Archive for the ‘Government and Politics’ category

Healthcare: Market Solutions vs. Bureaucratic Decrees

March 28, 2017

Modern thin line design concept for HEALTHCARE website banner. Vector illustration concept for healthcare diagnosis and treatment.

Our current battle over healthcare is being debated from a false premise. Most people have bought into the lie that healthcare is or should be a right. It isn’t a right as understood by most people. The right to keep and bare arms doesn’t mean someone else is obligated to supply a gun. The right to free speech  doesn’t mean someone else is obligated to supply a microphone, a stage and an audience. But for some reason we think a right to healthcare means someone is obligated to provide it.

The truth is healthcare is an economic good or service produced by individuals. These individuals own what they produce. It is their property. No one has a right to what someone else produces.

How can you gain possession of what someone else owns? 1) You can produce something they want and exchange it for what they have produced. 2) They may give it to you as a gift. 3) You can steal it. 4) You can have someone steal another persons production, exchange it for what you want, and have them give it to you indirectly. 5) You can have someone else steal it and give it to you directly.

Government intervention into the healthcare market, up to and including Obamacare, has been an incremental march away from the first two and toward the last two. Everyone knows that direct theft of another person’s property is unethical and immoral because it is illegal. But when we are one or two steps removed from the direct theft, for some reason we think it’s ethical and moral because government says it’s legal.

hand writing economic demand - supply graph on chalkboard

ECONOMIC REALITY OF HEALTHCARE

Healthcare is an economic good ruled by the laws of economics. Scarcity, subjective value, supply and demand are a few laws we need to look at in order to understand why government central planning isn’t the right process to ration the scarce good we call healthcare.

SCARCITY: Healthcare has to be produced. It is a scarce good. It isn’t like the air we breathe. Air doesn’t have to be produced by anyone. The abundant supply of air exists naturally. You might say the air I put in my tires Isn’t free. The air you put in your tires is first compressed and then forced into your tires. Compressed air has to be produced, therefore it is an economic good and not free like the air you breathe.

SUBJECTIVE VALUE: Everyone values healthcare differently. There is no objective value that can be placed on healthcare. The value for healthcare is subjective depending on each individual’s needs and wants. Both the demand for and the supply of healthcare is valued subjectively.

SUPPLY AND DEMAND: Since healthcare is scarce and valued subjectively, the law of supply and demand comes into play coordinating its production and consumption. The price reflects subjective valuations by individuals related to supply and demand. The subjective valuations at the existing price drives supply and demand to a new coordinating price.

The law of supply and demand states that more is demanded at a lower price than a higher price and more is supplied at higher price than a lower price. Price changes are constantly re-coordinating supply and demand according to the subjective valuations of individuals.

The supply of healthcare is limited by the scarcity of the resources, labor, capital and time needed to produce it. It is also limited by the demand for healthcare. If the demand for healthcare increases against a fixed supply, the price will go up in order to ration the scarce resource. As the price rises more resources, labor, capital, and time will be attracted to producing healthcare. As the supply increases to meet the higher demand a point will be reached where the price will stabilize and then decrease as supply outpaces demand.

The changing price sends information to consumers and producers about the scarcity of healthcare. These price changes are figured into the subjective valuations of how much each consumer will demand and how much each producer will supply.

Free market prices are the most efficient way to ration healthcare in a world of scarcity and subjective value.

government regulations, magnifier, pencil

GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION INTO HEALTHCARE

Government mandated healthcare subsidies, taxes and regulations distort the prices that would normally exist in a free market. Consumers demands and producers supplies are going to change according to these distorted prices. A mismatch of the supply of and demand for these scarce resources is brought about by government intervention.

What did you think was going to happen when more consumers were brought into the market by the Obamacare individual mandate? Subsidies also increase demand. Prices were guaranteed to rise as demand was artificially increased.

What happens when prices for healthcare services paid by Medicare and Medicaid are fixed below what they would be in a free market? The supply of health care would decrease at these lower prices.

Obamacare created more demand and at the same time created the incentive to supply less. What happens to the price when more is demanded and less is supplied? Even though our politicians told us costs would go down under The Affordable Care Act, anyone who understood basic economics could have predicted which way the price would go. And that isn’t even including paying for the government bureaucracy needed to implement the ACA.

