make the deepest impression are the fact that he and his family never worry about starving to death; that they bathe daily; that they have several changes of clean clothes; that they have clean and healthy teeth; that diseases such as smallpox, polio, diphtheria, tuberculosis, tetanus, and pertusis present no substantial risks; that Melinda Gates’s chances of dying during childbirth are about one-sixtieth what they would have been in 1700; that each child born to the Gateses is about 40 times more likely than a pre-industrial child to survive infancy; that the Gateses have a household refrigerator and freezer (not to mention microwave ovens, dishwashers, and televisions); that the Gateses’s work week is only five days and that the family takes several weeks of vacation each year; that the Gates children will receive well over a decade of formal schooling; that the Gateses routinely travel through the air to distant lands in a matter of hours; that they effortlessly converse with people miles or oceans away; that they can, whenever and wherever they please, listen to a Mozart string quartet, a Verdi opera, or Frank Sinatra singing of romance.
In short, what would likely most impress a visitor from the past about Bill Gates’s life are precisely those modern advantages that are not unique to Bill Gates – advantages now enjoyed by nearly all Americans.

This kind of life is America's gift to the world.  How we did it, how we grew it, seems obvious to us when we think about it.  Hell there's not that much difference, climate-wise, between the U.S. and Haiti, right? 

And we are now burdened with a political class in Washington that is doing everything possible to screw it up, counting on your jealousy of Bill Gates to give them more and more power and control. 

 

If you had ten million dollars....

If I were an entrepreneurial type and were to start my own business and somehow wind up with ten million dollars in the bank....

Or if I were to inherit ten million dollars....

Or if I were to hit the blackjack tables in Vegas and clear ten million....

I like to think that, after taking care of my daughter at Texas A and freakin' M university, I'd give a chunk of money to The Reason Foundation. 

Here's what they do:

Reason Foundation advances a free society by developing, applying, and promoting libertarian principles, including individual liberty, free markets, and the rule of law.
Reason Foundation produces respected public policy research on a variety of issues and publishes the critically-acclaimed Reason magazine.
Together, our top-tier think tank and political and cultural magazine reach a diverse, influential audience, advancing the values of choice, individual freedom and limited government.

I believe that educating people about the Free Market and Small Government and Personal Freedom would do more good than anything else I could do with my money.  Freedom helps people, Big Government hurts people.   

I'd probably give another chunk to The Cato Institute. 

The Cato Institute is a public policy research organization — a think tank – dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peace. Its scholars and analysts conduct independent, nonpartisan research on a wide range of policy issues.

Founded in 1977, Cato owes its name to Cato’s Letters, a series of essays published in 18th- century England that presented a vision of society free from excessive government power. Those essays inspired the architects of the American Revolution. And the simple, timeless principles of that revolution — individual liberty, limited government, and free markets – turn out to be even more powerful in today’s world of global markets and unprecedented access to information than Jefferson or Madison could have imagined. Social and economic freedom is not just the best policy for a free people, it is the indispensable framework for the future.

I know that, despite avoiding the place for the last 5 years or so, I'd give a chunk to the Agape Meal at Broadway Baptist Church.  If you want to give something to the poor folks in Fort Worth, Texas, Broadway BC is the way to go. 

The Agape Meal is our weekly banquet for the community. Broadway hosts about 175 guests each Thursday with volunteer table hosts and servers for each table of seven guests. The meal is served Thursdays at 6:00 p.m.; tickets are available starting at 4:00 p.m. in the Baptist Center Breezway (west side of church on May St.) until all gone.Ideally volunteers should arrive by 5:30 p.m. for duty assignments (host, server, etc.) and enter through the Main Entrance on St. Louis St.

Hit the link above to read about their clothing ministry, the Room At The Inn program, and everything else they've got going on.  Good people, those Moderate Baptists.... 

I would give a massive chunk to the Libertarian Party Of Texas.  Hell, if I could get just one of the Nixon - Obama Drug War victims out of jail through political means, it would be money well spent.

It would be cool to sponsor a M.D. in some politician-ravaged region through the Doctors Without Borders program. 

That's my list.  It's heavy on political education, mostly because I think political ignorance (which leads to Statism) has created more poverty, hunger and want than anything else on the planet. 

Think of your list.  Jot it down.  Seriously.  Jot it down.  If you've read through all the other stuff and don't write down your list, you've wasted your time. 

Now, go here.  

You MIGHT be an Anarcho-Capitalist

From FEE, the Foundation For Economic Education....

Suppose that there is a household on the border between the United States and Canada. Currently, this household is a part of the United States and is thus subject to all of its laws, regulations, and tax obligations. After years of being subject to U.S. law, this household is finally fed up (perhaps as a result of some recent policy initiative that passed through Congress). Rather than simply accepting the fact that they must live under a new regime they do not like, they phone up the Canadian government and inquire about the costs and benefits of being subject to Canadian law instead.

After careful deliberation, this household decides that it would be much happier as a Canadian household than as an American household. And after similarly careful consideration, the Canadian government decides that they would rather have this household as a citizen of Canada than not. As a result, this household purchases its governance from Canada instead of the United States.

