Tag: Not So Crazy Libertarian Ideals

Without the State Purely Scientific Research Wouldn’t Receive Funding

Many people believe that the state is necessary to fund scientific research, especially pure scientific research. In fact a common rebuttal statists make when I advocate anarchism is that we need the state to fund scientific research that isn’t likely to turn a profit. These people believe that private funding for scientific research only happens when the research is like to make a profit. Quite the opposite is true as Jack Horner, one of the most famous paleontologists in the world, explained during his interview on Slashdot:

How will science be funded in the US next?
by damn_registrars

For a long time the primary source of money for scientific research has been the federal granting agencies (NIH, NSF, DOE in particular). All three of them are facing either budget cuts, budget stalls, or increases in their budgets that do not match inflation. This does not seem to fare well for new scientists or established ones who are looking to further their careers. Where do you see research money coming from next? Alternately, are we looking ahead to a time where fewer people will be doing science because the funding just won’t exist to pay even their meager wages any more?

Horner: Like most researchers in the early part of their careers, I relied on writing grants to NSF, but as these government agencies became more stringent and stingy with funding for dinosaurs and other purely scientific endeavors, I moved away from government funding to private funding, and I think this is where most all research funds for dinosaurs will eventually come from. Private people who have the financial where-with-all and interest in the field currently fund most of the dinosaur collecting, research and exhibitions in the United States. It is up to us paleontologists to make sure we engage the public in all venues, and keep their interest high, if we expect to continue these kinds of studies. The government is much more interested in practical sciences (renewable energy, climate change, medical) these days, a trend I would expect to continue for quite some time.

When it comes to purely scientific research the state has little interest in providing funding. Instead scientists wanting to perform purely scientific research, such as paleontology, have to seek funding in the private sector. What many statists fail to realize is that there are people out there that have a deep interest in purely scientific research and are willing to donate money to its cause.

Raising Minimum Wage

One of the things Obama urged during his State of the Union address was for Congress to increase the minimum wage to $9/hour:

He urged Congress to work with states to provide “high quality” preschool to all low- and moderate-income 4-year-olds, and he proposed raising the federal minimum wage to $9 per hour, up from $7.25 today.

Those of us who have studied the Austrian tradition of economics duly point out that increasing minimum wage also increases unemployment. Minimum wage laws create a barrier for entry, especially for those just entering the workforce and therefore unskilled.

Let’s look at minimum wage laws another way. If raising the minimum wage actually increases the average wealth of the lowest paid workers why stop at $9/hour? Why not make it $100/hour or $1,000/hour? Isn’t it time we stopped screwing around and made everybody millionaires? Wouldn’t that put everybody above the poverty line? No, it would make almost everybody in the workforce unemployable, at least legitimately. Most people don’t produce $100/hour worth of value let alone $1,000/hour. If raising minimum wage to $100/hour sounds preposterous and unworkable why do people think raising it to $9/hour is any different?

Prohibitions Are Business Opportunities

In the state’s war on obesity public schools around the country are either severely restricting or outright banning soda. Statists still believe they can control behavior through prohibitions but history reminds us that isn’t the case. During Prohibition entrepreneurs setup businesses where individuals could purchase alcohol in a social environment. These businesses eventually became known as speakeasies, as individuals discussed them quietly in public in order to avoid tipping off the police. Although the public school system has tried to beat all forms of creativity and historical knowledge out of American children they continue to overcome their oppressors and bypass school prohibitions:

A School is believed to be the first in London to become “water only” and ban fizzy drinks for pupils.

[…]

Some entrepreneurial teenagers have spotted the “business potential” of smuggling in contraband cola, lemonade, orangeade and other soft drinks to sell at inflated prices. The ban was announced in a newsletter to parents. No food was banned, with sweets and chocolate cleared for consumption in the grounds.

Pupil Jake Phillips, 15, said that “speakeasies” are starting up selling the prohibited drinks. “There is business potential now there’s a gap in the market,” he said.

“Gangsters sold alcohol in America when that was banned. Prohibition always leads to supply and demand. That means anyone who sneaks it in can make a lot of money.” Pupils under 16 are not allowed out at lunchtimes so they cannot buy drinks elsewhere.

It’s good to see students learning from history and ignoring draconian mandates. Perhaps, someday, these children will be the destroyers of the state.

You Can’t Rely on the State for Protection

Almost two years ago I reported that firefighters in Alameda, California allowed a man to drown because they were pissy about budget cuts. Not surprisingly the family of the victim filed a lawsuit and even less surprisingly the court ruled that the firefighters couldn’t be held responsible because they have no duty to protect individuals:

The police and firefighters who remained on shore as Raymond Zack waded into San Francisco Bay on Memorial Day 2011 and succumbed to hypothermia were under no legal duty to help him, a judge ruled Monday.

Officers and firefighters also did not worsen the 52-year-old Zack’s condition by clearing Robert Crown Memorial State Beach or by preventing people from going to his aid, Judge George Hernandez said in a ruling that effectively tosses out a lawsuit that Zack’s family filed against the city of Alameda.