NOW WHAT?

The failure of the Republican repeal and replace bill is a good thing. The bill was just an exchange of a set of not quite as bad new government regulations for the existing bad government regulations. Their is only one way to reduce the cost of healthcare. Get rid of government subsidies, taxes and regulations. Unfortunately all Democrats and a majority of Republicans don’t understand basic economics.

Quoting Ludwig von Mises – “Economic history is a long record of Government policies that failed because they were designed with a bold disregard for the laws of economics.

Republicans are also scared of political fall out when they get rid of healthcare entitlements. The Democrats and their accomplices in the main stream media will trot out all the sob stories of people whose ‘access’ to healthcare was taken away. Of course the MSM didn’t tell the stories of all the people who had their healthcare costs sky rocket under the ACA. These rising premiums paid for the increased costs and subsidies caused by government intervention.

Millions of families got crushed by the higher cost of healthcare. These were small businessmen and people who worked for small businesses in the more rural counties in America. These are the same people who were barely able to stay afloat when the economy crashed in 08. They cut their discretionary spending to the bone. Many had to use their savings and retirement accounts to make it through the recession.

When the Affordable Care Act was implemented after 2013 there was no spending left to cut to pay for the higher cost of healthcare. Wives had to go back to work just for the insurance. Men took second jobs for the same reason. These are the people in the swing states of Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, Iowa, and the Democrat States of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania who voted for Trump. He was their only hope. They literally couldn’t afford to vote for Hilary.

Fortunately market alternatives to Obamacare are starting to appear around the country.

Read Here- Direct Primary Care, A No-Insurance Model.

Read Here – Florida West Virginia Lawmakers Take Interest In Insurance Free Approach.

Read Here – Atlas MD, Wichita’s Premiere Cash-Only Clinic.

As the price of Obamacare goes higher the demand for Obamacare will decrease. This higher price will also bring about lower cost market alternatives to the Government run system. These alternatives will be outside of the system. We can call these free market alternatives as long as Government doesn’t try to shut them down with regulations. If they do try to shut them down they will then become black market alternatives (the new free market).

Fracking is an example of a market alternative to the OPEC cartel and our Governments regulations on drilling off shore and on public land. When the price of oil rose to above $110 dollars a barrel it became affordable for hydraulic fracturing to take off on private land. Now that it is profitable to frack at $45 a barrel the OPEC cartel has lost its monopoly power. The high price of $110 was what eventually brought the price of oil down. Healthcare will be no different. The market will find an alternative as the price goes higher.

Read Here – Trumpcare Defeat Could Be A Small But Important Victory For Healthcare Freedom.

Read Here – Ryancare Is Failing -What Should Happen Next?

Read Here – Forget Obamacare, Ryancare, And Any Future Reformcare – The Healthcare System Is Completely Broken.

Economic reality will end Obamacare. Let’s hope the Government doesn’t end the market alternatives that have started to take root.

 

Walter E. Williams: “Liberty Is Not For Wimps”

March 22, 2017
Walter E. Williams

Walter E. Williams states in this article, Liberty Is Not For Wimps (read here): “Most Americans, whether liberal or conservative, Democratic or Republican, do not show much understanding or respect for the principles of personal liberty. We criticize our political leaders, but we must recognize that their behavior simply reflects the values of people who elected them to office. That means we are all to blame for greater governmental control over our lives and a decline in personal liberty.”

Our founders told us that eternal vigilance is the price of freedom. Since WWII we have not been vigilant at all. We vote and go back to living our lives. Being informed and active is the most important part of eternal vigilance. Voting is something that happens on one day every two years.

Why have not seen the growth in the power of Government over our lives? Because it has been an incremental increase.

When you see yourself in the mirror everyday you don’t realize how much you have changed over the course of 20 years. When you see a picture of yourself from 20 years ago you ask; “Who is that person?”.

This is what has happened to the growth of Government and the loss of our individual liberty. Unfortunately the majority of the people haven’t been shown a ‘picture’ of what individual liberty originally looked like. Their only picture from their past is a picture of Government solutions to every problem.