This much, at least, should not be terribly contentious: Governments sell governance and citizens purchase this governance in the form of paying taxes. All that is different in this case is that the border between the United States and Canada is not exogenously defined and, instead, is determined by people shopping for their government without having to move. If this doesn't sound contentious, then you might be an anarcho-capitalist.

Next, assume that the household is someplace in Virginia!! 

Go here to read the whole thing.  It's greatness. 

 

Who Is The Greedy Bastard?

Imagine a guy who sees that he can save his fellow humans a lot of time, material and money by manufacturing a widget unlike any other.  It would be ½ the cost of other widgets, be less harmful to the environment, and would save consumers’ money so that they will have more dollars available for other necessities or desires. 

The guy buys a few modified widget-manufacturing machines and pays a few people to run them.  The new and improved widgets are a hit.  He swaps the widgets for dollars. 

He uses some of the dollars to purchase new machinery, passes some of the dollars on to his hardest-working employees, and puts his best manager in charge of a 2^nd widget factory.  After about 10 years, he spends some of his money on a new house and a couple of new cars. 

People want his widgets.  But he doesn’t want that many things that other people have.  He doesn’t worry much about new clothes, hitting the nightclubs, or taking long vacations to Europe.  He likes the idea of making widgets.  So instead of swapping widgets for clothes, drinks, cruises or yachts, he continues swapping widgets for money.  He really doesn’t want that many things.  But if anyone were to come up with something he really wanted, he would probably swap some of his money for it. 

After about 20 years, as majority owner of a large corporation, this guy is one of the wealthiest people in the area.  He isn’t ostentatious, doesn’t flash his money around, and gives some to charity.  But mostly he just hangs onto his money, just in case he has an idea for a new product to manufacture, or finds a new location for a factory. 

So… if this guy were to go on buying sprees for mansions, yachts, beachfront spreads, whores and politicians, would he then be considered a greedy bastard?  Or is he a greedy bastard only if he hangs onto his money because nobody else has anything he wants to swap for it? 

And finally, why does any politician who crusades to take away the guy’s money (by force) have a saintly reputation, even though these politicians have never produced any “widgets” that people want to trade their own money or stuff for?

Who is the greedy bastard….the producer who hangs onto his money, the producer who spends his money like a drunk cowboy, or the non-producer who covets someone else’s money so he can give it to his supporters? 

What does it take to be considered greedy? 

Who's to say that Libertarian politicians, over time, wouldn't become Statists?

I get variations on this all the time:  "Who's to say that your Libertarian candidates wouldn't start spending and regulating like Statists if they stayed in office long enough?"

My answer  "If you left mulitiple generations of them in office long enough, without changing any of the rules of the game, or changing the worldview of the electorate, they probably would become Statists."

People are people.  They don't become cherubs when they win the beauty contests that we call "elections".  I'm sure that Ron Paul could be swayed by flattery and donations.  Ditto for Gary Johnson.  Judge Jim Gray is one of the finest men I've ever met, but I bet if you agreed to fund one of his favorite causes, he'd be willing to consider using a few taxpayer dollars to build that new stadium, or blow up some brown people overseas, or throw some stimulus in the right direction. 

This is why it's so important to have a government that is as small as possible.  Government is force.  The power to take other people's stuff and redistribute it.  The power to throw your enemies into steel cages.   I honestly don't know anyone that I would trust with that power for a long period of time. 

Here's some vintage Milton Friedman:

The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or it they try, they will shortly be out of office.

I believe that Libertarian candidates are the most likely to do the right thing.  But it's even more important for you to be aware of the right thing - stopping redistribution, ending privacy violations, curbing the spending and ending the wars. 

In the meantime, we're getting the government (and the wars, and the debt, and the wealth transfers, and the black incarceration rate, and the taxes) that we deserve. 

A Question About "Quantitative Easing"

Ben Bernanke and the boys at the Federal Reserve have been printing an extra 85 billion dollars per month.  All in the name of "stimulus". 

North Korea has been printing a couple of million dollars per month.  In their case, it is called "counterfeiting". 

Both sets of printing press owners, Bernanke's and North Korea's, are churning out bills for themselves and their buddies - the people who get to spend them first. 

But let's assume that "stimulus" of this sort is a good thing. 

Does it matter where the stimulus is printed? 

Answer: Very

Question: Go here. 

Breakfast At Tiffany's

Someone named Tiffany who goes to a private academy in Dallas sent me some questions about the Libertarian Party Of Texas for a school project. 
Since I'm feeling lazy this morning, I'm letting it double as today's blog post.  Thought it might shed a little light on how we work.  The rant at the end has almost been finessed into a liturgy.   

Tiffany,


I hope these answers are satisfactory. Let me know if you need any details.

-Does the Libertarian Party of Texas's platform differ from the national party’s platform?

The platforms occasionally differ in degree or in emphasis, but seldom in principle. There are two issues for which the core libertarian philosophy doesn’t provide easy answers. Abortion (two possibly conflicting sets of rights), and immigration in the context of a welfare state.

One of the best things about being a Libertarian is that our core platform really doesn’t change, whereas the Democrats and Republicans have swapped or otherwise changed their positions on several issues over the last 50 years.

-What do you do within the State branch?

