The item in question here relates to the second of three forums established to talk about an anti-property rights group that is working to supercede people's authority and individual judgement on their own property. The first townhall was organized, and had the audience stacked, by the anti-property rights group. The second one was organized by the opposition, but instead of participating the same way the opposition did in the first, the anti-rights group decides to try and hold their own event either in protest or to compete. That didn't work out so well.
Friday, March 27, 2009
WISH-TV Part II: The Classy Way To Tell The Story
See the video at this link. A reporter with some class at WISH-TV, Rob Youngblood, shows that you can professionally cover an event, even with a slightly humorous slant, without distorting facts or taking the opportunity to embarrass any individuals.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
WISH-TV hit Job: Bankrupt Country, Losing Your Property and Corporate Welfare Are Funny to Jim Shella?
On Wednesday, March 25 several taxpayer and property rights groups teamed up with reporters from a few of the more popular Indiana BLOGs to congregate at the Indiana State House. The event was well attended by several hundred people and there were booths staffed by unpaid volunteers that typically had to take a day off from their day job to try and help whatever cause they advocate.
The event's speakers consisted of Republicans, Libertarians and Democrats. Groups from across the state were invited to participate. Several people from the media attended and while there is probably a valid point to be made that the event over reached in its attempt to be very inclusive and address more than one issue, overall it was a good event with many concerned and well meaning people there.
Unfortunately, one of the local television stations decided to make a big joke out of the event in one of the worst and most unprofessional "hit pieces" I've ever seen done by a (formerly?) reputable news outlet. In fact, Shella did not air any interviews with the organizers or any speakers, instead choosing to cruelly showcase an unpaid volunteer organizer for one group who was not accustomed to media attention and got nervous. He also chose to use only the last few seconds of a much longer interview to ensure the substance of it was removed and then in an obvious hard cut in the middle of a sentence, make one of the Democrat speakers sound like they were against education funding. I mean it was almost as if I said, "If we're not going to properly fund education" and someone cut it to say, "we're not going to properly fund education".
Even more curious, was the blatant attempt to characterize the event as a "Libertarian event". The speakers included people from all three major parties. The booths included a couple of concerned property tax groups as well as the Republican Liberty Caucus, the Campaign for Liberty (mostly Republican volunteers but essentially a non-partisan group) and the people promoting the FairTax (which has 50+ co-sponsors in Congress). I guess because the invited host who introduced the various speakers is a Libertarian and maybe because one of the eight or so booths at the event included one for the Libertarian Party that gave WISH-TV creative license to write a piece of fiction and pass it off as news?
And as the above mentioned invited host of the event, I may be biased but let us just say:
A country with $60 trillion in obligations that is now impossible to pay, well Jim Shella, that's not funny.
Mr. Arnold from Delaware County who had his property taxes jump over $3,000 in one year, I'm sure he appreciates you finding humor in him being given an opportunity speak.
People being threatened with having their family's multi-generational property taken to give to the Indianapolis Motor Speedway or other private development projects, yeah, really glad you think that is funny.
People who don't agree with taxpayers being asked to FURTHER SUBSIDIZE sports team season ticket holders to the tune of $1,200 a seat. Yep, Jim Shella, taxing poor people to help pay for billionaire's money losing hobbies ... that one is always a knee-slapper isn't it? Laugh it up.
So instead of focusing on the issues and the concerns of these people, one media outlet decided to try and do a hit job on, I guess, libertarians? Huh? Or was it just an attempt by WISH-TV to tell taxpayers and common citizens who want to vent their frustrations with government to sit down, shut up and take it?
Now, make no mistake, in Indianapolis the local establishment Republicans and the local media perhaps have some things to worry about. For starters, the Republicans here just had one of their elected City Councilors switch to the Libertarian Party after a little over a year in office. This switch was partially brought on by Republican willingness to support, if not their outright promotion of, increasing benefits for the largest welfare recipients in the city, the Indiana Pacers and the Indianapolis Colts as well as unwillingness to address a major conflict of interest on the Capital Improvement Board.
Combine that with the fact that the Libertarian Party of Indiana, has pretty much offered up, regardless of ideology, some of the sharpest, most thoughtful candidates for office in the past several elections and that has led to increasing vote totals for them.
The local newspaper continues to struggle, but overall, several of the local BLOG sites (Advance Indiana, Ogden on Politics, Indiana Barrister) have done more insightful, investigative style reporting and fact finding than I have rarely (if ever) seen from the local newspaper or mainstream media outlets. So, what was the purpose of this blatant disregard for journalistic integrity? I mean, really, to focus their whole segment on a couple of people manning information booths, not the organizers or speakers? I mean, perhaps as some kind of sophomore prank that ultimately just undermines the credibility of the media.
Of course, to make things worse, pro-tax, pro-property confiscation leftists like Thomas Cook at Blue Indiana picked up the story and promoted the fiction. Of course, Thomas is on record as admitting that personal attacks are more fun than journalistic integrity. Hey, we were all young and silly once I suppose. I'm glad a staunch Democrat like Thomas finds government taking money from poor people to give it to sports teams is funny.
We wonder why our country is going down the tubes, but when the media isn't mature enough to take the issues seriously, especially if someone isn't an establishment insider politician or a well-paid, well-spoken lobbyist than the checks on government must come from the people.
Although it's not necessarily the truth, it is nostalgic to think of past days when reporters were the guardians of truth and protectors of freedom rooting out back room secret deals and investigating wrong doing. Even early American and colonial newspapers were used as political tools to promote an agenda so the question of the day is, whose "agenda" was Jim Shella serving with the piece of trash he aired yesterday?
--------
The event's speakers consisted of Republicans, Libertarians and Democrats. Groups from across the state were invited to participate. Several people from the media attended and while there is probably a valid point to be made that the event over reached in its attempt to be very inclusive and address more than one issue, overall it was a good event with many concerned and well meaning people there.
Unfortunately, one of the local television stations decided to make a big joke out of the event in one of the worst and most unprofessional "hit pieces" I've ever seen done by a (formerly?) reputable news outlet. In fact, Shella did not air any interviews with the organizers or any speakers, instead choosing to cruelly showcase an unpaid volunteer organizer for one group who was not accustomed to media attention and got nervous. He also chose to use only the last few seconds of a much longer interview to ensure the substance of it was removed and then in an obvious hard cut in the middle of a sentence, make one of the Democrat speakers sound like they were against education funding. I mean it was almost as if I said, "If we're not going to properly fund education" and someone cut it to say, "we're not going to properly fund education".
Even more curious, was the blatant attempt to characterize the event as a "Libertarian event". The speakers included people from all three major parties. The booths included a couple of concerned property tax groups as well as the Republican Liberty Caucus, the Campaign for Liberty (mostly Republican volunteers but essentially a non-partisan group) and the people promoting the FairTax (which has 50+ co-sponsors in Congress). I guess because the invited host who introduced the various speakers is a Libertarian and maybe because one of the eight or so booths at the event included one for the Libertarian Party that gave WISH-TV creative license to write a piece of fiction and pass it off as news?