Granted I wouldn’t hold the firefighters responsible either, nobody should be coerced into taking an action they don’t wish to take. What I take offense to is that we’re forced to pay these bums and receive no guarantee of service in return. Effectively we have to pay them or we’ll be kidnapped and locked in a cage or have are wages garnished but if they fail to provide the service we’re paying for no punishment befalls them. The true tragedy of this story is the fact that the firefighters allowed the individual to drown because they didn’t receive as much protection money as they wanted. This is askin to mobsters breaking your kneecaps because you failed to pay them protection money.

Olympic Arms No Longer Selling to Employees of the State of New York

It’s too bad Olympic Arms is currently unable to meet current demand for their rifles because their recent announcement makes me want to buy something from them:

Press Release: Olympic Arms, Inc. Announces New York State Sales Policy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Olympic Arms is a staunch believer in and defender of the Constitution of the United States, and with special attention paid to the Bill of Rights that succinctly enumerates the security of our Divinely given Rights. One of those Rights is that to Keep and Bear Arms.

Legislation recently passed in the State of New York outlaws the AR15 and many other firearms, and will make it illegal for the good and free citizens of New York to own a large selection of legal and safe firearms and magazines. We feel as though the passage of this legislation exceeds the authority granted to the government of New York by its citizens, and violates the Constitution of the United States, ignoring such SCOTUS rulings as District of Columbia v. Heller – 554, U.S. 570 of 2008, McDonald v. Chicago – 561 U.S. 3025 of 2010, and specifically the case of United States v. Miller – 307 U.S. 174 of 1939.

Due the passing of this legislation, Olympic Arms would like to announce that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee of such an entity – will no longer be served as customers.

In short, Olympic Arms will no longer be doing business with the State of New York or any governmental entity or employee of such governmental entity within the State of New York – henceforth and until such legislation is repealed, and an apology made to the good people of the State of New York and the American people.

If the leaders of the State of New York are willing to limit the right of the free and law abiding citizens of New York to arm themselves as they see fit under the Rights enumerate to all citizens of the United State through the Second Amendment, we feel as though the legislators and government entities within the State of New York should have to abide by the same restrictions.

This action has caused a division of the people into classes: Those the government deems valuable enough to protect with modern firearms, and those whose lives have been deemed as having less value, and whom the government has decided do not deserve the right to protect themselves with the same firearms. Olympic Arms will not support such behavior or policy against any citizen of this great nation.

Olympic Arms invites all firearms manufacturers, distributors and firearms dealers to join us in this action to refuse to do business with the State of New York. We must stand together, or we shall surely fall divided.

Sincerely,

Brian Schuetz
President
Olympic Arms, Inc.

Emphasis mine. Were every firearm manufacture to follow Olympic Arms’s example New York politicians would likely find themselves having to repeal their recently passed gun control legislation or face the realization that their primary expropriators, the police, would be unable to expand their expropriation operations. After all, the state would find it very difficult to steal from the general population if they didn’t have an arsenal of weapons to backup their threats. Imagine the headaches that would be faced by various police departments in New York if Glock and Smith and Wesson refused to do business with them.

For now I will make a note to purchase an Olympic Arms rifle when they catch up on production.

A Proposal to Save the Australian Government Time and Money

I don’t claim myself to be a financial genius but I believe I can save the Australian government a lot of time and money:

Three American companies-Apple, Microsoft and Adobe-have been summoned by the Australian Parliament to explain why they charge higher prices Down Under than in other countries.

My proposal is to call of the hearing because I can provide the answer. The reason Apple, Microsoft, and Adobe charge what they charge is because those are the prices people are willing to pay. It’s as simple as that. If I manufacture a laptop, charge $2,000 for it, and enough people buy my laptop to turn me a profit I find acceptable then I know I’ve set the right price. Unfortunately the Australian government is unlike to find, “Because those are the prices the market will bear.” as an acceptable answer.

Gun Control Advocates Should be Fighting to Disarm the Police

Gun control advocates claim they oppose gun violence yet only seem to want non-state agents disarmed. In fact gun control advocates want the state to keep its guns because people with guns are needed to take guns from people. In their holy war to convince others to become members of the gun control church the advocates of gun control make outlandish claims such as police officers are more responsible with firearms than the average person. Stories like this indicate otherwise:

Two women who were shot by Los Angeles police in Torrance early Thursday during a massive manhunt for an ex-LAPD officer were delivering newspapers, sources said.

The women, shot in the 19500 block of Redbeam Avenue, were taken to area hospitals, Torrance police Lt. Devin Chase said. They were not identified. One was shot in the hand and the other in the back, according to Jesse Escochea, who captured video of the victims being treated.

It was not immediately known what newspapers the women were delivering. After the shooting, the blue pickup was riddled with bullet holes and what appeared to be newspapers lay in the street alongside.