In addition to acting as Tarrant County Chair, I serve on a committee called SLEC. This is the State Libertarian Executive Committee. Our core responsibilities are to ensure that we have ballot access, that the message of Liberty is spread throughout the state, and to oversee the state conventions every two years. There are several committees within that group, and I currently chair the Compliance committee. We ensure that all actions taken by the county groups and SLEC are done according to the by-laws, and can withstand any legal challenges.

-What is the Libertarian Party of Texas's main job/function?

The purpose of the Libertarian Party of Texas is to win elections.

-How does Libertarian Party of Texas work with the national Libertarian party?

We help coordinate and host events for presidential candidates. Our most recent presidential candidate, former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson, was very well-received in Texas, BTW.

We also elect and send delegates from Texas to the national conventions, where they select our presidential and veep candidates.

-Which candidates is the Libertarian Party of Texas currently supporting and which elections are you all currently preparing for?

All of the “off-year” elections are non-partisan. But because of his pro-liberty stance, we’re encouraging people to support Daniel Wood, who is running for Arlington City Council. Sybil Lane is running for the school board in Crowley and she seems to have some strong libertarian support. We’re also making phone calls for John Basham, Tim Nold, and Mary Kelleher, three of the candidates for Fort Worth Water Board. These local elections are extremely important to us, even though no one runs under a Libertarian Party banner. It’s a shame that so few people vote in them, because the local races are often more likely to have a direct impact on the citizens than the national contests do.

-How much money does the Libertarian Party of Texas raise for “party activities”? How much money do they raise for specific candidates?

Fundraising is often a struggle for us. The Big Two fund their campaigns by blatantly selling exemptions to the tax, import, and tariff codes. It’s difficult to raise large amounts of money by promising to merely leave you (and your competitors) alone.

Fundraising for individual candidates has almost become a theological dispute for us, with some libertarians insisting that the national, state, and local parties not get into the business of “picking winners and losers”, and others wanting to put 100% of our limited resources into just a few competitive races in hopes of winning more elections.  At this point, the candidates are supported by their own fundraising events, with administrative and some logistical support from the county and state operations. 

-On what does the Libertarian Party of Texas spend most of their money?

Publicity for the party, administration, educational events and conventions.

-What are two recent headlines/events with which the Libertarian Party of Texas associated?

The Tarrant County Libertarian Party recently hosted a presidential candidates debate featuring the six Libertarians vying for the LP presidential nomination. We also hosted a gun rights/2nd amendment debate at TCU this past weekend.

The state party recently hosted an activists forum about dealing with the Texas Legislature. Speakers from NORML, the ACLU, a gun group, a transportation lobby and others all gave their take on how to lobby the legislature, where they’ve succeeded and where they’ve failed. Since this is an off-year for elections, the county organizations have been more active and visible than the state level operation.

-Does the Libertarian Party of Texas face any obstacles?

The biggest obstacle we face is something called the “wasted vote fallacy”. This is the belief that unless you vote for a Democrat or Republican, your vote is wasted.

Please remember that your share of the national debt is $50,000.00, and even more if you intend to grow up and be a net taxpayer to the federal government.

Your share of the government’s unfunded liabilities is more than $350,000.00

The Democrats and Republicans got you this far into debt by working together, as a team, in a bi-partisan manner.

They are borrowing billions of dollars from China, to protect the South Pacific from…..China.

We have enough people in our military (45% of the world’s military spending) to put a soldier along every 20 feet of the borders of the United States.

According to author Michelle Alexander, Barack Obama now has more black men confined in steel cages (mostly for owning or selling a weed) than The Confederate States Of America did prior to the start of the Civil War. One million government jobs could be eliminated if we were to end the Drug War (which is why so many government employees support the Drug War.)

The Federal Reserve printing press on Blue Mound Road in Fort Worth is pumping an additional 65 billion dollars a month into the nation. You’ll soon see prices rising because of this.

The only “wasted” vote is a vote to maintain this disaster.

Hope this helps!!

Allen Patterson

Tarrant County Libertarian Party Chair

A Hypothetical Question On Why You Took Your Income Tax Deductions

Thanks to heroic efforts on the part of Mrs. Sepulchre, we're going to get a $4.00 check (of our own money) back from Obama. 

We claimed every possible deduction.  Work mileage, political activism for non-profits, charitable deductions, and on and on and on. 

I don't speak for Mrs. Sepulchre on this website. 

But the reason I like to take every possible deduction is that I think I can spend my money better than Barack, Boehner, Reid, Rick Perry, and whichever Monsanto employees are running the FDA this week. 

I believe that every single dollar given to the U.S. government will be, at worst, spent on very bad things for very bad reasons, and at best, spent more inefficiently than it would be spent in the private sector. 

That's why Libertarians take every possible tax deduction. 

If you're not a Libertarian, what was your excuse for doing the exact same thing? 

The Eleven Questions

I haven't linked to anything over at Counting Cats lately. 
A relatively new contributor called "Single Acts Of Tyranny" is asking various folks eleven questions about politics and liberty. 

The questions have a slight bent toward the U.K., but all still apply to the U.S.A.  To save "Single Acts Of Tyranny" the trouble of emailing me, I'm going to answer the eleven questions now, just for the good of The Republic. 

