Muda69

Yang, who created buzz with freedom dividend, ends 2020 bid: https://apnews.com/dac9093037af268f867ed697a09d0556 When will Mayor Pete drop out, or he is mainly campaigning for a vice presidential bid?

Socialism Always Fails: https://mises.org/wire/socialism-always-fails However, as I pointed out three years ago, the collapse of the USSR and the eastern European socialist states did not “convert” Heilbroner to becoming an advocate for capitalism, nor did China’s transformation from Mao’s giant commune to a quasi-capitalist economy (and subsequent economic growth) change his mind. Indeed, socialists seem almost impervious to factual arguments, and despite a gaggle of “what would a socialist economy look like” articles in publications such as Jacobin, socialists have never refuted the Austrian arguments. For that matter, socialists really cannot appeal to economics at all despite their claim that their goal is to provide a better economic society for those ubiquitous workers. Jacobin declares: (Note that the Jacobins are famous for unleashing the infamous Reign of Terror during the French Revolution, in which thousands of so-called enemies of the state were murdered. That American socialists today willingly associate themselves with genocide speaks volumes of what these people will do if they ever gain real power here.) In other words, the implementation of a socialist order is not so much dependent upon a plausible model of a socialist economy, but rather is an exercise that depends upon convincing people that somewhere over the rainbow we can make the whole thing work, despite the failures of the past. And that is where the recent articles in The Nation and the Daily Mail reveal much about the socialist mentality. In The Nation, Ross Barkan argues that the barriers to implementing a socialist system are political, not economic. Indeed, in “Why American Socialism Failed” he writes that there was just too much political resistance to reorganizing the United States into something like what at that time was being done in the Soviet Union. (It should be noted that he seems to view the Russian Revolution with much sympathy—and fails to note that perhaps Americans at that time were not interested in implementing a regime that would mirror the atrocities being committed by the Red Army and the new Soviet government.) Instead of following the old political strategy of having people run as members of a socialist party, Barkan says that the better plan is for socialists simply to take over the modern Democratic Party by electing socialists from the presidency on down. He writes: In other words, the entire question of socialism is political; socialists can speak about their utopian visions, be elected on those platforms, but really don’t have to explain how they actually will make a socialist economy perform in a way that will even begin to match the output of a private enterprise–based economy. Yet, when confronted with the reality of the actual performance of a socialist economy, all the writer can do is to appeal to the election of socialists, which should not be surprising, since the end of socialism is political power and nothing else. The death of a Canadian teenager of leukemia while waiting for the government’s permission to have a bone marrow transplant speaks volumes both of the performance of socialist systems and the way that people under socialism submit to the system. Laura Hillier, 18, of Ontario died before she could receive a transplant, which is not particularly unusual in the Canadian system, as “standing in line” for care is the typical experience, even when a life is at stake. From the Daily Mail: Although Hillier’s obituary “slammed” the wait times in Canada, nonetheless, nothing will be done because Canada’s “single payer” system is both politically sacrosanct and a socialist politician’s dream. It is sacrosanct because it provides the “free healthcare” that socialists promise and a politician’s dream because it provides unending opportunities for “reform.” In reality, the economic calculation problem is front and center, making it impossible to “fix” the Canadian single-payer system, something no Canadian politician will admit. One doubts that Hillier would have died in the same way in the United States. For all of the criticism American medical care receives from the left (and the current system hardly fits the claim by socialists that it is “free market”), one can be reasonably assured that a young woman here would not die because of a lack of hospital beds. In Canada, however, such deaths are a matter of course, and for all of the “this shouldn’t happen” statements from both politicians and victims’ families, it will continue to happen. (Canada, perhaps not surprisingly, has relatively poor cancer survival rates.) Under socialism, one stands in line and does not challenge the system, since the system is based not upon the successful delivery of services, but rather on the prospect of such services being made available “to the people” for no fee, the product of a “compassionate” socialist state. Note that at no point in his article does Barkan write of any way that socialism would improve the lives of Americans. Socialism is not about providing needed services to those who cannot receive them otherwise, nor is it about raising the living standards of the poor, despite socialist claims to the contrary. Socialists do not create goods and services; they commandeer them for political purposes, and such things are useful only as a means of putting and keeping socialist politicians in power. No politician in Canada will be voted out of office for the premature death of Laura Hillier, nor will any hospital administrators be sacked. Had medical officials given in to sentiment and bumped Hillier up the transplant list, someone else would have died for lack of space. The enemy here is scarcity, and under socialism, scarcity is multiplied. Canadians have come to accept this situation, all the while convincing themselves that theirs not only is a morally-superior system to anything that exists in their neighbor to the south, but also enables them to receive medical services that they believe would be denied them if their government were not paying. They have become like the cave dwellers in Plato’s allegory, believing that the medical shadows they see on the wall represent the best care possible. Socialists might well take over the Democratic Party; indeed, American voters are capable of putting someone like Bernie Sanders in the White House. They well could make the electoral gains that the writers at The Nation have coveted for decades. What they cannot do, however, is tell the truth about socialism. Another article in Jacobin, written by Sam Gindin, demonstrates this last point: Gindin then goes on to “refute” Hayek’s “knowledge problem” critique of socialism (while ignoring the Austrian “economic calculation” issue). The rest of the piece essentially can be shortened into this one sentence: forget the past failures of socialism; this time we will make it work. We have been hearing this kind of thing for more than a century. Socialists tell us that if the rest of us will give them total power over our lives, this time they will provide prosperity, and unlike previous socialist regimes, they won’t strip us of our liberties. We should have as much confidence in their words as the loved ones of Laura Hillier had in the empty promises of Canadian medical officials. Spot on analysis by Mr. Anderson. And I personally I will take a system based on the successful delivery of goods/services (Capitalism) rather a system based on making those goods/services available "to the people" for "free" (socialism). The latter is doomed to failure, as history has repeatedly proved.