And as the above mentioned invited host of the event, I may be biased but let us just say:
A country with $60 trillion in obligations that is now impossible to pay, well Jim Shella, that's not funny.
Mr. Arnold from Delaware County who had his property taxes jump over $3,000 in one year, I'm sure he appreciates you finding humor in him being given an opportunity speak.
People being threatened with having their family's multi-generational property taken to give to the Indianapolis Motor Speedway or other private development projects, yeah, really glad you think that is funny.
People who don't agree with taxpayers being asked to FURTHER SUBSIDIZE sports team season ticket holders to the tune of $1,200 a seat. Yep, Jim Shella, taxing poor people to help pay for billionaire's money losing hobbies ... that one is always a knee-slapper isn't it? Laugh it up.
So instead of focusing on the issues and the concerns of these people, one media outlet decided to try and do a hit job on, I guess, libertarians? Huh? Or was it just an attempt by WISH-TV to tell taxpayers and common citizens who want to vent their frustrations with government to sit down, shut up and take it?
Now, make no mistake, in Indianapolis the local establishment Republicans and the local media perhaps have some things to worry about. For starters, the Republicans here just had one of their elected City Councilors switch to the Libertarian Party after a little over a year in office. This switch was partially brought on by Republican willingness to support, if not their outright promotion of, increasing benefits for the largest welfare recipients in the city, the Indiana Pacers and the Indianapolis Colts as well as unwillingness to address a major conflict of interest on the Capital Improvement Board.
Combine that with the fact that the Libertarian Party of Indiana, has pretty much offered up, regardless of ideology, some of the sharpest, most thoughtful candidates for office in the past several elections and that has led to increasing vote totals for them.
The local newspaper continues to struggle, but overall, several of the local BLOG sites (Advance Indiana, Ogden on Politics, Indiana Barrister) have done more insightful, investigative style reporting and fact finding than I have rarely (if ever) seen from the local newspaper or mainstream media outlets. So, what was the purpose of this blatant disregard for journalistic integrity? I mean, really, to focus their whole segment on a couple of people manning information booths, not the organizers or speakers? I mean, perhaps as some kind of sophomore prank that ultimately just undermines the credibility of the media.
Of course, to make things worse, pro-tax, pro-property confiscation leftists like Thomas Cook at Blue Indiana picked up the story and promoted the fiction. Of course, Thomas is on record as admitting that personal attacks are more fun than journalistic integrity. Hey, we were all young and silly once I suppose. I'm glad a staunch Democrat like Thomas finds government taking money from poor people to give it to sports teams is funny.
Here is what one attendee wrote about the event:
As hard as this may be to comprehend, the speakers actually believed what they were saying. This was not politics as usual, but real human beings, taxpayers no less, who want a change to come about before it’s too late. Libertarians, Republicans, and Democrats were all there as this was not about party lines but about true change.
Believe it or not, we made a little noise out in the crowd as different speakers brought up issues that affect us all. While on the surface some of the issues only relate to Indianapolis, such as the Speedway Redevelopment Commission and the Capital Improvement Board, they are really the same thing we all have in our local communities but with different names and on different scales.
We wonder why our country is going down the tubes, but when the media isn't mature enough to take the issues seriously, especially if someone isn't an establishment insider politician or a well-paid, well-spoken lobbyist than the checks on government must come from the people.
Although it's not necessarily the truth, it is nostalgic to think of past days when reporters were the guardians of truth and protectors of freedom rooting out back room secret deals and investigating wrong doing. Even early American and colonial newspapers were used as political tools to promote an agenda so the question of the day is, whose "agenda" was Jim Shella serving with the piece of trash he aired yesterday?
--------
More coverage in a post at http://www.libertyfile.com/IN/
--------
Don't forget your daily dose of national news and information that is affecting liberty and the economy. Visit The Liberty File.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Political Games People Play And A Quick Ethics Note
For at least the past six Presidents of the Indianapolis City County Council, it has been tradition for the Council Minority Leader to read any requested recognitions of deceased persons and conduct the adjournment of the Council proceedings. By council rules it is the decision of the Council President to decide who does this task. As a matter of courtesy, it has traditionally been extended to the minority party.
I don't know all of the details, but this past year the Council Vice-President, Ryan Vaughn (R), apparently went to Council President Bob Cockrum (R) and made a request to be allowed that privilege and while nobody can know for certain, since we're dealing in politics and it can be an unpleasant game, it was presumably to either (a) increase Councilor Vaughn's visibility for future political career ladder climbing or (b) intentionally diminish opportunities for the Democrat Minority Leader, Councilor Joanne Sanders, to speak in one of the few formal duties traditionally done by the minority party. Let's assume both and understand that neither concept is new or shocking to politics.
Regardless, well before his switch to the Libertarian Party, Councilor Ed Coleman (L) saw the political gamesmanship and took exception to what he perceived as a show of disrespect for the minority party and treatment that he feared could all too easily just be reciprocated after 2011, when it is likely the council could shift back to the Democrats. So, he introduced a proposal (#63) that would have permanently codified who was responsible for the task. While it's a fair argument that this proposal was one that perhaps more restricted than liberated, it did make a point and ensure there was some debate on what was going on.
I attended the committee meeting where the measure was voted down on a strict party line vote (4-3) with Republicans opposing. What struck me was that Councilor Coleman was very direct that he felt there was a bit of political gamesmanship going on. Laughably, the chair of the committee, Councilor Lutz (R) made some awkward and lame attempt to admonish Coleman for comments against the Council President. Coleman never said it had anything to do with the Council President, just that there were some political games going on. In fact, I don't think Coleman was thinking of Councilor Cockrum at all when he made that statement. And, seriously, Lutz was ridiculous admonishing somebody who merely stated that in a political body, there were some politics going on! But, in fairness, lots of ridiculous things happen in politics, we sometimes call them Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy, John McCain, Pete Stark or, for Indiana folks, Pat Bauer (clearly no relation to Jack).
On a much more serious note. The committee also reviewed some ethics proposal that I think would easily be gotten around just by making sure lobbyists are all "salespeople". At least that was my initial impression of what appears to be a loophole big enough to drive a truck through. Of course, it didn't appear to me that this ethics reform would do anything to stop, oh, maybe partners at big law firms that do business with Indianapolis's sports team from sitting on the boards that negotiate the deals with those teams or oversee management of sports facilities. Perhaps we should fix THAT problem first? In fact, I think that's a grand idea.
---
If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and visiting every day or subscribing to the RSS Feed!