The Whited Sepulchre is a Fort Worth, TX blogger, shipping manager, inadequate guitarist, dachshund owner, and Chair of the Tarrant County Libertarian Party.  He often requires a helicopter pilot as a designated driver. 

1. Who was the greatest political leader in the Western world?

President Calvin Coolidge.  He grew the U.S. economy, retired a huge chunk of the national debt, was almost an isolationist, spoke out in favor of civil rights, and made no effort at all to be a great political "leader".  Therefore, the nation prospered.  The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for it to be afflicted with a great political leader, as presently defined.  May Coolidge and his tribe increase. 

2. If you could change, introduce or abolish one law, what would it be?

I would eliminate the "General Welfare Clause" from the U.S. Constitution, and tighten up the "Commerce Clause".  These have been slowly misinterpreted to mean that Congress can do whatever the hell it wants. 

3. What advice would you give to a sixteen year-old today?

The same advice that my mother gave me as I was going away to college.  "Don't wash anything in hot water, and watch out for wild women."  I might add: "Invest as much as you can in gold and silver".
 

4. Who do you most admire?

Almost any entrepreneur who has taken the risk of creating something that people will desire more than their money.  Also, my parents. 

5. Are you optimistic or pessimistic about the future of your country?

Incredibly pessimistic.  We're 17 trillion in debt, and are in the hands of Drug Warriors, Crony Capitalists, the Military Industrial Complex, and a machine politician from Chicago.   But I am looking forward to saying "I told you so!!"  

6. If you think voting for establishment parties changes little or nothing, what is the one thing we can do as individuals to cause real change?

Vote for the Libertarian Party.  We will slay the beast and replace it with a puppy.  

  

7. When will we finally say good-bye to the state?

We won't.  Mostly because no matter what Grandmother Stalin said, there really is such a thing as a bad, bad boy. 

8. Should free people have the right to keep and bear arms openly or covertly without government permission, sanction or registration?

Yep. 

9. What annoys you most about current politics?

Oh god....Ok, in spite of serious competition, it's the belief that if someone is opposed to Barack's education, healthcare, charity, relief, energy, and agriculture con games, then that person is opposed to all education, healthcare, charity, relief, energy, and agriculture. 

10. Gold standard or fiat currency and interest rate control?

That question presupposes a false dichotomy.  We could have a gold standard, and a currency issued by a neighborhood bank, and another currency issued by Wal-Mart, and dozens of others.  Let a thousand currencies bloom!!  Anyone foolish enough to want a fiat currency could continue trading with his fiat currency and saving his fiat currency.  But one day he would look in his wallet and realize that his dollars are made of paper. 

11. Do we have an obligation to help the poor?

No, but if you don't help the poor and disabled, you're probably an asshole.  I just wish that government anti-poverty programs left us with more money to help the poor.  Two years ago, the U.S. anti-poverty programs blew through $63,000.00 per poor family in the nation.  I don't think it went to the poor. 

Hope this has been entertaining, Cat Counters!! 

The Tale Of The Slave - by Robert Nozick

From the Duke University Educational Society.  Robert Nozick's "Tale Of The Slave".  Think of this as a progression for one slave to experience.   
The last question is a zinger. 

"The Tale of the Slave"
from Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia, pp. 290-292.

Consider the following sequence of cases, which we shall call the Tale of the Slave, and imagine it is about you.

1. There is a slave completely at the mercy of his brutal master's whims. He often is cruelly beaten, called out in the middle of the night, and so on.
2. The master is kindlier and beats the slave only for stated infractions of his rules (not fulfilling the work quota, and so on). He gives the slave some free time.
3. The master has a group of slaves, and he decides how things are to be allocated among them on nice grounds, taking into account their needs, merit, and so on.
4. The master allows his slaves four days on their own and requires them to work only three days a week on his land. The rest of the time is their own.
5. The master allows his slaves to go off and work in the city (or anywhere they wish) for wages. He requires only that they send back to him three-sevenths of their wages. He also retains the power to recall them to the plantation if some emergency threatens his land; and to raise or lower the three-sevenths amount required to be turned over to him. He further retains the right to restrict the slaves from participating in certain dangerous activities that threaten his financial return, for example, mountain climbing, cigarette smoking.
6. The master allows all of his 10,000 slaves, except you, to vote, and the joint decision is made by all of them. There is open discussion, and so forth, among them, and they have the power to determine to what uses to put whatever percentage of your (and their) earnings they decide to take; what activities legitimately may be forbidden to you, and so on.
   
   Let us pause in this sequence of cases to take stock. If the master contracts this transfer of power so that he cannot withdraw it, you have a change of master. You now have 10,000 masters instead of just one; rather you have one 10,000-headed master. Perhaps the 10,000 even will be kindlier than the benevolent master in case 2. Still, they are your master. However, still more can be done. A kindly single master (as in case 2) might allow his slave(s) to speak up and try to persuade him to make a certain decision. The 10,000-headed monster can do this also.
   
