Governments which have a regard to the common interest are constituted in accordance with strict principles of justice, and are therefore true forms; but those which regard only the interest of the rulers are all defective and perverted forms, for they are despotic, whereas a state is a community of freemen. – Aristotle
Radley Balko is back to blogging regularly at The Agitator again; he restarted over the past couple of weeks but made the official announcement yesterday in a post which contained this fantastic and link-rich mini-rant: “Stop quoting Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in defense of your censorious bullshit. In fact, stop quoting Oliver Wendell Holmes for anything. He was a racist, eugenicist, authoritarian asshole. I’ve never understood why progressives have thought so highly of him, back then, or now.” Balko was in top form this week, contributing every link down to the video via his Twitter feed. The video (which is here due to its coolness) comes via EconJeff, who also supplied the first two links below it.
- A swarm of cops with an attack dog and a SWAT team equipped with a tank, a helicopter and tear gas are dispatched for “high risk operation” of arresting a corpse.
- Congress literally doesn’t know what it’s doing.
- Cop shoots man in the back for jaywalking.
- The inherent sadism of prohibitionism.
- Freedom for me but not for thee.
- Paul Bunyan undressed here.
- The New Yorker gently mocks Facebook for banning that Adam and Eve cartoon I featured last week.
- How the future happened.
- The magnitude of the mess we’re in.
- Three congressmen praise Scientology.
- Malaysia declares V-neck shirts to be gay.
- Mentally ill man tased to death for shoplifting.
- A powerful, yet simple fable about faith in authority.
- Presenting the politician berry: all style, no substance.
- Sometimes you learn really awkward things about people after they die.
- Absolutely horrific account of how “sex offender” laws destroyed one man’s life.
- US government declares that male football players can subsist on the same amount of food as petite, sedentary girls.
This ad in favor of Colorado’s upcoming measure to regulate marijuana like alcohol is especially effective for anyone who knows what usually happens to dogs in drug raids:
- How ambitious and sleazy prosecutors literally made a federal case out of an internecine squabble among the Amish.
- The Secretary-General of the UN is against free speech, except for whatever kind governments decide to allow.
- “If the ice-cream store goes under, who knows what happens?“
- Police chief says people who use banned drugs are terrorists.
- He really puts himself into his art.
(Thanks to Walter Olson for the third item below the video, Tracy Quan for the fourth, Popehat for the fifth, Nun Ya for the sixth, Mike Siegel for the seventh, Luscious Lani for the eighth and Cthulhuchick for the ninth. The second-to-last one above the picture is from Lenore Skenazy, the last from Baylen Linnekin and the picture itself from Eapen Thampy of Americans for Forfeiture Reform.)
Concerning the “magnitude of the mess we’re in” … it’s pretty clear from that story that Barack Obama is to the U.S. Economy what the Terminator was to Sarah Connor.
But that linked article doesn’t even touch the debt that has been accumulated by the 50 states themselves – and we tend to forget about that. http://americancityandcounty.com/finance/how-much-do-states-owe
That said … the whole U.S. government can accurately be envisioned as one great “money nozzle” spewing forth money from the masses while two groups fight each other for who controls the nozzle. To make things even more perverted – it’s the guys at the bottom of the nozzle, the ones who are having their wallets sucked dry by it, who have to “decide” who will have control of the nozzle.
Because of this, the national debt won’t be paid off through overt taxing – not for the most part anyway. This is because overt taxes piss off the guys at the bottom of the nozzle so that whoever’s in control of it loses votes, and the guys in control aren’t rocket scientists – but they’re smarter than the guys at the bottom and they realize this.
Nope – in order to pay off that debt you have to “suck it” out of the little guy’s wallets when they’re not looking – and that is being done through quantitative easing schemes and monetization.
So the dollar in your pocket looks like a dollar – but it’ll slowly be turned into a quarter. I you buy a loaf of bread with a dollar today – it’ll cost you four tomorrow.
This is what people don’t realize – they pull a dollar out of their wallet today and it looks the same as it did yesterday – so it must be the same right?
Nope – it’s not. It’s always, under current government practices, worth a bit less each day. But eh, the little guys don’t notice it much so this is how the big guys will “stealth tax” it from the small guys.
The down side with that? Well, it’s gonna cause a depression but the guys at the top are just going to point at the other guys at the top and blame them for it. This is the whole game.
There’s another big downside to inflationary policies like raising the minimum wage: it wipes out middle-class savings and retirement funds. Poor people aren’t affected one way or the other, because they have no savings and they’ll still be poor whether their minimum wage is divided into one unit or forty. And rich people aren’t much affected because most of their wealth is in stocks, real estate and other non-inflated wealth (only bonds and the like lose value). But the middle class tries to save in cash units, which are steadily worth less with every “adjustment” and every “easing” and every “minimum wage increase” than when they were deposited, and since they aren’t earning any interest that means those savings are steadily being drained away to support the massive bloat which has unceasingly grown for the past hundred years, especially the past forty-odd.