I don't know all of the details, but this past year the Council Vice-President, Ryan Vaughn (R), apparently went to Council President Bob Cockrum (R) and made a request to be allowed that privilege and while nobody can know for certain, since we're dealing in politics and it can be an unpleasant game, it was presumably to either (a) increase Councilor Vaughn's visibility for future political career ladder climbing or (b) intentionally diminish opportunities for the Democrat Minority Leader, Councilor Joanne Sanders, to speak in one of the few formal duties traditionally done by the minority party. Let's assume both and understand that neither concept is new or shocking to politics.
Regardless, well before his switch to the Libertarian Party, Councilor Ed Coleman (L) saw the political gamesmanship and took exception to what he perceived as a show of disrespect for the minority party and treatment that he feared could all too easily just be reciprocated after 2011, when it is likely the council could shift back to the Democrats. So, he introduced a proposal (#63) that would have permanently codified who was responsible for the task. While it's a fair argument that this proposal was one that perhaps more restricted than liberated, it did make a point and ensure there was some debate on what was going on.
I attended the committee meeting where the measure was voted down on a strict party line vote (4-3) with Republicans opposing. What struck me was that Councilor Coleman was very direct that he felt there was a bit of political gamesmanship going on. Laughably, the chair of the committee, Councilor Lutz (R) made some awkward and lame attempt to admonish Coleman for comments against the Council President. Coleman never said it had anything to do with the Council President, just that there were some political games going on. In fact, I don't think Coleman was thinking of Councilor Cockrum at all when he made that statement. And, seriously, Lutz was ridiculous admonishing somebody who merely stated that in a political body, there were some politics going on! But, in fairness, lots of ridiculous things happen in politics, we sometimes call them Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy, John McCain, Pete Stark or, for Indiana folks, Pat Bauer (clearly no relation to Jack).
On a much more serious note. The committee also reviewed some ethics proposal that I think would easily be gotten around just by making sure lobbyists are all "salespeople". At least that was my initial impression of what appears to be a loophole big enough to drive a truck through. Of course, it didn't appear to me that this ethics reform would do anything to stop, oh, maybe partners at big law firms that do business with Indianapolis's sports team from sitting on the boards that negotiate the deals with those teams or oversee management of sports facilities. Perhaps we should fix THAT problem first? In fact, I think that's a grand idea.
---
If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and visiting every day or subscribing to the RSS Feed!
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Forgot How To Make The Bomb? Just Ask China.
In speaking with my good friend Travis Cross recently the topic of the United States forgetting how to make a material related to nuclear weapons came up.
To quote the Fox News article:
Travis humorously asked, "Couldn't we just ask the Chinese?"
After all, remember this scandal?
It's also been speculated that since the material is believed to be either very toxic or very hazardous to make, subjecting the government to potential lawsuits from anyone exposed to it, they may have "intentionally misplaced" the formula to minimize the likelihood of it being used against them or maybe even just declassified in a trial.
So, there we go. Next time we have difficulty remembering how to build our weapons, we can just ask the foreign nations that we've sold the secrets to or just ask their spies for our plans back.
---
If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and visiting every day or subscribing to the RSS Feed!
To quote the Fox News article:
The Department of Defense and the National Nuclear Security Administration had to wait more than a year to refurbish aging nuclear warheads — partly because they had forgotten how to make a crucial component, a government report states.
Regarding a classified material codenamed "Fogbank," a Government Accountability Office report released this month states that "NNSA had lost knowledge of how to manufacture the material because it had kept few records of the process when the material was made in the 1980s and almost all staff with expertise on production had retired or left the agency."
So the effort to refurbish and upgrade W76 warheads, which top the U.S. Navy's (and the British Royal Navy's) submarine-launched Trident missiles, had to be put on hold while experts scoured old records and finally figured out how to manufacture the stuff once again.
Travis humorously asked, "Couldn't we just ask the Chinese?"
After all, remember this scandal?
A scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has provided information that seriously contradicts Clinton administration claims that nuclear secrets obtained by China were solely the result of espionage during the late 1980's.
It's also been speculated that since the material is believed to be either very toxic or very hazardous to make, subjecting the government to potential lawsuits from anyone exposed to it, they may have "intentionally misplaced" the formula to minimize the likelihood of it being used against them or maybe even just declassified in a trial.
So, there we go. Next time we have difficulty remembering how to build our weapons, we can just ask the foreign nations that we've sold the secrets to or just ask their spies for our plans back.
---
If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and visiting every day or subscribing to the RSS Feed!
Monday, March 9, 2009
South Dakota Passes HCR 1013 - 10th Amendment "Sovereignty" Resolution - Goes To Governor
On March 2 the South Dakota State House introduced what is now commonly referred to a "Sovereignty Resolution" whereby, if passed, a state would take whatever action or notification are spelled out in the resolution to reassert 10th Amendment States Rights.
---
If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and visiting every day or subscribing to the RSS Feed!
Numerous states have had these resolutions introduced and Oklahoma has passed, I believe, a different version in each of their State Legislative Bodies but it appears that South Dakota has, in very short order, passed a resolution that now may just need the Governor's signature. Their House passed the resolution on March 3 by a vote of 51 to 18 and on March 5 it looks like their Senate voted 20 to 14 to concur.
Text of the Resolution follows:
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 1013A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION, Reasserting sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over certain powers and serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates.WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."; andWHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more and the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; andWHEREAS, today, in 2009, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government and many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; andWHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; andWHEREAS, any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America, or Judicial Order by the judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of the United States of America by the Constitution of the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of any of the several states or their citizens constitutes a nullification of the Constitution of the United States of America by the government of the United States of America; andWHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States:NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the House of Representatives of the Eighty-fourth Legislature of the State of South Dakota, the Senate concurring therein, that the State of South Dakota hereby reasserts sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; andBE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed; andBE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this concurrent resolution serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.
---
If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and visiting every day or subscribing to the RSS Feed!
Sunday, March 8, 2009
How To Fix The American Economy And The Dimes Worth of Difference
I bristle every time I hear someone try and blame the current economic crisis completely on the woeful eight years of the Bush Administration. As someone who has consistently desired reductions in government spending and decreases in our deficits, I am stunned and saddened by the spending we now see, the deficits that are being incurred and debt that our children and grandchildren will never be able to pay without significant reductions in government and confiscatory taxes.
The following is an annotated and cleaned up excerpt from a comment I posted in response to an Obama supporter pinning all the blame on Bush. I'm not a supporter or fan of either man and when you hear libertarians in particular talk about there just not being much difference between MOST Democrats and Republicans, the following highlights some of the proof there.
Excerpt from Indiana Barrister, Abdul Hakim-Shabazz's Blog. Abdul is the host of Abdul in the Morning, an Indianapolis based morning talk show that generally does an excellent job covering local and state politics. The show is currently found on WXNT - Newstalk 1430AM from 6 until 9 AM Eastern and is followed by the Glenn Beck program.