These people have not been taught about individual liberty in our schools and universities. In fact they have been indoctrinated into thinking Government is the end all and be all. They have to be educated about individual liberty before they can make informed decisions.

LIBERTY DEFINED

Excerpt from the article: “My initial premise is that each of us owns himself. I am my private property, and you are yours. If we accept the notion of self-ownership, then certain acts can be deemed moral or immoral. Murder, rape and theft are immoral because those acts violate private property.

“Most Americans accept that murder and rape are immoral, but we are ambivalent about theft. Theft can be defined as taking the rightful property of one American and giving it to another, to whom it does not belong. It is also theft to forcibly use one person to serve the purposes of another.”

“At least two-thirds of federal spending can be described as Congress’ Taking the rightful property of one American and giving it to another American, to whom it does not belong. So-called mandatory spending totaled $2.45 trillion in 2015. This, two-thirds of the federal budget goes toward Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, food assistance, unemployment and other programs and benefits that fall into the category of taking from some and giving to others. To condemn legalized theft is not an argument against taxes to finance the constitutionally mandated functions of the federal government; we are all obligated to pay or share of those.

RIGHTS DEFINED

Excerpt from the article: “Many say that government spending guarantees one right or another. That’s nonsense. True rights exist simultaneously among people. That means that exercise of a right by one person does not impose an obligation on another. In other words, my rights to speech and travel impose no obligations on another except those of noninterference. For Congress to guarantee a right to healthcare, food assistance or any other good or service whether a person can afford it or not does diminish someone else’s rights – namely, their right to their earnings. Congress has no resources of its own. If Congress gives one person something that he did not earn, it necessarily requires Congress drive somebody else of something that he did earn.

FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION

Excerpt fro the article: “A very difficult liberty pill for many Americans to swallow is freedom of association. As with free speech, the true test for one’s commitment to freedom of association does not come when one permits people of voluntarily associate in ways that he deems acceptable.”

“The true test is when he permits people to associate in ways he deems offensive. If a golf club, fraternity of restaurant were not to admit me because I’m a black person, I would find it offensive, but it’s every organization’s right to associate freely.”

“On the other hand, a public library, public utility or public university does not have a right to refuse me service, because I am a taxpayer.”

CONCLUSION

Excerpt from the article: “The bottom line is that it takes a bold person to be for personal liberty, because you have to be able to cope with people saying things and engaging in voluntary acts that you deem offensive. LIBERTY IS NOT FOR WIMPS.

It is our job to make the case for individual liberty. As I said earlier, people are not being taught about individual liberty in our schools and universities. If people are not curious enough to educate themselves, it is up to us to educate them.

Walter E. Williams has been ringing the bell for individual liberty his whole life. You don’t have to try to save the whole world. You just have to influence the people in your little part of the world. People are starting to be curious about what is going on. The election of Trump proves that people know there is something wrong with the status quo. These people represent fertile ground on which to plant the seeds of liberty.

 

Related Article: Walter E. Williams: The State Against Liberty, at austrianaddict.com.

Related Article: Walter E. Williams: Voluntary vs. Involuntary Exchange, or Seduction vs. Rape, at austrianaddict.com.

Related Article: Walter E. Williams Speaks About The Economics Of Liberty, at austrianaddict.com.

Related Article: Walter E. Williams: Are We Moving Toward More Personal Liberty of More Government Control Over Our Lives, at austrianaddict.com.

Related Article: Walter E. Williams Talks About Individual Liberty, at austrianaddict.com.

Economic Ignorance Has Caused Our Political Chaos.

March 8, 2017

Microeconomics or Micro Economics as a Concept

What do Jeffery Sachs (economics professor at Columbia), Bill Gates, the Pope, Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress have in common?….. Economic ignorance!

Why are  pronouncements by people with authority rarely challenged?….. Economic ignorance!

I found some recent articles on economicpolicyjournl.com which have a similar theme: People with authority demonstrating their ignorance about basic economic principles.

Here are the articles.

Harvard Educated Economist Clueless About The Fundamentals Of Economics.

I Never Realized The Economic Ignoramus Bill Gates Is….Until Now.

The Pope’s Problem With Basic Economics.

Trump In Melbourne Spilling His Economic Plans And How Non-Free Market Are They.