Chalk this up to economic populism being bad for the economy. The only thing I would disagree with would be that minimum wage increases (or even the concept of the policy itself) doesn’t affect the poor. It hurts everyone, but does so for low-income folks most directly. If you make above the minimum, you experience some inflation. If your marginal productivity is below the minimum (i.e., your labor isn’t worth that amount), then you just got priced out of the market – you’re unemployable.
That’s true; I was thinking more in terms of savings and long-term impact.
Long-term, the country is utterly bankrupt. We have a third-rate manufacturing industry, a tax base in catastrophic decline and a public sector demanding more money than at any point in history. There are communist governments that don’t place this type of burden on income generation.
The Left thinks money just appears. There’s an infinite pool to draw from. Every welfare check we write and bullet we buy is a national disaster.
We’re heading for the greatest fall due to financial incompetence in history.
Yeah I agree with you on that. Americans are very “one-dimensional” when looking at money. They taught me save money in school, and my parents emphasized it also. They teach you about taxes also and that it’s something else you need to think about.
But they rarely teach anyone about how the dollar is truly valued. If you told a 12th grader that the dollar in his pocket was worth actually less than it was yesterday – I doubt he’d believe you. The number on the dollar is the same – it looks the same to him – how could it have changed?
Yet it does. Here’s an eye opening article …
http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2012/02/06/the-federal-reserves-explicit-goal-devalue-the-dollar-33/
Over the next 20 years, the Federal Reserve will INTENTIONALLY devalue the dollar by 33%.
How many potential retirees plan for this? How the hell can you possibly plan for this? Well, I do it by investing in tangible things that don’t lose value … gold, real estate (acquired at reasonable rates), antiques, whatever …
But how many retirees know that they need a 33% return on their investments today in order to account for Uncle Sam’s monkeying with the system? I’ve never seen this thinking included in any retirement seminar I’ve attended.
Why aren’t people PISSED BEYOND BELIEF ABOUT THIS? This government – just wakes up in the morning and says it will STEAL money from it’s citizens and do it in such a dastardly way that they won’t even know it!
There are two points that article misses.
First, there are unfunded anticipatable expenses, like repairing infrastructure. These are not usually counted as unfunded liabilities, since there is no present obligation to pay them, but they are huge.
Second, the article touches on the fact that there’s no way that the government can keep up essential services, but fails to recognize the one critical service that is presently suffering and which can only get worse: the courts.
As much as I despise the courts of America, I also have to acknowledge that, without even ersatz justice, society will come unglued really damned fast. The courts have always been underfunded. But when everyone is screaming for their turn at the public teat, it will be damned hard for the courts to be making the case that they’re more important than (pick any random voting block).
(And I won’t even get into the vacant judgeships caused by politics….)
Followed one of those links, found a fine example of how to lie with statistics:
“did you know that the U.S. income tax system is already very progressive? The top 1% pay 37% of all income taxes and 50% pay none.”
Yeeees, that would be because the the 1% make more than half the income, and the bottom 50% are a hairsbreadth away from poverty. They pay more tax in total because they have all the goddamn money.
It’s a little more complicated than that. They’re only including income tax. In fact, the total tax rate — social security, sales, etc. — peaks at about 30% (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/19/heres-why-the-47-percent-argument-is-an-abuse-of-tax-data/).
You completely miss the point of the statement.
1% paying 37% of income taxes IS a very progressive tax system. That’s not a lie – that’s a fact.
Not to mention the fact – that a lot of those taxes are simply STOLEN from those people and then given as handouts to people who sit on their couches all day.
And now – we want to tax those guys more? Please.
And 50% don’t pay a goddamn thing – which is a disgrace by anyone’s standards. By god man – if the government told me I didn’t owe them taxes every year I’d go out and shoot myself in the head for being a complete failure at life.
Everyone should pay the same tax – regardless of income. That rate should LOW – and the government should be the one doing without.
When the income tax was first instituted, only the top 5-10% had to pay it, and we were promised that would always be true. It ought to be. (And the present payroll taxes, including the “employer’s shares” which we really pay but don’t see on our paystubs, ought to be merged into the regular income tax so that the poorest working people can stop paying those, too.)
The biggest problems with our tax system are that (1) it’s too easy for Congress to collect and spend tax money for trivial purposes, many of them not among Congress’s enumerated powers; and (2) it’s too easy for lobbyists to buy changes to the tax code to benefit narrow groups. Both of these problems spring from incentive traps inherent in a representative system of government with members elected by districts, so probably not even constitutional change will fix it unless we bring in economists to design a system without the incentive traps.