To prove the "dimes worth of difference" claim let's look at each of the items listed above:
Bush grew government spending in eight years from under $1.9 trillion to over $3.1 trillion (excluding off budget war costs). Fiscal Conservatives voting for Bush were betrayed like no other. Obama continues to grow government spending (recently proposing $3.6 trillion budget) as well under the guise of "stimulus" but that is just cover to finally spend money where they want to and serve their political interests.
Eliminating the Personal Income Tax completely would take government spending back to around year 2000 levels depending on who's numbers are used. Tweaking or bouncing from 35% to 39.6% is an argument over semantics, not whether it is right to take anything at all. Taking a single dime from one American to send to a U.N. program that pays for forced population control abortions in China is theft and to anyone of strong religious convictions reaches a whole other level of crime against them. Bush did correctly reduce the capital gains and estate taxes and modestly cut taxes for everybody. Obama appears prepared to increase taxes only on those who actually create the wealth in the country. Remember, someone like Bill Gates got rich by creating many, many thousands of jobs and even whole industries around him. He did not 'plunder it'. (I know, Mac and Open Source folks are groaning right now - I feel your pain - hurrah for Ubuntu!).
You get more of what you subsidize, less of what you tax. Income taxes tax productivity instead of spending or consumption. This creates a disincentive to savings and investment. Our savings rate, until very recently as people pulled back their purchasing, has been negligible and sometimes negative. Taxes on income allow the government steal your money, via withholding, before you ever get it while if consumption was taxed, if the rate got too high, people could voice their opinion by closing their wallet [Hamilton - Federalist #21]. While my ultimate choice would be to eliminate as many taxes as possible, I do favor legislation like HR 25, The FairTax Act, over most other forms of tax tweaking and tax reform that are presently talked about and immediately viable.
While last session around 74 members of Congress supported this legislation by putting their name on it, neither Bush nor Obama support this much needed type of tax reform. The benefits of the FairTax over the Flat Tax will be the subject of an upcoming post. I used to favor the Flat Tax over the FairTax until I really evaluated both plans.
Both Presidents have supported the idea of direct government intervention to bail out failing financial institutions. This is a whole other discussion to be had, but why not let these organizations fail and let the healthier, better managed ones pick up the pieces and prosper?
If GM goes out of business tomorrow there is still a demand for the quantity of cars that they normally would sell, the demand for cars and need for people to make them would not go down. GM and Chrysler have gotten beat by better competitors. This is how capitalism works via a concept called "creative destruction". Make a better mousetrap and you can make money by putting the maker of the inferior mousetrap out of business, to compete he must sell his product for less than yours or come up with an ever better product than you have invented. A third option, frequently used, is to petition the government to ban, restrict, regulate or tax your better invention.
If the American owned manufacturers are allowed to go out of business, their factories, parts, inventories, buildings, patents, copyrights, trademarks and brand names do not disappear into thin air. Yes, it would be painful, but other organizations will buy up those assets and, using (we hope) better management, put them to more capable and productive use in the economy. Remember, the other car makers are going to need more employees, more factories and more of everything else in order to meet the demand for cars currently met by the failing organizations.
Neither President appears to support this option although the patience with GM does seem to be wearing thin.
The Federal Reserve is a privately owned banking cartel that Congress has unconstitutionally delegated the power of money creation to (the Constitution 'delegates' this to Congress already). Wise men throughout history have repelled the idea of central banks (President Jackson dismantled our first one) but private banking interests prevailed in 1913 to establish the current system (and the income tax to pay them interest). I highly recommend this 40 minute YouTube documentary on Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve. Watch it, and if it doesn't make you mad watch it again.
The FED allows for interventions in the monetary system that are generally harmful, not beneficial. Remember, it was founded under the promise that we would never have another recession; however, within 20 years we were in the middle of the worst one our country has ever experienced to date.
Neither Bush nor Obama are advocating for an elimination, reform or even an audit of this system. Congressman Ron Paul has introduced legislation to at least audit the Federal Reserve and has picked up over a dozen co-sponsors including Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana (R). Some Democrats have even signed on.
Our money, starting in 1913 but with the nail in the coffin being hammered into place in 1971, is no longer backed by anything of value like Gold. Many people consider this idea outdated, but when your currency is backed by "The Full Faith and Credit" of a deeply in debt government and when it's value can be reduced merely by firing up the printing presses, harming poor people the most, then our currency is not "sound" it is just an illusion. It is like the baseball card that has value only so long as others believe it does, it is difficult to get or has scarcity value, and are willing to pay for it in the belief that it will hold or increase in value in the future.
Neither Bush nor Obama are advocating the idea of restoring sound money.
Touching Social Security or Medicare/Medicaid is considered taboo in politics. So much so that when the Bush Administration actually tried to promote the idea of privatizing just a portion of this, putting people in more control of the funds, it went no where as yellow streaks appeared in the backs of even Republicans.
Democrats claim that Social Security is an "insurance policy", Republicans and Libertarians view it as a forced investment scheme that pays very low interest [ie: you are FORCED to loan money to the government for very little interest]. Insurance policies are for IF you need it and most people do not view it as "insurance". They consider that they have paid into it, they want their money back when the time comes.
At least Bush made a modest effort, Obama or some future administration will now have no choice but to reduce benefits or use printing presses to inflate the currency in trying to keep up.
Without government sponsorship, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would have never been able to grow to the size they did and create the consolidation of risk they posed. The loans and risks they held would have been spread amongst hundreds or thousands of smaller firms, each with varying levels of (likely better) management, immune from political influence and with varying degrees of risk tolerance instead of that directed by politicians trying to force home ownership onto people who maybe can't afford it.
I have not heard either party promote the idea of dismantling these entities and restoring financing and risk decision to the private market.
Despite ever increased government spending and regulation, our public school system is terrible. All efforts to introduce competition to this system are met with staunch resistance by teachers unions. I would think competition for the best teachers would be good for teachers salaries and increase promotion opportunities, but then what you need the union for?
If we did a better job teaching basic personal finance and economics, the right kind of economics (Austrian School) not that now discredited Keynesian crap, we might improve our savings rates, reduce the amount of oppressive debt our people get into. They might understand the implications of the things our elected officials do.
If we did a better job teaching Math, Science and Grammar we might have a much more skilled and productive work force.
If we should actually teach children our own system of economics and inspire them with limitless opportunity instead of funneling them into cubicle jobs and massive student loans they'll spend 20 years paying off. We need to inspire people to become the next Thomas Edison, Nicola Tesla, Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Stan Lee, Steve Jobs (and Wozniak) or Ray Kroc.
George Bush massively grew the Federal Department of Education rather than restoring those functions to the States. It appears that the new administration is not supportive of school choice initiatives nor will address eliminating the Department of Education. We've only had the Department of Education since the Carter years, Reagan promised to get rid of it (still waiting). I think we could argue things have gotten worse, not better since its inception.