House Republican Border Adjustment Tax Plan Gains Support In White House: Prepare For Higher Prices And Less Product.

Jeffery Sachs, Bill Gates and the Pope don’t have the power of Government behind anything they say. Their authority exists in the minds of the people who believe they have authority. They can’t force their economic ignorance on us

The President and Congress have the power of Government behind their policies. Politicians and bureaucrats can force their economic ignorance on us.

OUR ECONOMIC IGNORANCE

The increasing political chaos existing in the U.S is rooted in the economic ignorance of a vast majority of people. Both the masses, and people with “authority”, bear responsibility for our present political and economic situation.

People with “authority” being economically ignorant creates a problem because we the masses accept what they say as truth. This leads to the passage of Governmental policies which can’t produce the outcomes predicted by the people with authority.

We have the power to be a check on these people with authority. But we reinforce their authority on the one hand, and increase the economic ignorance of the masses on the other, when we don’t challenge the economic validity of what they say.

People with authority always want more power. Their power can’t be increased unless we allow it. Authority not backed by the force of Government isn’t real authority. We voluntarily give people their position of authority.

With politicians and bureaucrats it’s different. Their authority is backed by the force of Government. Our first non-violent voluntary recourse to their power is to vote the economically ignorant out of office, or not to vote them into office in the first place. Our second is putting political pressure on politicians. But this only works if a overwhelming majority of people put political pressure on them.

The ability of politicians and bureaucrats to grow their power, rests on the economic ignorance of the electorate. If the economic consequences of the policies passed by these politicians were known by the voters, they wouldn’t have been passed. Understanding basic economic principles allows us to look over the horizon and see the consequences of these policies.

EXAMPLES OF FAILED POLICIES

The Affordable Care Act aka Obamacare sounds great. But the laws of economics will not allow the ACA to lower the cost of healthcare. The costs can be shifted, but not lowered by government decree. The result of passing the ACA is chaos in the healthcare market, or what is left of a healthcare market.

Increasing the minimum wage for low skilled workers sounds great. But the laws of economics won’t allow increasing the minimum wage, above what that labor produces. The result of passing this law is fewer low skilled workers will be employed.

FORSEEABLE CONSEQUENCES

If, we the people, understood some basic principles of economics we wouldn’t allow these interventionist ideas to be planted, let alone take root.

Some of these basic principles are: 1) Scarcity, 2) Subjective Value, 3) Supply and Demand 4) Production Precedes Consumption.

Lets look at the Affordable Care Act and mandated minimum wage increases through the binoculars of scarcity, and supply and demand.

Scarcity is the first rule of economics. Scarcity simply means, “what everybody wants adds up to more than there is”. Put differently. Their are limited means available to satisfy the unlimited ends we seek. These limited means have to be allocated toward producing the ends we seek. There are two ways to allocate these means. One way is voluntary cooperation, through prices in a free market. The other way is force, through the edicts of politicians and bureaucrats using government power.

Supply and Demand is easy to understand. Put simply; More is demanded and less is supplied at a low price, and more is supplied and less is demanded at a high price. Prices reflect and drive supply and demand. If their is a sudden drop in the supply of a product, the price rises. This increase in price rations the existing supply, and sends a signal that more needs to be produced. On the flip side of the coin, if their is a sudden increase in the supply of a product, the price will go down. This decrease in price sells off the existing glut, and sends a signal less needs to be produced.

AFFORDABLE CARE ACT AND MINIMUM WAGE LAWS

The Affordable Care Act forced “30 million” uninsured people to enter the healthcare market. This meant the demand for healthcare was going to increased. Even though the supply of healthcare couldn’t be increased as quickly. (Example) It takes years for people to become doctors and nurses. Increasing the supply takes more time than the almost instant increase in demand brought about by the stroke of pen. If we apply the economic principles of scarcity, and supply and demand to the Affordable Care Act, what was going to happen to the price of healthcare? And this is not even calculating the cost of the regulations and new bureaucracy created by the 2500 page bill.

Raising the minimum wage increases the price of labor. According to the law of supply and demand, less is demanded at the high price. Voting for laws which increase the wages of people who we think are not being paid enough doesn’t help these people. Fewer people will be employed at the higher price. Many times these low skilled workers jobs will disappear all together because they can be replaced by automation. The price of labor was artificially increased to the point where it was economical to automate (read here). If we apply the law of supply and demand to the rhetoric of increasing the minimum wage, people wouldn’t have been fooled into thinking they were helping the people the law was actually hurting..

OUR CHOICES

Economic principles are always in play. Government edicts can’t negate economic reality. The political chaos we have today is the result of ignoring the reality of basic economics. We can’t wish these realities away because we don’t like the fact they limit what we demand.

I’m going to quote a person with authority at this point. So don’t take this quote as authoritative. Figure it out yourself.

F. A. Hayek a Nobel Prize winning economist, (how is that for status), said: “Planning, or central direction of economic activity, presupposes the existence of common ideals and common values; and the degree to which planning can be carried is limited to the extent to which agreement on such a common scale of values can be obtained or enforced.

Let’s get educated in basic economics. Life is easier to understand when you understand how the world works. Here is another quote.

F. A. Hayek: “The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little the really know, about what he imagines he can design.”

We have two choices. Scarce resources can be rationed through prices voluntarily in the free market. Or Scarce resources can be rationed forcibly by politicians and bureaucrats through the power of Government. Which direction are we moving?

CONCLUSION

Political insiders of both parties have shaped the battle field into a choice between the R’s and the D’s. In reality the real battle is between the insiders in both parties who want to grow the power of Government, and people who stand for free markets and want to cut the power of government. Neither group is a majority. The majority of people are the economically ignorant. These people have been fooled into fighting the battle through the R and D paradigm.

Our job is to educate the economically ignorant. When this majority understands basic economic principles, they will they stop fighting on the fake R and D battlefield and start fighting on the real battlefield: central planning vs. voluntary cooperation.

 

Related ArticleMinimum Wage Laws Create Unemployment, at austrianaddict.com

Related ArticleIncome Inequality Part II: Increase The Minimum Wage, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleThe Reality Of Obamacare, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleThe Economics of Healthcare vs. The Right To Healthcare, at austrianaddict.com.

 

You Decide: Did Jeff Sessions Commit Perjury?

March 3, 2017

Video of Al Franken’s Question To Jeff Sessions In Context.

DEFINITION OF PERJURY: The willful giving of false testimony under oath of affirmation, before a competent tribunal, upon a point material to a legal inquiry.

Here is the transcript of the whole segment (Click Here)

FRANKEN: CNN has just published a story and I’m telling you this about a news story that’s just been published. I’m not expecting you to know whether or not it’s true or not. But CNN just published a story alleging that the intelligence community provided documents to the president-elect last week that included information that quote, “Russian operatives claimed to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump.” These documents also allegedly say quote, “There was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump’s surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.

Now, again, I’m telling you this as it’s coming out, so you know. But if it’s true, it’s obviously extremely serious and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do?

SESSIONS: Senator Franken, I’m not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I didn’t have — did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it.

FRANKEN: Very well. Without divulging sensitive information, do you know about this or know what compromising personal and financial information the Russians claim to have?

SESSIONS : Senator Franken, allegations get made about candidates all the time and they’ve been made about president-elect Trump a lot sometimes. Most of them, virtually all of them have been proven to be exaggerated and untrue. I would just say to you that I have no information about this matter. I have not been in on the classified briefings and I’m not a member of the intelligence committee, and I’m just not able to give you any comment on it at this time.

FRANKEN: OK. Totally fair.

 

WAS SESSIONS RESPONDING TO THE HIGHLIGHTED AREAS IN THE ABOVE TEXT?

DID HE COMMIT PERJURY? YOU CAN MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND.

 

Related ArticleI Hate Politics! at aistrianaddict.com.

I Hate Politics

February 10, 2017

Puzzle pieces with word Politics

Politics has nothing to do with “public service”. Politics is about using verbal sleight of hand to gain political power. The idea that being a “public servant” some how makes politicians and bureaucrats place the people’s interests ahead of their political self interest is laughable.

The fact that the constitution is now being embraced by the progressive Democrats, when they used it for toilet paper during the Obama administration is evidence that politics is about power.