But (1) is the important moral principle. When you come down to it, taxation is legalized extortion — a protection racket, which is a bigger threat to us than anybody it purports to protect us from — and can only be justified to pay for necessities such as national defense that can’t be done without it. At least 98% of the national budget (when we last even had a budget!) simply doesn’t meet this standard of necessity, and therefore should not happen unless individuals choose to spend their own money on it voluntarily.
Why is it that poor people shouldn’t pay taxes?
I just don’t understand this. I’m not a rocket scientist, I’m not exceptionally bright by any definition of the word. I have no college degree and I was an average high school student.
Yet – somehow I now find myself in the top ten percent income bracket and I should be penalized for working hard and making correct decisions while the rest of the “folks” sitting on their couches watching Jerry Springer should pay none?
What universe is this?
Everyone should have skin in the game – everyone. There should either be no income tax – or everyone should have to pay it. My preference is a flat tax for everyone – no, not based on income. Figure out what it should cost one to be an American citizen … period … and set it at that. I’d be ecstatic if that number were $5K per person or lower.
Poor people shouldn’t pay taxes because they need all their income for real needs. When you become richer, you become able to satisfy all your needs and start spending on wants, or even luxuries. I’ve oversimplified, but not by much.
You are wrong. A progressive tax system is one where the wealthier pay a greater proportion of what they have. If you have half the money and pay less than half the taxes, the system is not a progressive one.
In a progressive INCOME tax the wealthy pay a greater percentage of INCOME, not of absolute wealth. Let’s say that again: it’s an INCOME tax, not a TOTAL ASSETS tax. They do indeed pay a greater percentage of their income, even if it’s not as great a percentage as the self-anointed wealth redistributors would like.
Sorry – you’re wrong bro …
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax
You know why poor people don’t pay income tax?
BECAUSE THEY’RE FUCKING POOR!
I don’t know what’s so damned complicated. If they have EVEN LESS money, they end up living under a bridge and going hungry. Then they steal because, fair or not, people seldom just accept starvation. So then YOUR tax dollars are spent to house and shelter them. In prison. For the profit of for-profit prison corporations. It really would have been cheaper to just pay out a bit of welfare and realize that the poor shouldn’t pay income taxes because THEY’RE FUCKING POOR.
Good God Almighty.
Re: US govt guidelines on lunches. I would say it’s even worse than that. They are emphasizing low-fat meals including low-fat milk. But schoolkids brains are still developing and thy NEED fat to build their brains with. Serving any non-obese child low-fat milk is insanity.
Another thing I’ve been saying for two decades now (like the “multitasking” thing). I really should change my name to Cassandra.
Well, that’s what being of the libertarian persuasion is all about, right? You’re always right; but no one believes you. We were predicting the debt crisis a decade ago.
I remember ranting to Jack over breakfast about the government’s incredible irresponsibility in forcing banks to give mortgages to people with bad credit; I predicted it would end in a severe financial debacle, and that was when the papers first started talking about the policy under Bush the Elder in, what, 1991? ’92?
Well this is what you get when the government runs schools but even in my daughter’s private school they use some food chart that’s clearly propagandized by the government.
Under “good foods” – nothing but rabbit food … oh but wait – there WAS fish under “good” … it was listed at the very bottom of the chart (well hidden).
Under bad? Steak of course.
Chicken? Completely missing from “good” or “bad” – I guess they couldn’t figure out if it was good or bad. LOL
By the way – for years I have been drinking whole milk. I don’t even try to go low fat anymore – I go low carb and I have never had a problem with maintaining a healthy weight.
Well that is until now – I’m in the arctic now and the cooks here are Scandinavian and I just can’t eat what they’re serving up. Were it not for oreo cookies – I think I would be starved already.
This means more cardio when I get home. Bummer.
I’ve gotten into arguments with other women who insist on salad, the whole salad, and nothing but salad – I eat a lot of beef, because I’m mildly anemic and red meat keeps my iron levels up.
Guess who has a lot of energy?
In 1989, the people pushing oat bran as some miraculous cholesterol cure insisted that it somehow lowered serum cholesterol. Sensible people recognized that the only effect it might have would be that its inert bulk replaced items in the diet which contributed cholesterol, i.e. if one eats a lot of cardboard, sawdust and twine one has no room in one’s stomach for actual food. But no, the nutritionists insisted, oat bran had the magical property of somehow leaching cholesterol from the blood without ever leaving the intestines. Right then and there my long-held belief that all nutritionists were crackpots became a conviction, and I’ve remained unshaken in it ever since. I eat (and feed my family) a variety of foods, without any one component (meat, vegetables, starches, grains, dairy, etc) predominating or excluded; we all stay quite healthy and enjoy our meals, and I never have to “count” anything or read labels looking for this year’s fad mumbo-jumbo.