Instead of Removing Trump From Power, Remove Power From the Presidency: https://reason.com/2020/02/08/instead-of-removing-trump-from-power-remove-power-from-the-presidency/#comments Agreed. Mr. Welch is spot-on. The power of the Oval Office needs to be drastically reduced, along with the overall power and scope of the federal government.

Hmm, I see no explanation as to why the changing of this rule to include the shotgun formation. Handing more options and power to the offense, I guess. After all high school needs more 74-66 gems. That or we don't want the widdle shotgun quarterback having to actually have his hands in the vicinity of the offensive center's anus. Yuck!

Maybe you misread my question, so I will restate it. Is Mr. Allen just the following the lead regarding Preferred Walk On players as "tacking dummies" that has already been set for decades by traditional Big Ten powerhouse programs like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, and Wisconsin?

Is this the current model at traditional B10 powerhouse programs like Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, and Wisconsin?

Michael Bloomberg and the Imperious Presidency: https://reason.com/2020/02/07/michael-bloomberg-and-the-imperious-presidency-2/ Agreed. The size, scope, and power of the federal government needs to be reduced by 25%, across the board. Then maybe, just maybe it will once again become government by the people and for the people.

https://reason.com/2020/02/05/undercover-cops-hired-118-handymen-then-arrested-them-all-for-not-having-licenses/ The Sheriff's Office also released a compilation video of some of the handymen caught up in the sting operation, including several who had past criminal convictions, or who had been caught previously performing unlicensed contract work. Only eight of the people arrested as part of Operation House Hunters were repeat offenders, according to the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Department. The other 110 were arrested for first-time offenses. The bulk of those charges were for "unlawful acts in the capacity of a contractor," a misdemeanor offense that can come with a $1,000 fine and a 12-month jail sentence. Repeat violations can result in a felony charge. That the Sheriff's sting operation netted few master criminals is not surprising to Leslie Sammis, a criminal defense lawyer in Tampa, Florida, who has represented clients caught up in these sting operations in Hillsborough County. "The real con men that are trying to trick homeowners are usually too experienced to get caught up in one of these types of sting operations. So the stings tend to catch someone that crosses the line in an unsophisticated way," Sammis told me in an email. Frequently, she says, officers will hire a handyman on the pretext of performing work that doesn't need a license, and then during the course of the job ask them to do something that does, like unhooking a toilet or laying some tiles. "When the handyman says no, then the undercover detective moves the conversation to something else and then comes back to the question later in a different way," says Sammis. "By the time the handyman gets to the location, they want to make the homeowner happy and end up agreeing to perform work that they didn't intend on doing when they first arrived. The undercover detective are just creating a crime that probably wouldn't occur otherwise." Using stings to nab unlicensed contractors isn't unique to Hillsborough County. Cops and regulators have conducted similar operations in New York and California. Occupational licensing, whether it's of contractors or hair braiders, is often much more about protecting incumbent businesses and government licensing revenue than it is about safeguarding the welfare of consumers. Operation House Hunters is a perfect illustration of this, with cops going to great lengths