The Republicans aren’t much better. How can a republican support Trumps idea of tariffs regarding trade? Trumps executive orders that get rid of Obama’s executive orders are fine. But have Republicans questioned any of the other executive orders made by Trump?

The progressive left main stream media is fact checking everything Trump says, after not fact checking anything Obama said for 8 years. (“If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor”, “The Benghazi attack started because of an internet video.”)  There is no progressive left agenda in the media, is there?

EXAMPLES OF POLITICAL BS

-Chuck Schumer talks about Refugees in 2015 and again in 2017. What a difference two years makes.

Do you think Schumer’s tears are real or fake????

 

-In 2006 Senators Obama, Biden, and Clinton voted for (click here to see vote), The Secure Fence Act of 2006 (click here to read bill). Now they are against any border wall, fence or other structure.

-Bill Clinton wanted to build a wall to keep illegal immigrants way back in the 90’s when he was President.

Listen to this and tell me if this doesn’t sound like Trump 2017.

 

Liz ‘Fauxcahontas’ Warren Accuses Trump Nominees of ‘Lying’ During Job Applications,. Elizabeth Warren lied about being part Indian when she applied for a professorship at Harvard. She knew how to use the system for personal gain before she became a politician.

-Last year the Republicans passed a bill to repeal Obamacare and sent it to Obama knowing he would veto it. Why don’t they have a bill repealing Obamacare on Trumps desk right now? Maybe they know he will sign it. Establishment Republicans really don’t want Obamacare repealed do they?

CONCLUSION

The grass roots in both parties should agree that the Federal Government has too much power. The Republicans complained about the Federal Gov. having too much power during the 8 years of Obama. The Democrats are complaining that the Federal Government has too much power in the first month of Trumps Presidency. Their both right about the Federal Government having too much power.

The Federal Government has too much power over the States and the people. It just seems more tolerable to the people whose party is in power. Can’t both sides unite to put the chains of the constitution back on the real enemy of individual freedom, the Federal Government?

Unfortunately each side wants to use the position of power when they get voted in. It is only fair they do this  since the other party used the position of power for the previous 8 years to get what they wanted. It is like the Hatfields and McCoys. Neither side knows who started the escalation of power. And neither side wants to be the one who rolls back Federal power. Until grass roots members in each party agree to roll back Federal power, nothing will get done. Because we know politicians want to expand and wield the power of Government.

 

Related ArticleIndividual Liberty Is The Least Contentious Way Of Settling Differences, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWalter E. Williams: The Free Market Is Not Allowed To Work, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWalter E. Williams Talks About Individual Liberty, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleAbuses Of Poser By Individuals In Government, at austrianaddict.com.

Fake Headlines

February 3, 2017

https://thumb7.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/175957/227201005/stock-vector-vector-newspapers-eps-transparency-used-cmyk-global-colors-gradients-used-227201005.jpg

The headline of a news story is supposed to summarize what the news story is about. It is also supposed to make the reader curious to read the rest of the story. Unfortunately fake headlines have a different purpose. Fake headlines try to portray an ideological message, without the reader reading the rest of the article.

Headlines can and are used as propaganda.

Two days ago, Milo Yiannopoulous went to UC Berkeley to give a speech. Protesters forced him to cancel. Here are a few headlines from media outlets about the incident.

Protesters Force UC Berkeley To Cancel Far-Right Speaker’s Speech, at reuters.com.

Speech by Right-Wing Commentator Milo Yiannopoulous At Berkeley Canceled After Protest, at fox5sandiego.com.

Violent Protesters Block Berkeley Talk By Breitbart Editor, abcnews.go.com

Berkeley Cancels Milo Yiannopoulous Speech, And Donald Trump Tweets Outrage, nytimes.com.

The Real Headline.

First Amendment Rioters Bully Gay Conservative Commentator To Cancel His Speech At UC Berkeley.

Does this headline portray a different story?

The protesters wanted to exercise their free speech rights. The protest turned into a riot. The commentator was bullied into canceling the speech out of fear for his safety. The speaker was a Gay man. He was also an ideological conservative/libertarian.

I Have Some Questions

Was the original protest, which I have no problem with as long as it was peaceful, infiltrated by paid for professional rioters?