My understanding of this (and IANAD) is that there is an explanation for why “oat bran” (really fiber in general, particularly soluble fiber) could reduce cholesterol levels. One of the substances used in digestion is bile, released by the liver into the stomach. One of the primary components of bile is cholesterol. It’s released into the stomach to help digestion and then reabsorbed in the intestine. The theory is that if you eat a lot of fiber, it will interfere with the re-absorption of that cholesterol.
krulac,
I think that they got confused because “everything tastes like chicken.”
About 18 months ago I started getting serious about my fitness/nutrition after years of being overweight. Everything worked out, and ultimately I basically settled on a diet/food plan that does the exact opposite of what these kids are about to be exposed to. I read, “more whole grains, only low-fat or nonfat milk, daily helpings of both fruits and vegetables, and fewer sugary and salty items”, my first thought was that these kids are plausibly doomed. The best case scenario is probably that there’s no effect from this madness. I doubt anyone is going to lose any weight, unless the sheer scale of calorie restriction enforces starvation.
Maggie.
Re : The Amish article.
How do you explain the sexual ‘deviancy’ of that horrible old codger.
On the comment about Congress not knowing about the laws they pass, they never know what is going on with the laws they pass. P.J. O’Rourke said it perfectly, the law of unintended consequences is the only law Congress passes every year. Also, I hate to agree with muslim dunderheads, but v-neck shirts on a guy, yeah that’s gay. The young lady in the article shows exactly who the v-neck was made for.
KHorn,
“the law of unintended consequences is the only law Congress passes every year”
Why would you believe that the consequences of what they are doing are unintended? Are you so gullible that you believe some of the smartest people in the world do not know what they are doing?
I know what they are doing. I know the consequences are intended. And I can assure you that I have FAR less information available to me than they do.
Shiny things.
Best article.
Hi Maggie,
I have found your equal or better! How about that? Meet Tami Pepperman.
Tami is pioneering an approach where lawyers, judges and magistrates can be indicted and processed by their fellow criminals…self caibalisation. I have known of Tami for a while but have not had the time to listen to the details of what she is talking about.
Most importantly for you on this call she is talking about how feminism is harmful of women.
I VERY highly recommend you listen to this and spread it around the more intelligent of your sex workers.
I am trying to get you to understand that you have been lied to by people you believe and so you believe you have to submit to the criminals in the guvment, legal profession and police.
They are criminals and predators. You do not have to submit to them. I offered you and your fellow sex workers help but you have turned me down, presumably because you do not believe me.
Well? Will you dis-believe Tami too?
When you and your fellow sex workers wish to live in freedom? Please get back to me.
The only way anybody could imagine that I believe the authority of cops and legislators is rightful is to ignore at least half of what I write; apparently you’ve been doing that to suit your world-view, though I can’t imagine why. But anyone who ignores a gun pointed at his head does so at his own peril, which point you seem unable to fathom.
You are far more tolerant than I! I’d have booted the guy, not because I disagree with him (though I do) but because I will not tolerate being spoken to in the mode of abusive adult to child.
I prefer to let his comments speak for themselves, which they do admirably.
Oddly, I think of it as parody. He is writing parody isn’t he? He can’t be serious…
Nolan suffers from narcissistic personality disorder. He doesn’t actually listen to anybody. What you write comes out completely different in his deranged brain. He believes he is the new messiah. He thinks that he has actual political power sitting behind his keyboard in Germany. He thinks people listen to him. He doesn’t realize that he is an embarrassing joke.
Wow, I think I’ve suddenly gained new respect for Justin Bieber. Then again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIChsFrdf00
I’m thinking it’s now considered patriotic in China to hate any building designed anywhere but China. Remember when ever French journalist or comedian thought it was his duty to bitch and moan about Euro-Disney?
GGGGRRRR!!!! It posted when I hit ENTER, but I was hitting ENTER to skip a line down.
Which I can do now. Ah well.
OK, the future. I was starting to think that I really was starting to get old. It seemed I didn’t like ANY of the new music coming out. Then I discovered psytrance. I’m not so old after all. The future’s sounding good.
It’s awful when a husband dies. It’s awful when a father dies. When a husband dies and you learn that he was your father… that’s one strong lady.
The whole federal school food thing was supposed to be implemented gradually so that dumbass glitches could be fixed. And, they can bring lunch from home. The real problem, of course, is the whole one-size-fits-all thing, like zero-tolerance policies which treat an Alka-Seltzer the same as cocaine. All in all, I’m glad to see kids sticking up for themselves.
Yes, cannabis the same as alcohol. Or cigarettes. Less harmful than either. And this from somebody who, for all my fascination with acid, X, ‘shrooms, and nutmeg, isn’t interested in smoking a joint if they legalized it tomorrow and made it free next week. But really, the War on Drugs is a failure. Time to bring the troops home and let the POWs go.
I scream, you scream, we all scream for fixed-rate certificates of deposit!