7. Though still not having the vote, you are at liberty (and are given the right) to enter into the discussions of the 10,000, to try to persuade them to adopt various policies and to treat you and themselves in a certain way. They then go off to vote to decide upon policies covering the vast range of their powers.
8. In appreciation of your useful contributions to discussion, the 10,000 allow you to vote if they are deadlocked; they commit themselves to this procedure. After the discussion you mark your vote on a slip of paper, and they go off and vote. In the eventuality that they divide evenly on some issue, 5,000 for and 5,000 against, they look at your ballot and count it in. This has never yet happened; they have never yet had occasion to open your ballot. (A single master also might commit himself to letting his slave decide any issue concerning him about which he, the master, was absolutely indifferent.)
9. They throw your vote in with theirs. If they are exactly tied your vote carries the issue. Otherwise it makes no difference to the electoral outcome.

The question is: which transition from case 1 to case 9 made it no longer the tale of a slave?

Libertarian Responses To The Dallas Morning News Voter Guide

The Dallas Morning News recently sent out its Voter Guide to all candidates running for office in the DFW Metroplex.

Here are the issue-specific questions, along with what I think are the ideal Libertarian responses:

Why should voters choose you over your opponent?

Our opponent(s) are affiliated with the Republican and Democratic parties. Those two organizations have led our nation into undeclared wars, failing schools, and a $16 trillion dollar debt. Those two organizations are not going to reform themselves. As a Libertarians we understand that we’ll have to overcome considerable resistance from voters concerned about “wasting their vote”, plus a large amount of media bias. But liberty-oriented, small-government candidates are our only hope for extricating ourselves from the wars, the inefficiency, and the debt.
(Please note that this question assumes only one Democrat or Republican opponent, not multiple opponents from multiple parties offering other choices. Shame on you, Dallas Morning News!)

The Legislature cut billions of dollars from the state budget in 2011. Are there areas where lawmakers went too far? Not far enough? How would you change that in 2013? Please be specific.

The Legislature didn’t go far enough. They could save billions more by extending retirement ages of government employees, and offering less generous benefits, benefits that would be in line with those offered by the private sector. State employees could be given 401K accounts instead of pensions. Parents should be allowed to personalize their children’s education through a voucher plan. This would encourage competition and improved efficiency in the Texas school system.
The Legislature should immediately shut down the Emerging Technology Fund and the Texas Enterprise fund. These programs are corporate cronyism at its worst.
A simple Google search reveals that we’re spending $750,000.00 per year on a Department of Agriculture “Egg Quality Program”, which is supposed to prevent consumers from buying cracked eggs. Kroger, Wal-Mart, HEB, and Albertson’s can handle that responsibility. The list of other savings opportunities is almost endless.

The state’s business tax has not raised enough money to offset local property tax cuts. What changes, if any, do you favor?

The correct way to phrase this question would be as follows: The state’s spending has exceeded taxes. What spending reductions, if any, do you favor? We should continue to cut taxes and find new ways to reduce even more spending. The Texas Public Policy Foundation has produced excellent lists of logical spending cuts and ways to reduce government waste. The difficulty lies in having the political will to do so.

Texas’ business climate is touted as a jobs magnet for the nation. Are there areas where business regulation is too lax or too tight, and what changes would you make?

Even with the current level of wasteful spending by the state, Texas has found itself leading most of the other states in job creation. We should examine our current levels of regulation, taxation, and bureaucracy as compared to, say, California. Ask new businesses why they chose to locate here, and continue to ensure that red tape and financial disincentives are eliminated.
We should also work to give consumers the right to choose between “government regulated” and “unregulated” products, since the regulations put in place by retailers and distributors are generally more effective and sensible than those put in place by 3rd parties in Austin and Washington.

The governor informed the federal government that Texas will not participate in certain parts of the Affordable Health Care Act. Was this a wise decision, and what should the state’s course of action be today?

1) This was a wise decision.
2) Nullification. If something is expensive, it is because it is scarce relative to demand. ObamaCare does nothing to eliminate the scarcity of doctors, nurses, hospitals, medical equipment, or pharmaceutical supplies. It does, however, eliminate the scarcity of IRS agents, and mandates that 16,000 more be hired. ObamaCare is an ill-conceived, poorly written, disastrous piece of legislation.

Critics have questioned the benefits and oversight of the Emerging Technology Fund and Texas Enterprise Fund, both administered by the governor’s office. Would you continue to put tax dollars into these economic development funds?

No. These are slush funds for political contributors and cronies. Government agencies have a horrible track record for predicting successful “Emerging” technologies. If an entrepreneur can’t attract private capital, chances are that his idea will fail. Socializing risk while privatizing profit should not be a function of the Texas government.

Some regulators worry that environmental restrictions on power plants might compromise the state’s ability to keep up with electricity needs. Do you agree, and how should the legislature respond?

All environmental restrictions are the result of a compromise – we make small compromises in the air quality in exchange for not having to chop firewood for our stoves. The legislature does have a role as referee in any disputes arising because of these trade-offs. If an individual has been directly harmed, he or she should be compensated by the business or individual responsible for the damage.

State officials have fought a number of federal air-quality regulations, arguing that they’re bad for business. Is this the right strategy, or should Texas comply with the EPA? How should the state weigh environmental concerns against industry protests?

See previous question. EPA overkill has been well documented. There is a point where safety cannot be improved by another order of magnitude without ridiculous expense or inefficiency. We should demand that all new regulations by all regulatory bodies be subject to a vote in the Texas legislature, rather than being automatically implemented by unelected bureaucrats.