to manufacture licensing law violations that either wouldn't have happened or wouldn't have produced unsatisfied parties. The more effort law enforcement spends entrapping handymen, the fewer personnel and resources they have to devote to deterring other, more serious crimes. "These sting operations rake in big money in fines and court costs," Sammis says. "Catching real criminals actually committing a crime is much harder." It appears that more and more "policing" is about generating revenue than catching criminals. And as one of the comments to this story states: "I hope the DA and County officers get very large campaign contributions from the licensed contractors. Job well done."

Not guilty: Senate acquits Trump of impeachment charges: https://apnews.com/93c85dcfb0e6b2185391965e77ebea51 Can we close this thread now?

Uncle Sam Doubles Down on His Spending Addiction: https://reason.com/2020/02/06/uncle-sam-doubles-down-on-his-spending-addiction/

Trump Bashes Socialism While Endorsing a Status Quo Socialism of His Own: https://reason.com/2020/02/05/trump-bashes-socialism-while-endorsing-a-status-quo-socialism-of-his-own/ Agreed. The uni-party is spending our way to financial oblivion, and our children and grandchildren will bear the brunt of the pain.

Pete Buttigieg is an elitist. He should embrace it.: https://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/columnists/james-briggs/2020/02/06/after-iowa-pete-buttigieg-should-stop-trying-run-his-elitism/4669375002/ (Note: article is behind a paywall)

https://mises.org/wire/what-year-did-healthcare-become-natural-right Yep, it leads to government controlling virtually every facet of our daily lives, and liberty dies in the process.

And that long jaunt to/from Richmond is only every other year...............

Republicans should think twice before endorsing the dangerous myth that impeachment requires a criminal violation.: https://reason.com/2020/02/05/good-and-bad-reasons-for-acquitting-trump/

<sarcasm>Right.</sarcasm>

Hardly. But you keep believing that if it makes you feel superior. So in gonzo's utopia one has to have a government issued license to stack firewood. Got it. Perhaps he could be the county firewood stacking inspector.

Not a myth. Where did I say 100% of fuel taxes paid for road construction and maintenance. Yet you have to admit it still pays for a significant percentage of it, the rest partially comes from legalized theft. Perhaps I need a pilot's license.

What exactly are acceptable weapons for a fight there, ITG?

Because you were there for a routine biopsy, not because your wife tripped, fell, hit her head and now had a nasty bruise and symptoms of a concussion.

WTH? In the context you just describe such questioning seems completely out of line.

Nice try, Night Hawk. I help pay for for those highways via something called a "fuel tax" or a "user tax". I generally have little issue with this kind of taxation as long as it is voluntary (I don't pay it if I choose not to drive a fuel powered vehicle) and the money is used to build and maintain roads. Having said that I would still prefer private roads when possible that charge a toll, a more direct user tax. Involuntary taxes like payroll taxes used to fund entitlements like Social Security and Medicaid however are theft. Plain and simple.

School Choice and Two Spheres of Liberty: https://www.cato.org/blog/school-choice-two-spheres-liberty

Is that your local watering hole? Or a physical threat?

‘Two-deep leadership’ and ‘no one-on-one contact’ are primary tenets of the Boys Scouts of America's Youth Protection training, which every adult volunteer and paid professional has to take upon joining the organization, and renew about every two years: https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/01/19/whats-the-difference-between-two-deep-leadership-and-no-one-on-one-contact/