Here’s a picture of the aftermath:

Apparently the police didn’t feel the need to identify the occupants of the vehicle before firing over a dozen rounds into it. In all likelihood the officers involved in the shooting will go unpunished because they were fired on the truck under the guise of officer safety. Combining the words officer and safety generally grants immunity to any wrongdoing performed by a police officer.

The police prove to be more irresponsible than the average gun owner time and time again. I, nor anybody I know who carries a gun, would have fired rounds into a truck. In fact if I, or any other person who carries a gun, had fired rounds into a truck we would be locked in a cage and hearings would be held on newly proposed legislation to punish every other non-state gun owner. Most of the time police officers involved in shooting bystanders are granted administrative leave until the one week news cycle passes, at which point the officers involved return to work. How anybody can support disarming accountable individuals such as myself but not unaccountable individuals such as state agents is beyond my comprehension, especially when they claim to advocate my disarmament under the guise of stopping gun violence.

Gun Ownership in Latin America

As this country continues to go the way of Rome I’ve been looking at escaping this sinking ship of a nation before things get too bad. While performing my research on foreign lands I came across an excellent podcast called The Expat Files. The Expat Files is a podcast done by John Mueller, a man who left the United States and has lived in various Latin American countries for over 20 years. The most recent episode discussed gun ownership in Latin America. Honestly, based on what Muller said, it seems many Latin American countries are freer than our own. He mentioned that many countries do have laws requiring registration, licensing, and the usual slew of gun control advocate demands but the laws are not enforced because most Latin American countries lack the resources to run a police state. On top of that many countries in Latin America don’t bother enacting gun control legislation because they know people, especially those living in rural areas, will simply ignore them. I also found it rather interesting that it’s normal to see individuals walking around with pistols strapped to their hip as we’re often told that the United States is one of the few countries that allow such activities.

Overall escaping this country and heading to a place where the state’s decrees aren’t enforced sounds better and better. It’s obvious that things are going well in the United States nor are they going to be improving anytime soon. Between the never ending wars, deflating currency, faltering economy, and draconian state the United States is becoming uninhabitable. If you’re interested in escaping this ship but want to keep participating in the shooting sports I’d advise you to listen to the lastest episode of The Expat Files because Latin America may be a better option than sticking around here.

How the Political Machinery Works

For the last three days there have been hearings at the Minnesota State Capitol building on the recently proposed gun control bills. So far gun rights advocates have greatly outnumber gun control advocates, which could make it seem as though gun rights advocates have a chance at shutting these bills down before they hit the floor. In an ideal world that would be the case but in the real world that’s not how things work. When you’re working within the political system you’re playing by the state’s rules, of which there is only one: the state gets to make the rules. Yesterday it became obvious that the hearings were nothing more than a sham, as hearing usually are. Gun control advocates were given disproportionately more time to speak and the author of the bill that was being discussed walked out when gun rights advocates were speaking.

It’s obvious that the people proposing this slew of bills have already made up their minds and that no amount of reasoning is going to dissuade them. Nobody should be surprised by this though, this is how statism works and why the political process is not an effective means of protecting your property.

Medical Cannabis Companies May be the First Casualty of Washington’s Cannabis Legalization

Washington’s legalization of Cannabis has been seen as a boon for many liberty minded folks. Unfortunately the legalization of cannabis has opened the door for the Washington state government to tax sales of the plant and license sellers. This leaves an interesting question unanswered, how will state controlled cannabis compete with mostly unregulated medical cannabis:

As Washington moves to legalize marijuana, there are fresh concerns that a parallel market for pot will continue to flourish. It’s not quite a black market. Let’s call it a “grey” market – for medical marijuana. The question now: how will highly taxed and regulated pot compete with largely unregulated medical marijuana?

In all likelihood it won’t:

In Washington, medical marijuana – or MMJ as it’s often called — is loosely regulated. That won’t change when Washington’s new pot legalization law is fully implemented. Initiative 502 was silent on medical marijuana.

You might think a hands-off approach would please the industry – who likes regulations? But medical marijuana growers worry about operating in the grey.

“Without any change you’re going to see the medical marijuana community produce and sell a large quantity of cannabis, because possessing it is no longer illegal,” says the Washington Cannabis Association’s Chris Kealy.

And, he says, they’ll sell it for less. He points to government estimates that predict legal pot under I-502 will go for about $12 a gram.

“The current marketplace in MMJ world is between $8 to $10 — and that is likely to go down.”

This will create an interesting conundrum. The state wants tax money and licensing fees for cannabis but face competition from medical cannabis growers. Whenever the state encountered competition is moves to squash it, meaning the days of medical cannabis growers in Washington may be numbered. In a rather sad but ironic twist medical cannabis companies may become the first casualty of Washington state’s legalization of cannabis. This is also why I prefer decriminalization over legalization, when something is decriminalized it still prevents the state from turning it into a taxable good and therefore prevents the state from making anything more than half-hearted moves against producers.