What is your view on the science of man-made climate change? Do you support legislation that would reduce the output of greenhouse gases, and, if so, what approach would you take?

If AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) is a science, it has been a poorly administered one. The East Anglia “ClimateGate” emails have revealed a pattern of deception, fraud and mismanagement embarrassing to science. Researchers have actively worked to keep dissenting views out of peer-reviewed journals. Editors who published dissenting views on climate have suddenly resigned.
And it is puzzling to see how many of the leading Anthropogenic Global Warming advocates have gargantuan carbon footprints. We should believe that AGW is a problem only when those who stand to benefit most from regulation start acting as if AGW is a problem.

We’ve yet to see a real debate (as opposed to competing blog posts) between the leaders on both sides of the AGW debate. Perhaps Texas should offer to host such an event?

Natural gas production has been a boon industry in Texas, but regulators have cited it for adding to air pollution and contaminating groundwater. How should the legislature balance the benefits against environmental concerns?

The gas companies have indeed been good for Texas, but if gas companies have done harm, they should be held accountable. The legislature, along with the courts, should act as referees in any disputes or claims, but should not be in the business of favoring one form of energy over another. We should also bear in mind that the form of energy that is most harmful to the environment is the use of firewood. That’s what most of us were using for energy 100 years ago.

With dozens of school districts suing the state, lawmakers might have to contend with another court order to find a new way to finance public education. What would be a fairer, longer-lasting method of paying for schools?

We should implement the fairer, longer-lasting method that we use to provide for groceries, televisions, garden hoses, and most other commodities.  We should give parents a choice. Open the school system to competition by giving parents vouchers.
Since 1970, inflation-adjusted spending per student has tripled while test scores have remained flat. Give kids a ticket out of underperforming schools !
Also, there is no rational excuse for teachers to be working in a tenure system, or being given extremely generous retirement packages while in their early 50’s. No system that pays for more years of retirement than work is sustainable.

What changes, if any, do you advocate in certification, evaluation, or pay for teachers?

In an ideal system, certification, evaluation, and pay for teachers would be left up to the private institutions that employ them. In the current public school system, however, the two criteria that least influence effectiveness (certifications and # of years spent teaching) are the ones used to determine teacher pay.

Test scores for black and Hispanic students have traditionally lagged their white counterparts in public schools. How should the legislature address this?

By giving them educational choices besides those public schools. Give the parents a real choice. If people were assigned grocery stores based on their zip codes, you would also see a decline in the performance of grocery stores.  Give minority students a choice !! 

State universities have been challenged to ensure the productivity of professors, be more efficient and boost graduation rates. What measures are appropriate, and should they be tied to tax support?

In the age of the internet, there is little or no reason to bring students into one classroom to hear one professor. We have the opportunity to introduce every student in the nation to some of the greatest professors who have ever lived, and at a minimal cost. With the exception of a very few “lab” courses, some disciplines that require one-on-one instruction, and a few group activities, the cost of a university education could be slashed by a massive percentage simply by taking advantage of the internet. This is a "solved" problem.  All we lack is the political will to change the system.

Privatizing the college system and giving the right of 3rd Party Educators to issue certifications of competence in various areas of study would open up the world to a far greater number of students. 

The state should not be in the business of boosting graduation rates.

The drawing of new legislative and congressional maps was nothing short of chaotic, for voters and candidates. Would you support the formation of an independent, bipartisan commission to draw new districts after the next census?

No. There is no such thing as an independent, bipartisan commission.

Also, if the voters are going to tolerate racial gerrymandering from judicial appointees, then we are getting the system that we deserve.

Should Texas abolish its system of allowing straight-ticket voting in state and local partisan elections?

Yes. We should also abolish the system of putting party affiliations beside the names of candidates. A system of “Approval Voting” could eliminate the need for expensive primaries, run-offs, and final elections.

Texas has a 50-year water plan but no specific way to pay for it. What steps should the Legislature take to make sure the state has long-term water supplies?

“If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.” The idea that we’re going to plan for an adequate water supply for the year 2062 puts a lot of faith in the flawed souls who make up the Texas Legislature.

The state has relied on new ways of tolling and borrowing to pay for road and bridge projects. Most major new highways in North Texas are being built as tolled or partially tolled roads. Is this acceptable, or is it time to raise the gasoline tax for the first time in more than 20 years?

This is acceptable. In these cases, the roads are being primarily funded by the users.

Should the Legislature enact laws to help combat illegal immigration? If so, what would you advocate?

Increased illegal immigration from Mexico is a direct result of our war on drugs. We should decriminalize recreational drug use and possession immediately, and totally legalize them as soon as politically feasible. We have turned Mexico’s justice and law enforcement system into a cruel joke. The drug lords don’t fear the Mexican military, police, courts, or the U.S. military. They don’t fear confiscation of their drug shipments, as these only cost them pennies on the dollar to produce. The drug lords in Mexico fear legalization. Let’s help give our Mexican friends their country back.

Lawmakers overwhelmingly approved eyewitness ID reforms and other measures in 2011 in response to troubling DNA exonerations. What other steps do you favor to improve the justice system?