So, looking at the above items, admittedly limited to mostly economic matters, there isn't a significant difference in policy. NEW BOSS. SAME AS THE OLD BOSS. Although, now we're just bombing stuff in Pakistan instead of Iraq ... there's your "change".
---
If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and visiting every day or subscribing to the RSS Feed!
The following is an annotated and cleaned up excerpt from a comment I posted in response to an Obama supporter pinning all the blame on Bush. I'm not a supporter or fan of either man and when you hear libertarians in particular talk about there just not being much difference between MOST Democrats and Republicans, the following highlights some of the proof there.
Excerpt from Indiana Barrister, Abdul Hakim-Shabazz's Blog. Abdul is the host of Abdul in the Morning, an Indianapolis based morning talk show that generally does an excellent job covering local and state politics. The show is currently found on WXNT - Newstalk 1430AM from 6 until 9 AM Eastern and is followed by the Glenn Beck program.
“Bush Led Recession” is an intellectual dishonesty. Don’t get me wrong, he was woefully bad and could have helped avoid this but, accelerated by his big government spending and lack of proper attention to economic matters, the clock ran out on his watch.
The only purpose of suggesting Bush caused it is to be a willing tool of one political party over another rather than truly evaluate the economic circumstances and policies going back close to 100 years.
It is about a half hour conversation to go through all of the causes and issues at a very high level. The solutions are simple, but politically unrealistic under the ‘one party system’.
Steps:
(1) Massive cuts in government spending
(2) Cut taxes
(3) Where taxes are necessary tax consumption not productivity
(4) Allow bad debt to be liquidated
(5) Allow distressed assets to fail and be reborn into productive ones
(6) Phase out the Federal Reserve
(7) Restore “sound money”
(8) Phase out SS/Medicare/Medicaid using ‘opt outs’ ‘buy outs’ and attrition
(9) Dismantle GSEs (Government Sponsored Entities)
(10) Start ‘educating’ our children instead of ‘graduating’ them.
These items would eliminate market distortions, restore economic risk to private entities instead of public, increase confidence in our currency, balance our budget, build barriers to excessive taxation, allow economic resources to be put back to productive use, reduce inflation, reduce interest rates and restore solvency to the government.
Currently, the United States Government owes so much money that if we could tax the entire world’s productivity at 100% for an entire year, it would not cover the tab. Taxing the entire U.S. at 100% for nine or ten years wouldn’t do it. Selling everything our entire country and our people own … still can’t pay it.
The seeds were planted and watered all along the way from Wilson, Hoover and FDR up through Eisenhower, LBJ, Reagan, Bush (41), Clinton and Bush (43). I fear Obama is just pouring gasoline on the fire.
To prove the "dimes worth of difference" claim let's look at each of the items listed above:
(1) Massive cuts in government spending
Bush grew government spending in eight years from under $1.9 trillion to over $3.1 trillion (excluding off budget war costs). Fiscal Conservatives voting for Bush were betrayed like no other. Obama continues to grow government spending (recently proposing $3.6 trillion budget) as well under the guise of "stimulus" but that is just cover to finally spend money where they want to and serve their political interests.
(2) Cut taxes
Eliminating the Personal Income Tax completely would take government spending back to around year 2000 levels depending on who's numbers are used. Tweaking or bouncing from 35% to 39.6% is an argument over semantics, not whether it is right to take anything at all. Taking a single dime from one American to send to a U.N. program that pays for forced population control abortions in China is theft and to anyone of strong religious convictions reaches a whole other level of crime against them. Bush did correctly reduce the capital gains and estate taxes and modestly cut taxes for everybody. Obama appears prepared to increase taxes only on those who actually create the wealth in the country. Remember, someone like Bill Gates got rich by creating many, many thousands of jobs and even whole industries around him. He did not 'plunder it'. (I know, Mac and Open Source folks are groaning right now - I feel your pain - hurrah for Ubuntu!).
(3) Where taxes are necessary tax consumption not productivity
You get more of what you subsidize, less of what you tax. Income taxes tax productivity instead of spending or consumption. This creates a disincentive to savings and investment. Our savings rate, until very recently as people pulled back their purchasing, has been negligible and sometimes negative. Taxes on income allow the government steal your money, via withholding, before you ever get it while if consumption was taxed, if the rate got too high, people could voice their opinion by closing their wallet [Hamilton - Federalist #21]. While my ultimate choice would be to eliminate as many taxes as possible, I do favor legislation like HR 25, The FairTax Act, over most other forms of tax tweaking and tax reform that are presently talked about and immediately viable.
While last session around 74 members of Congress supported this legislation by putting their name on it, neither Bush nor Obama support this much needed type of tax reform. The benefits of the FairTax over the Flat Tax will be the subject of an upcoming post. I used to favor the Flat Tax over the FairTax until I really evaluated both plans.
(4) Allow bad debt to be liquidated
Both Presidents have supported the idea of direct government intervention to bail out failing financial institutions. This is a whole other discussion to be had, but why not let these organizations fail and let the healthier, better managed ones pick up the pieces and prosper?
(5) Allow distressed assets to fail and be reborn into productive ones
If GM goes out of business tomorrow there is still a demand for the quantity of cars that they normally would sell, the demand for cars and need for people to make them would not go down. GM and Chrysler have gotten beat by better competitors. This is how capitalism works via a concept called "creative destruction". Make a better mousetrap and you can make money by putting the maker of the inferior mousetrap out of business, to compete he must sell his product for less than yours or come up with an ever better product than you have invented. A third option, frequently used, is to petition the government to ban, restrict, regulate or tax your better invention.
If the American owned manufacturers are allowed to go out of business, their factories, parts, inventories, buildings, patents, copyrights, trademarks and brand names do not disappear into thin air. Yes, it would be painful, but other organizations will buy up those assets and, using (we hope) better management, put them to more capable and productive use in the economy. Remember, the other car makers are going to need more employees, more factories and more of everything else in order to meet the demand for cars currently met by the failing organizations.
Neither President appears to support this option although the patience with GM does seem to be wearing thin.
(6) Phase out the Federal Reserve
The Federal Reserve is a privately owned banking cartel that Congress has unconstitutionally delegated the power of money creation to (the Constitution 'delegates' this to Congress already). Wise men throughout history have repelled the idea of central banks (President Jackson dismantled our first one) but private banking interests prevailed in 1913 to establish the current system (and the income tax to pay them interest). I highly recommend this 40 minute YouTube documentary on Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve. Watch it, and if it doesn't make you mad watch it again.
The FED allows for interventions in the monetary system that are generally harmful, not beneficial. Remember, it was founded under the promise that we would never have another recession; however, within 20 years we were in the middle of the worst one our country has ever experienced to date.
Neither Bush nor Obama are advocating for an elimination, reform or even an audit of this system. Congressman Ron Paul has introduced legislation to at least audit the Federal Reserve and has picked up over a dozen co-sponsors including Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana (R). Some Democrats have even signed on.
(7) Restore “sound money”
Our money, starting in 1913 but with the nail in the coffin being hammered into place in 1971, is no longer backed by anything of value like Gold. Many people consider this idea outdated, but when your currency is backed by "The Full Faith and Credit" of a deeply in debt government and when it's value can be reduced merely by firing up the printing presses, harming poor people the most, then our currency is not "sound" it is just an illusion. It is like the baseball card that has value only so long as others believe it does, it is difficult to get or has scarcity value, and are willing to pay for it in the belief that it will hold or increase in value in the future.
Neither Bush nor Obama are advocating the idea of restoring sound money.
(8) Phase out SS/Medicare/Medicaid using ‘opt outs’ ‘buy outs’ and attrition
Touching Social Security or Medicare/Medicaid is considered taboo in politics. So much so that when the Bush Administration actually tried to promote the idea of privatizing just a portion of this, putting people in more control of the funds, it went no where as yellow streaks appeared in the backs of even Republicans.
Democrats claim that Social Security is an "insurance policy", Republicans and Libertarians view it as a forced investment scheme that pays very low interest [ie: you are FORCED to loan money to the government for very little interest]. Insurance policies are for IF you need it and most people do not view it as "insurance". They consider that they have paid into it, they want their money back when the time comes.
At least Bush made a modest effort, Obama or some future administration will now have no choice but to reduce benefits or use printing presses to inflate the currency in trying to keep up.
(9) Dismantle GSEs (Government Sponsored Entities)
Without government sponsorship, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would have never been able to grow to the size they did and create the consolidation of risk they posed. The loans and risks they held would have been spread amongst hundreds or thousands of smaller firms, each with varying levels of (likely better) management, immune from political influence and with varying degrees of risk tolerance instead of that directed by politicians trying to force home ownership onto people who maybe can't afford it.
I have not heard either party promote the idea of dismantling these entities and restoring financing and risk decision to the private market.
(10) Start ‘educating’ our children instead of ‘graduating’ them.
Despite ever increased government spending and regulation, our public school system is terrible. All efforts to introduce competition to this system are met with staunch resistance by teachers unions. I would think competition for the best teachers would be good for teachers salaries and increase promotion opportunities, but then what you need the union for?
If we did a better job teaching basic personal finance and economics, the right kind of economics (Austrian School) not that now discredited Keynesian crap, we might improve our savings rates, reduce the amount of oppressive debt our people get into. They might understand the implications of the things our elected officials do.
If we did a better job teaching Math, Science and Grammar we might have a much more skilled and productive work force.
If we should actually teach children our own system of economics and inspire them with limitless opportunity instead of funneling them into cubicle jobs and massive student loans they'll spend 20 years paying off. We need to inspire people to become the next Thomas Edison, Nicola Tesla, Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Stan Lee, Steve Jobs (and Wozniak) or Ray Kroc.
George Bush massively grew the Federal Department of Education rather than restoring those functions to the States. It appears that the new administration is not supportive of school choice initiatives nor will address eliminating the Department of Education. We've only had the Department of Education since the Carter years, Reagan promised to get rid of it (still waiting). I think we could argue things have gotten worse, not better since its inception.
So, looking at the above items, admittedly limited to mostly economic matters, there isn't a significant difference in policy. NEW BOSS. SAME AS THE OLD BOSS. Although, now we're just bombing stuff in Pakistan instead of Iraq ... there's your "change".
---
If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and visiting every day or subscribing to the RSS Feed!
D.L. Hughley Interviews Ron Paul - "You Are Too Human"
This is an excellent discussion between D.L. Hughley and Congressman Ron Paul (R - TX). They cover a lot of topics including bailouts, the American Civil War, foreign policy, Rush Limbaugh and others.
Hughley tells Congressman Paul that he is "pragmatic" and "too human to be a Republican." No politics from Ron Paul, just the truth and plain, straight talk.
Hughley tells Congressman Paul that he is "pragmatic" and "too human to be a Republican." No politics from Ron Paul, just the truth and plain, straight talk.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Collection of All Newborn DNA By Federal Government Without Consent
A lot of people are unaware that in 2007 a bill (S.1858) was passed by Congress that requires DNA samples of all newborn children to be sent to the Federal Government, warehoused, databased and tagged to note any genetic anomalies. This law does not require notification, much less consent, from the parents.
Every newborn child is now having samples of their DNA sent to the government for screening and indexing. The title of the bill was "Newborn SCreening Saves Lives Act of 2007" but probably should have been titled "Stealing Your Kid'S DNA for Databasing and Tracking Without Telling You."
Beyond establishing a list of genetic conditions for which newborns would be tested, the bill also establishes guidelines for sharing test results nationwide, creating systems for surveillance and tracking of the status of anyone diagnosed at birth with any kind of defect, tracking genetic traits and defects within families and to subject people to genetic research without getting their consent or even having to inform them. The DNA is taken and then becomes the property of the government.
Now, I know a lot of people aren't really too concerned with what powers the Federal Government has granted to it by our Constitution, but I'm pretty sure nowhere in there does it authorize the quiet theft of our genetic material for purposes of research, tracking and whatever else they decide to do with it once they have it. And, of course, they always eventually choose to expand uses of information once collected. Besides all of that, isn't it a bit creepy to suddenly become, as World Net Daily suggested in 2008, a population of "guinea pigs."
For those who have some historical perspective on the 'eugenics' movement in the early 20th Century, you will be familiar with the name Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who advocated eugenics as a way to eliminate traits from the population that were considered 'unfit'. In fact, a large part of this movement and the advocation of abortion to be more widely accepted had outright racial motives associated with one of the project names and who knows what she meant when she criticized, "the ever increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born."
This massive violation of everything from privacy to medical ethics was introduced by Senator Christopher Dodd [D-CT], ultimately passed by both houses of Congress and signed by President Bush on April 24, 2008. Yeah, let me say that again and note I didn't say "vetoed". SIGNED by President Bush into law. There were 21 co-sponsors and while you might expect Hillary Clinton [D-NY], Bernie Sanders [I-VT] or Ted Kennedy [D-MA] to be among them (they were) there were a few surprises. Those included embattled Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman [R] and Senator Richard Lugar [R-IN], Orrin Hatch [R-UT] and the recent stimulus bill sellout Susan Collins [R-ME]. These Senators didn't just vote for it, they CO-SPONSORED it.
And the story gets better. This bill was passed in the Senate by "unanimous consent". In other words, no recorded vote was taken. This is what cowardly legislators do on controversial bills when they don't want a record of how they voted to be used against them later. Sure enough, the House of Representatives did the same thing.
Hey isn't this great! You don't have to be accused of a crime to get your fingerprints taken, the government will already have your DNA. Convenient. And hey, somewhere in a lab somewhere they could be doing medical research ... ON YOU.
---
If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and visiting every day or subscribing to the RSS Feed!
Every newborn child is now having samples of their DNA sent to the government for screening and indexing. The title of the bill was "Newborn SCreening Saves Lives Act of 2007" but probably should have been titled "Stealing Your Kid'S DNA for Databasing and Tracking Without Telling You."
Beyond establishing a list of genetic conditions for which newborns would be tested, the bill also establishes guidelines for sharing test results nationwide, creating systems for surveillance and tracking of the status of anyone diagnosed at birth with any kind of defect, tracking genetic traits and defects within families and to subject people to genetic research without getting their consent or even having to inform them. The DNA is taken and then becomes the property of the government.
Now, I know a lot of people aren't really too concerned with what powers the Federal Government has granted to it by our Constitution, but I'm pretty sure nowhere in there does it authorize the quiet theft of our genetic material for purposes of research, tracking and whatever else they decide to do with it once they have it. And, of course, they always eventually choose to expand uses of information once collected. Besides all of that, isn't it a bit creepy to suddenly become, as World Net Daily suggested in 2008, a population of "guinea pigs."
For those who have some historical perspective on the 'eugenics' movement in the early 20th Century, you will be familiar with the name Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who advocated eugenics as a way to eliminate traits from the population that were considered 'unfit'. In fact, a large part of this movement and the advocation of abortion to be more widely accepted had outright racial motives associated with one of the project names and who knows what she meant when she criticized, "the ever increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born."
This massive violation of everything from privacy to medical ethics was introduced by Senator Christopher Dodd [D-CT], ultimately passed by both houses of Congress and signed by President Bush on April 24, 2008. Yeah, let me say that again and note I didn't say "vetoed". SIGNED by President Bush into law. There were 21 co-sponsors and while you might expect Hillary Clinton [D-NY], Bernie Sanders [I-VT] or Ted Kennedy [D-MA] to be among them (they were) there were a few surprises. Those included embattled Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman [R] and Senator Richard Lugar [R-IN], Orrin Hatch [R-UT] and the recent stimulus bill sellout Susan Collins [R-ME]. These Senators didn't just vote for it, they CO-SPONSORED it.
And the story gets better. This bill was passed in the Senate by "unanimous consent". In other words, no recorded vote was taken. This is what cowardly legislators do on controversial bills when they don't want a record of how they voted to be used against them later. Sure enough, the House of Representatives did the same thing.
Hey isn't this great! You don't have to be accused of a crime to get your fingerprints taken, the government will already have your DNA. Convenient. And hey, somewhere in a lab somewhere they could be doing medical research ... ON YOU.
---
If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and visiting every day or subscribing to the RSS Feed!
Thursday, March 5, 2009
HR 875 Would Essentially Outlaw Family Farms In The United States
I get a lot of e-mails each day and one today (hi Cheryl!) pointed my attention to HR 875, a bill introduced into the 111th Congress. SO, I went and did something that members of Congress rarely do and actually read the bill.More accurately, I glanced through it which is still more than they ever do. It was introduced by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT 3rd) and, as of this writing, has around 36 co-sponsors including my Congressman, Andre Carson (D-IN 7th). It immediately strikes me as being terribly bad legislation.
Under a heading described as protecting the public health and ensuring the safety of food it creates a "Food Safety Administration" within Health and Human Services. Oddly, it doesn't just add regulations to the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) which is also under HHS. And don't we have the USDA as well? The bill applies to all manner of "Food Establishments" and "Food Production Facilities" (note the following excerpt).
The bill would appear to even cover some fishing boats and potentially your downtown hot dog street vendors. "Transportion" of food also could be covered. In fact, the bill probably would also apply to your family garden since no exemption is apparent.
What it essentially does is place a tremendous regulatory burden on all of these organizations and individuals by requiring them to have "food safety plans", consider all relevant hazards [note: I wish Congress would consider all "relevant hazards" or unintended consequences of everything THEY did], testing, sample keeping and to maintain all kinds of records. The bill also allows the government to dictate all manner of standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, packaging, temperature controls and other items.
This massive bloat in government regulation (and taxpayer expense to support it) would add additional cost and headache to every farm, some fishing boats, slaughterhouse, processing plant, CO-OP and anyone else associated with growing, storing, transporting or processing food. The bill authorizes fines of up to $1,000,000 (one million) dollars for "each act" and for "each day" of a violation.
We'll skip over the concern over how important food production and distribution, largely recession proof, could be if our economy continues to decline and inflation takes hold and just address this on the apparent lunacy that it is. As those familiar with history know, large dominant corporations often will use government to demand industry regulations that force the small competitor out of business or introduce barriers to entry that prevent new companies from starting up to compete. In the early part of the 20th century a tremendous amount of regulation was written by the industries themselves to be enacted into law.
In this case, I think this bill could do tremendous harm to family farms or independent food operators. Only massive companies have the ability to meet these regulations and imagine the legal expenses that could be incurred to defend oneself? Never forget, the government has near unlimited resources where you might have to cough up $200 to $500 an hour for a good attorney to defend yourself, your farm, boat, truck, restaurant, orchard, vineyard or hot dog stand. And what about the increased cost of food associated with the cost of compliance, it's not unreasonable to think that many places would have to hire staff or outside assistance just to comply with the law.
We have an excellent history in the United States of safe food, but as Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel suggested recently, "You should never want a serious crisis to go to waste." He spoke those words relative to looking for opportunities to do things that people would not otherwise accept without some crisis. We should be very careful not to let the very rare instance of something like the recent peanut problem be used as such a "crisis". There is no impetus to point the bureaucrats of government and the guns they control, their ability to not only deprive someone of life or freedom but to destroy whole families, careers and reputations, at everyone in the country who might be involved in ensuring we have stuff to eat.
We're doing just fine without this legislation.
UPDATE: Friday, March 6 - 10:50 PM EST
This video clip was included in a news update that went out to supporters of Congressman Ron Paul (R - TX) this evening. Also - If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and subscribing to the RSS Feed there.
Under a heading described as protecting the public health and ensuring the safety of food it creates a "Food Safety Administration" within Health and Human Services. Oddly, it doesn't just add regulations to the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) which is also under HHS. And don't we have the USDA as well? The bill applies to all manner of "Food Establishments" and "Food Production Facilities" (note the following excerpt).
(14) FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITY- The term ‘food production facility’ means any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding operation.
The bill would appear to even cover some fishing boats and potentially your downtown hot dog street vendors. "Transportion" of food also could be covered. In fact, the bill probably would also apply to your family garden since no exemption is apparent.
What it essentially does is place a tremendous regulatory burden on all of these organizations and individuals by requiring them to have "food safety plans", consider all relevant hazards [note: I wish Congress would consider all "relevant hazards" or unintended consequences of everything THEY did], testing, sample keeping and to maintain all kinds of records. The bill also allows the government to dictate all manner of standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, packaging, temperature controls and other items.
This massive bloat in government regulation (and taxpayer expense to support it) would add additional cost and headache to every farm, some fishing boats, slaughterhouse, processing plant, CO-OP and anyone else associated with growing, storing, transporting or processing food. The bill authorizes fines of up to $1,000,000 (one million) dollars for "each act" and for "each day" of a violation.
We'll skip over the concern over how important food production and distribution, largely recession proof, could be if our economy continues to decline and inflation takes hold and just address this on the apparent lunacy that it is. As those familiar with history know, large dominant corporations often will use government to demand industry regulations that force the small competitor out of business or introduce barriers to entry that prevent new companies from starting up to compete. In the early part of the 20th century a tremendous amount of regulation was written by the industries themselves to be enacted into law.
In this case, I think this bill could do tremendous harm to family farms or independent food operators. Only massive companies have the ability to meet these regulations and imagine the legal expenses that could be incurred to defend oneself? Never forget, the government has near unlimited resources where you might have to cough up $200 to $500 an hour for a good attorney to defend yourself, your farm, boat, truck, restaurant, orchard, vineyard or hot dog stand. And what about the increased cost of food associated with the cost of compliance, it's not unreasonable to think that many places would have to hire staff or outside assistance just to comply with the law.
We have an excellent history in the United States of safe food, but as Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel suggested recently, "You should never want a serious crisis to go to waste." He spoke those words relative to looking for opportunities to do things that people would not otherwise accept without some crisis. We should be very careful not to let the very rare instance of something like the recent peanut problem be used as such a "crisis". There is no impetus to point the bureaucrats of government and the guns they control, their ability to not only deprive someone of life or freedom but to destroy whole families, careers and reputations, at everyone in the country who might be involved in ensuring we have stuff to eat.
We're doing just fine without this legislation.
UPDATE: Friday, March 6 - 10:50 PM EST
This video clip was included in a news update that went out to supporters of Congressman Ron Paul (R - TX) this evening. Also - If you're wanting to keep up on news related to government encroachment of our freedoms or the continued erosion of our economy please consider visiting The Liberty File and subscribing to the RSS Feed there.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Californians Plan Tax Protests - Work For Recall Of Elected Officials
The following information is from the "Tax Revolt 2009" web site. An event is also planned in Indianapolis, Indiana for March 25, 2009 that is being dubbed The "Revolt at the State House." Voters and taxpayers are expected to speak out against various abuses, insider dealings and lack of property tax reform after massive increases in 2007. There is an increasing tone of outrage around the country and while the masses may not jump on board, the tireless efforts of those that demand the rule of law, fairness, accountability, transparency and competency in their government will increasingly draw attention.
Regarding the California Event:
The Revolution is now! Tax Revolt 2009 is here! Politicians in Sacramento and Washington have plundered California and the nation. It is time for taxpayers to rise up and take back your state and your nation.
News! Attend Saturday’s Tax Revolt Rally!
Attend Saturday’s Tax Revolt Rally!
Spread the word (print out and distribute the flyer to your friends and neighbors)!
The Slidebar Café
122 East Commonwealth Ave.,
Fullerton CA 92832 (map)
Saturday, March 7, 2009, 3-6 PM
Hold Lawmakers Accountable
You must Sacramento lawmakers accountable:
Recall Arnold Schwarznegger
Recall Jeff Miller
Recall Jim Silva
Hold Sacramento Accountable
Sacramento has betrayed taxpayers by passing the largest state tax increase in the nation’s history. Californians pay the highest income and sales taxes in the nation - while we suffer job losses, pay cuts, and dwindling 401k’s. Hold Sacramento accountable.
Hold Republicans and Democrats Accountable
State spending has grown 40 percent in the past five years because of deal-making and political corruption by special interests. Lawmakers of both parties are not protecting taxpayers because lawmakers put their power, prestige, and lifestyles first. Hold Republicans and Democrats accountable.
Regarding the California Event:
The Revolution is now! Tax Revolt 2009 is here! Politicians in Sacramento and Washington have plundered California and the nation. It is time for taxpayers to rise up and take back your state and your nation.
News! Attend Saturday’s Tax Revolt Rally!
Attend Saturday’s Tax Revolt Rally!
Spread the word (print out and distribute the flyer to your friends and neighbors)!
The Slidebar Café
122 East Commonwealth Ave.,
Fullerton CA 92832 (map)
Saturday, March 7, 2009, 3-6 PM
Hold Lawmakers Accountable
You must Sacramento lawmakers accountable:
Recall Arnold Schwarznegger
Recall Jeff Miller
Recall Jim Silva
Hold Sacramento Accountable
Sacramento has betrayed taxpayers by passing the largest state tax increase in the nation’s history. Californians pay the highest income and sales taxes in the nation - while we suffer job losses, pay cuts, and dwindling 401k’s. Hold Sacramento accountable.
Hold Republicans and Democrats Accountable
State spending has grown 40 percent in the past five years because of deal-making and political corruption by special interests. Lawmakers of both parties are not protecting taxpayers because lawmakers put their power, prestige, and lifestyles first. Hold Republicans and Democrats accountable.
---
And don't forget to visit The Liberty File for your daily dose of liberty impacting news and information.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Dow 6,760 Means $1,452 Loss After Inflation
If you bought into the Dow Jones Industrial Average the last time it was at 6,760, the approximate close from today, after inflation you would have lost approximately $1,452 even though the price is the same.
This basically means that the Dow would need to be at 8,100 or so just to break even, but that excludes the fact that you would be paying taxes on the inflation portion of your earnings. So that means you'd need to be at 9,180 or so, assuming the top federal tax rate and some reasonable allowance for state income taxes. Considering that inflation is the result the government printing too much money (inflating the money supply) which results in price increases, meaning it is basically a 'hidden tax', you essentially pay taxes on your taxes.
Now, an adjustment could clearly be made to the above figures to use a capital gains tax rate, but keep in mind that the reduced capital gains rates are not long for this world. BUT, does this not highlight why capital gains taxes should essentially be zero? Should you pay taxes on inflation?
No wonder people try and shelter their money elsewhere.
Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN 5th) Joins Ron Paul on FED Transparency Act
Indiana's 5th District representative to the U.S. Congress, Dan Burton, has signed on, along with ten other representatives, to Ron Paul's Federal Reserve Transparency Act (HR 1207). The bill's summary says:
To amend title 31, United States Code, to reform the manner in which the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is audited by the Comptroller General of the United States and the manner in which such audits are reported, and for other purposes.
Out of the ten other co-sponsors, there are three Democrats which is an encouraging sign that there may some bipartisan support for finally getting an audit of the Federal Reserve. Oddly, I became aware of this when a friend in Florida let me know that 61 year old freshman representative Dan Posey, (R-FL 15th) had signed onto the bill.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)