Were these rioters dressed in the black hooded sweatshirts part of the original protest?

Why weren’t the protesters confined to the place on campus that is designated as a free speech zone?

Do they have a free speech zone at Berkeley like other universities have?

Why didn’t any of the stories mention that Milo was gay?

Doesn’t being gay mean you are part of an identity group and can never be criticized?

Or does being a conservative and not politically correct trump your status as a gay person?

 

This is all very confusing. Will the left please write down the order of importance of the identity groups they’ve made up. I’m having a hard time knowing which group is more equal.

I know one thing for sure. If you don’t have a progressive left ideology, you are not considered a member of one of their identity groups. It is all about ideology, nothing else.

 

Related ArticleAre You A Democrat, a Republican, or a Libertarian, at austrianaddict.com.

Blue State California Actually Agrees With Red State Texas: The Federal Gov. Has Too Much Power!

February 2, 2017

Election or referendum in United States of America. Calexit - California is secede From USA. California republic Independence Campaign. Vector illustration. Hashtag Calexit on USA flag.

Is California going all Texas on us? Texas is known for its independence. It’s not fond of the Federal government mandating what it has to do. Remember the Texit movement? Does the recent Calexit movement mean that California is seeing the light that the Federal government has too much power?

The only difference between the Texit and the Calexit is the media and the elites think it is cool when California talks secession, but not so much when Texas talks secession. Read this article, “Can Texas Legally Secede From The United States?” from June of this year. It paints a bleak picture for the Texit movement.

In this article titled, Calexit: Record Number Of Californians Support Secession, New Poll Finds, one in three California residents are in favor of a “peaceful withdrawal” from the Union. Why the sudden move toward states rights? If you guessed because they don’t like Trump’s potential executive orders you guessed correctly. The only reason they would be afraid of the Presidential over reach is if the position of the Presidency had the power to be lord over the States.

In this article, California is Threatening To Cut Off Funds to Washington, California is looking for ways to suspend financial payments to Washington. I have always thought this is a great idea. If you don’t send the Federal Government money, it has nothing to use for extortion.

Image result for texit labels

The power of our chief executive increased under George W. Bush. It grew exponentially with Obama’s executive orders that were never seriously challenged by the opposition party. Now that the President is not a progressive central planning democrat, the left thinks the position has too much power. I agree with them. The Federal government in general and the Presidency in particular have usurped powers that the Constitution never gave them.

10th AMENDMENT

Even though California is tardy, welcome to the 10th amendment party. The 10th Amendment states: 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.

This means that the Federal Government only has the powers enumerated in Articles 1 through 6 of the Constitution. Any powers not listed, are reserved to the States or the people.

CAN WE AGREE?

We should all agree that the Federal Government has too much power. Can we all work together to roll back the powers that the Federal Government has usurped from us? We should not wait until the other party wins before we talk about how big the Government has grown. If both sides of the aisle work together to roll back Government power we will be able to do it through the political and legal process.

If we wait any longer the only choice is for states to actually attempt secession. The cost of this has proven to be very high, look at the Civil War. The only thing keeping states from seceding is the power we have allowed the Federal Government to usurp.

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who I have a great deal of respect for, said: “If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede.” I respectfully disagree with Justice Scalia.

The Declaration of Independence (click here) is a founding document that states the reasons why we wanted to secede from the British Empire. Here is what it says:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for on people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”…………

“…….Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security…….”

Our country seceded from what our founders saw as a despotic British Empire. If secession, was used by our foundering fathers, isn’t it our birth right as sons of these founders to use the same process to, “dissolve the political bands which have connected us“, when Government becomes tyrannical?

Fortunately we don’t have to reach the point of secession if both Red and Blue States can agree that the Federal Government has too much power. We can not just believe this when the opposition party has the power in Washington. We have to do something about it when our own party is in power or this will end badly.

 

Related ArticleWalter E. Williams: The State Against Liberty, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWalter E. Williams: The Constitution, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleA Lesson From Atlas Shrugged, at austrianaddict.com.

Related Article – “I’m From The Government And I’m Here To Help.“, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleWhy Do People Think The Government Is The Economy?, at austrianaddict.com.