We should discourage plea bargaining. We have tens of thousands of prisoners languishing in jail who have never been given a trial, but feared our ramshackle courts system more than they feared prison.

What additional safeguards, if any, are needed in the capital punishment system?

Capital punishment should be ended immediately. Most of us don’t trust the U.S. mail system with important documents. We avoid V.A. hospitals. We return from trips to the DMV with stories of waste and inefficiency. “Good enough for government work” is now a cliché. Why should we trust the government with taking someone’s life?  Texas has released 35 prisoners from Death Row because of shoddy DNA work. 

Texas homeowner insurance rates continue to rank among the highest nationally. How should the Legislature respond?

The Legislature should merely enforce contracts between homeowners and businesses, while working to remove any barriers keeping additional insurance companies from competing in Texas. We have more hailstorms, hurricanes, and tornadoes than the rest of the nation, and acts of the Legislature won’t change this.

Should the Legislature let voters decide whether to expand gambling by licensing slot machines or casinos in Texas?

No. Gambling is none of the Legislature’s business. It’s none of the voters’ business. If you choose to wager money on the performance of a slot machine, a deck of cards, Tony Romo, or a horse, it should be between you and the person/business with whom you are placing the wagers.

Should the state impose additional regulations on payday loan operations? If so, what should those rules include?

No. The typical payday loan operation charges $17.50 per $100.00 borrowed. The typical bank charges as much as $30.00 for a single bounced $5.00 check. Which organization is charging extortionate interest? Plus, the payday loan operations provide a service to many people that traditional lending operations often turn away.

That’s all of the questions. Hope this was interesting.

Alex, I'll take "Jerusalem" for $500

Answers to a few questions

Question:  Why are Libertarian politicians like Gary Johnson and Ron Paul so popular among college students? 

Answer:  Because many years from now, today's college students and their children and their grandchildren are the demographic who will still be stuck paying for all of today's spending. 

Question:  Why are Libertarian politicians like Gary Johnson and Ron Paul so popular among active military, and why do they receive such a large percentage of military political campaign donations? 

Answer:  Because active military members know that it is Demoblicans and Republicrats who are working hardest to get them killed, not Libertarians. 

Question:  In the recent New Hampshire primary, when Romney finished first, Ron Paul finished second, and Rick Santorum finished third, why did Rick Santorum claim that he actually finished second? 

Answer:  Because Santorum knows that Ron Paul is not a Republican, he's a Libertarian. 

Question:  When discussing whether or not Ron Paul will possibly run on a second-party third-party ticket, why don't the members of the Mainstream Media ever say the name of this party?  Why do they fear the "L" word? 

Answer:  Because their sources, their Rolodexes, their cell phones and their earnings potential all come from their access to Republicrats and Demoblicans.  And, as the C-SPAN crews recently recorded by accident, if a Libertarian is ever elected president, 2/3rds of the Pentagon Press Corps will lose their jobs.  Ditto for the rest of the Washington media.  There simply won't be much going on for them to write or talk about, once the initial cutbacks are in place.  Therefore, the Lamestream Media try to de-legitimize any parties except for the Crips and the Bloods.  Or whatever you want to call them. 

I hope this helps. 

Can you spot the economic fallacy?

I watched some Fox Bidness Channel blabbering yesterday a.m.  The host had two guests: a gent named David Callahan from the Demos think tank, and economist/actor Ben Stein from the world of reality. 

They were discussing the Bush era tax cuts.  Stein noted that during the four years after the tax cuts were implemented, tax revenue increased and that we had record-breaking amounts of tax money rolling into the Treasury.  (Thomas Sowell has also noted that the percentile who received the tax break then paid more $$ in taxes afterwards, and also paid a higher percentage of the total taxes.  If people don't have to give the government as much money, people can then invest their money in things that aren't stupid or harmful and that eventually creates benefits for everyone.  The government eventually gets more money.)

Callahan disagreed.  He stated that there was a four-year period in the Clinton era where taxes were a higher percentage of GDP than ever before, and that tax revenue was near 20% of GDP during that era. 

Let's assume that Stein and Callahan are both correct.  More dollars, adjusted for inflation, came in after the Bush tax cuts.  But a higher percentage of taxes to GDP came in during the Clinton era.   

Who has a legit point, Stein or Callahan? 

A Hypothetical Question About The Nobel Peace Prize

The last three Democrat adminstrations have produced three Nobel Peace prize winners.

Carter/Mondale - Carter won it, and then went off into full-time Foreign Policy interference. 

Clinton/Gore - Gore won it, and then went off to be a Green Scam Billionaire. 

Obama/Biden - Obama won the Peace Prize, and then went off to bomb the crap out of Libya, get involved in Pakistan, and then carefully maintain the other wars that we had on our plate. 

So....There's long been talk of replacing Biden on the 2012 ballot with someone who is marginally sane.  Now there's talk of replacing Obama on the 2012 ballot with someone who is marginally electable. 

If this happens, and the new Democrate Duo happens to win, is the Nobel automatically awarded to one of the new Statists?  Should it be, just to save time? 

Just wondering. 

An honest question about the effectiveness of pepper-spray

Buzzfeed has published what they call The 45 Most Powerful Images Of 2011.  There are some great photos in there. 
Three of them caught my attention.....

A protester gets sprayed in the face with pepper spray at an Occupy Portland protest. (Randy L. Rasmussen/The Oregonian)

A University of California Davis police officer pepper-sprays students during their sit-in at an "Occupy UCD" demonstration in Davis, California. (Jasna Hodzic)

84-year-old Dorli Rainey was pepper sprayed during a peaceful march in Seattle, Washington. She would have been thrown to the ground and trampled, but luckily a fellow protester and Iraq vet was there to save her. (Joshua Trujillo / seattlepi.com)

I've got one question.... Our government is pepper-spraying protesters who are rallying for more and more government power and control.  I repeat....Our government is pepper-spraying protesters who are rallying for more and more government power and control.
Have the protesters changed their minds already, or do they need to be pepper-sprayed some more? 

Hit this link to see the other pics.  There are some great ones in the Buzzfeed collection.
A fresh coat of Whitening to my friend Mike Coyne for opening my eyes to this phenomenon.   

9 boys molested at government institution. No steps taken to close the facility.

A government organization recently created a media firestorm when it allowed one of its ex-employees, a known pedophile, to continue using the government's facilities and bring young boys into its showers and dressing rooms.

One government employee attempted to report that he'd seen this ex-employee raping a 10-year-old in the workplace shower.  This witness went to his supervisor, who went to his supervisor to report the crime.  No actions were ever taken to intervene or protect the child. 

The only law enforcement involved were the government organization's in-house security.  No one in the organization spoke out.   

There were other incidents with young children involving the organization's in-house security officers.  Officers made recordings of the pedophile employee apologizing to the mother of one of the boys that he molested. 

No one pressed charges for years, and other government employees took great pains to cover up the incidents and protect the reputation of the government institution. 

It appears that 9 young boys were molested in some way.  Some of them were raped. 

If this had happened at a private institution, would our government allow it to remain open for business for another 15 minutes? 

Would politicians be rushing to sponsor something called the "Victims Of Paterno's Coverup Bill of 2011"?

Would Nancy Pelosi be standing in front of cameras, pontificating about the need for more regulation and oversight of the education industry? 

Just wondering. 

If you really want to be ruled....

From an excellent comment on Libertarian Reddit, in response to "who will protect us from evil corporations if we don't have a massive government?"

Here are a few "corporate overlords"


•Bill Gates (Microsoft)

•Jeff Bezos (Amazon)

•Richard Branson (Virgin)

•Alan Mulally (Ford)

•Steve Jobs (Apple)

How do you see this group compared to politicians of the same era (selected at random)?

•Bill Clinton

•George (W. or H.W.) Bush

•Dick Cheney

•Donald Rumsfeld

•Janet Reno

•Chuck Schumer

•Dick Armey

One group are productive, imaginative, innovative people who made billions serving others by producing products people actually wanted. The other group is dominated by paternalistic, officious narcissists who are remembered most for what they did through the arbitrary deployment of force, whether anyone wanted it or not.

You bet your bottom dollar I'd rather be "ruled by corporate overlords"!  They rule -- or more accurately, they are ruled -- by the daily democracy of the marketplace. Politicians rule by the barrel of a gun.

Well said, sir. 

Why Didn't They Attack Switzerland?

A common-sense answer to an unusual question, from the Strike The Root website:

Switzerland has not been in a war of any kind since 1815. It has not been in an official foreign war since 1515. This would be astounding, even miraculous, for any nation. But Switzerland borders Germany . And France . And Italy . And Austria . And Liechtenstein . Now the Prince of Liechtenstein has rarely lashed out in Blitzkrieg in a desperate bid to reign uber alles, but ALL of Switzerland 's other neighbors have devoted a lot of effort to invading other countries.

In addition to the encircling foreign marauders, Switzerland itself is composed of several different ethnic groups that get along as well as, e.g., Germans and French. But they haven't ethnically cleansed each other for two centuries, either.

You would think that peacekeeping performance of this kind would make Switzerland an object of study in every political science and civics course worldwide. "WHY Didn't They Attack Switzerland ?" should be the title of many a textbook. This is not the case. Very few political scientists study Switzerland .

Switzerland is of no interest to politicians, because the features of the Swiss system that keep the peace are the same features that make Swiss politicians unimportant. Do you know the name of the Swiss President now serving out his nonrenewable one-year term? No, you do not (it's Samuel Schmid, but you won't remember tomorrow). His name doesn't matter, and he doesn't matter to the defense of Switzerland . There is no central location of Swiss defense, no Pentagon or NORAD into which you can crash a 757 or a black-market Kazakh nuclear weapon. The defense of Switzerland is the entire people of Switzerland itself.

The features of the Swiss system for keeping the peace are simple. They mind their own business, and they have very strict gun control. By which they mean that every Swiss male must have a gun, except for those who have to carry a mortar or missile launcher. Females are not subject to universal military training, but if you go to a Swiss rifle range, there are always girls blasting away too. After 9-11, teh Swiss carried on as usual, somewhat different from the US response of panicked victim-disarmament. (You are aware that 99% of US pilots are STILL disarmed?)

Hit the link up top to read the whole thing. 
This pic is from Hammer Of Truth: