What Will and Won’t be Open During a Minnesota Government Shutdown

We’re only a few days away from a possible government shutdown here in Minnesota and people are confused about what state provided services will and won’t be open should the government take a leave of absence. The Red Star has a summary of what services will and won’t be available during the possible shutdown.

Reading through the list it’s bloody obvious to me that nobody is going to even notice a state shutdown. My concern is reading through all the shit that the government has obtained a monopoly on providing. For instance this little gem:

STILLWATER LIFT BRIDGE

Would close to vehicle traffic. It would be raised to allow boat traffic and would remain in the raised position.

Why the Hell is the state government charged with operating a lift bridge? Does that seem like a job that you need a government bureaucrat to perform? Being the bridge is connected to Stillwater why not let the city of Stillwater run the damned thing? Read through the list though and then ask yourself what downside would exist to the government shutting down. The shutdown is nothing but a boogeyman being used by those at the Capitol to justify their existence.

You’re Asking the Wrong People Obama

It’s being reported that Obama is meeting with Senate leaders to negotiate spending cuts:

President Barack Obama is meeting Senate leaders negotiating on spending cuts and raising the US debt ceiling, as a deadline for action looms.

Mr Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden had what officials said was a “constructive” meeting with Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Mr Obama was due to meet Republican leader Mitch McConnell later on Monday.

The problem lies in the fact that there seems to be only one person on Capitol Hill that has actual knowledge in economics and financing. Obama shouldn’t be talking to the Senate leaders but should be picking up the phone and calling Dr. Ron Paul who is one of the few members of our government that isn’t a complete Keynesian (and those are the fuckers who got us into this mess).

Unfortunately for those of us living in the United States Obama has decided to talk with Mitch McConnell who only seems capable for parroting the standard Republican party line:

The White House has said Republicans want to use the negotiations with the Obama administration to secure tax loopholes for corporations, tax breaks for the wealthy and subsidies for oil and gas firms.

“We have to have a balanced approach so that no sector of society, not the middle class, not seniors, not any one segment of the business community, has to bear any disproportionate burden,” Mr Carney told reporters on Monday.

This is what gets me about the Republican party, the often talk about things that sound somewhat libertarian on the surface but underneath they lack a true understanding of why libertarians express the beliefs they do. The majority of Republican also talk the big talk until it comes time to act, at which time they reveal their true colors as authoritarian Keynesian just like the Democrats (really there is no difference between the two parties).

Securing tax breaks isn’t going to fix the problem, we need to dramatically cut spending if we want any hope of keeping our inflated fiat currency from dropping in value fast enough to violate the theory of general relativity. Unfortunately the spending cuts must come from the political suicide sectors of Social Security, “defense” spending, and Medicare. Without cutting heavily from all three of these no major change will occur and our money will continue to inflate which will reduce the purchasing power of everybody who is dependent on our paper currency.

I also doubt the Republicans have the balls required to keep the debt ceiling where it’s at. At least if we did that it would force us to adopt a balanced budget for the year. But as usual there will be a back and forth between the Republicans and Democrats that will be little more than a pissing contest. After the pissing contest both sides will agree to compromise and raise the debt ceiling which will further increase our debt and fuck us over in the long run.

I Have a Cheaper Solution

Hillary Clinton has gone ahead and promised more American dollars to Central American countries to help them fight our drug war:

Mrs Clinton told a regional security conference in Guatemala that the US would increase its aid by more than 10% to nearly $300m (£187m).

Analysts say the figure is still small, given that more than two-thirds of cocaine sent from South America to the US now passes through Central America.

In total, some $1.8bn was promised to support the region’s security.

That’s a lot of taxpayer money just to enforce a prohibition on what people put into their own bodies. Instead of spending billions fighting this needless war, keeping non-violent people imprisoned, and getting people killed enforcing anti-drug laws let’s try something better, let’s just end the prohibition on currently illegal drugs.

Ron Paul and Barney Frank understand this and rumor has it that they’ll introduce a bill to legalize marijuana very soon. This would be the first step in ending the pointless war on drugs and would likely slash the number of people we put into prison every year.

We should have learned our lesson about prohibition during Prohibition. All the war on drugs has accomplished is the waste of untold billions (maybe trillions) of dollars, increase the rate of violent crime, lead to drug cartels gaining enough power to basically overthrow several states (and replace them with even more violence which is the negative part), and swelled our prison population to the highest in the world.

We can’t control what people put into their bodies because simply making something illegal doesn’t stop it from happening (which is why we have criminals by the way).

I’m Truly Shocked, California Did Something Right

Holy shit I’m actually surprised by something that happened in California, and it’s a pleasant surprise. I never thought I would actually have something nice to say about that forsaken state but it sounds as though they’re going to stop paying their “representatives” until the state budget is balanced:

It is often said if the state of California was a country it would be the eighth biggest economy in the world.

But with a $10bn deficit to match, and residents fed up of legislators missing the annual budget deadline by months, they voted for a new law.

It is the first time Proposition 25 has been put into effect – and it means all 120 elected members of the State Assembly and Senate will not be paid their wages, or their living allowances, until they pass a balanced budget.

Hell. Fucking. Yes. Obviously the “representatives” are complaining but they have no ground to stand on. Those people were hired to do a job and have failed to do it. As they have failed to do their job it’s only right that they don’t get paid (I’d fire them frankly but alas that’s not an option when government is involved). California should expand on this and refuse to pay their “representatives” until the state debt is paid off as well. Imagine how quickly such a program would accomplish turning California from a the most debt-ridden state into a debt-free state.

For once I can say there is something other states can learn from California, don’t pay the legislature until the budget is balanced.

Companies Abandoning California at an Accelerated Rate

What happens when you increase the tax burden on companies in order to correct a state deficit? Those companies start leaving. Companies are run by people and people are generally willing to put up with only so much abuse until they analyze their situation and consider their options. California has been increasing taxes on businesses and it’s now to a point where many businesses there have decided it’s simply not worth being there and are taking their services and jobs to another state.

In 2011 the rate of businesses leaving California has increased to 5.4 a week. Each of those businesses are also taking their jobs with them meaning the unemployment rate in California is going to continue getting higher. This is also a great demonstration of the fact that states simply can’t tax their out of debt. As they increase their tax rates the victims of those increases are going to leave and then will effectively pay $0.00 in taxes to the state.

California, like most socialist nations, is finally collapsing under it’s own ruined economy. They’ve tried to offer too much for too long and now they’re going all Soviet Union. Governments need to learn that the only way to effectively eliminate their debt is to spend less money. People will survive without government services but they won’t take loosing 90% of their earnings. I’m pretty sure it’s too late for California but I hope my state notices this and learns that increasing taxes on businesses and the wealthy (those who generally own businesses) is not going to reduce our debt but increase it in the long run as tax payers flee for friendly states (South Dakota is right next door and they’re generally pretty nice in comparison).

I Bet He Cures Blindness By Throwing Mud in Your Eyes Too

When I saw this article on the BBC asking why the crime rate in the United States have been dropping I expected no mention would be made of the increase in issuance of carry permits. I’ve come to expect that from the media, especially Britain where guns are almost completely illegal. What I didn’t expect was the theory that our lower crime rate is due to the election of the Obamessiah:

1. The Obama effect could explain the increased pace of the reduction of the last few years, says one of the country’s top criminologists, Alfred Blumstein. “The prior expectation was that the recession would have the opposite effect. The question then is what distinctive event occurred in ’09?” The election of a black president could have inspired some young black men, who are disproportionately involved in arrests for robbery and homicide, says the professor. It’s very speculative, he adds, and probably only one factor of many, as one of the cities with a huge drop in crime is Phoenix, in Arizona, which does not have a large black population. “In the field of criminology, you don’t get consistent indicators as you would in physics. There are so many factors that could have contributed.” A separate study on school test scores supports the view that some black teenagers were motivated to try harder by the new presidency.

Hallelujah brother, it’s a miracle! Our president can cure the blind by throwing mud in their eyes, he can walk on water, he can turn water into wine, and he can lower the crime rate! Seriously could the media suck his… I’ll let you fill in the blank here, any harder? Did Barack personally send the BBC a shipment of hookers and blow?

Before some Obamabot comes on here and claims my heated reaction is just due to the fact that I’m a Republican/Glenn Beck supporter/dirty Satanist/whatever I should state that I’d have the same reaction regardless of what president it was about (also I’m not a Republican or Glenn Beck supporter or dirty Satanist).

Beyond that stupidity the article was written as I expected it. Almost all of the theories stated are attributed to the state and not a single mention was made about liberalized (in the classical definition of the word) carry laws raising the stacks for committing crimes. Regardless of the reason the decline in crime does demonstrate that liberalized (again the classic definition) carry laws don’t lead to higher crime rates and thus enacting stricter gun control laws to curb crime is an exercise in stupidity. This is even more important to note when you consider the fact that liberalized (classical definition) carry laws may be part of the reason crime rates are declining.

I May Take Back Everything I Said About Texas

I ripped on Texas a short while back because they were trying to play tough and stand up to the federal government but folded the second the guys in Washington D.C. pushed back. Texas has a chance to redeem itself though as they have reintroduced the anti-molestation bill during a special session:

On Monday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry presented legislation for consideration in the ongoing Eighty-Second Texas Legislature, First Called Session that would ban intrusive TSA pat-downs.

OK Texas this is your chance to prove to the rest of the union that you don’t take shit from anybody. Get this legislation through and tell the federal government where to shove their legalization of federal agents committing sexual assault. On yet another bright side it appears as through Texas may not be the only state telling the boys at the federal capitol where to shove it:

Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center tell us to expect at least 10 other states considering similar legislation in the 2012 legislative session. Utah and Michigan have already joined in. CLICK HERE to track the progress of all “travel freedom” legislation around the country.

I would love to see all fifty states take a stand against the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). There is no valid reason for allowing government agents to commit sexual assault on people simply trying to fly from one place to another.

Family of Murdered Border Patrol Agent Want the ATF Prosecuted

Things have heated up for the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF). An investigation has been called for and the head of the ATF may have to resign and everybody else will likely get a congratulations and complimentary pat on the pack for their work in suppressing our rights. But as Uncle points out not everybody is happy with simply giving the ATF a slap on the wrist:

The idea was that once the weapons in Mexico were traced back to the straw purchasers, the entire arms smuggling network could be brought down. Instead, the report argues, letting the weapons slip into the wrong hands was a deadly miscalculation that resulted in preventable deaths, including that of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

Terry was killed last year north of the Mexican border in Arizona after confronting bandits believed to be preying on illegal immigrants. Two weapons found near the scene of the killing were traced to Fast and Furious.

“I was flabbergasted. I couldn’t believe it at first,” Terry’s mother, Josephine, said when she learned the ATF may have let some of the guns used in the attack slip through its fingers. Terry’s relatives said they want all those involved in his killing and who helped put the weapons in their hands to be prosecuted.

“We ask that if a government official made a wrong decision, that they admit their error and take responsibility for his or her actions,” Robert Heyer, Terry’s cousin and family spokesman, said in a hearing last week by the House panel.

I wish Terry’s family the best of luck but alas I’m guessing they’re more likely to receive a lesson in the evils of statism than receive any compensation for the murder of their family member. The government has a habit of protecting their own which has lead to many government agencies literally getting away with murder without so much as an apology.

Using Legislation to Force Adoption of Your Product

Let’s pretend that you’re a fledgeling inventor who has come up with a new mechanism to make a currently available tool safer. The idea seems solid but it’s also very expensive which has lead to nobody licensing your invention from you. What do you do? If you’re the asshole who invented SawStop you go to Capitol Hill and try to use government to force companies to license your invention:

Gass’ saw uses an electrical sensor to detect when the blade touches flesh instead of wood. Within a few thousandths of a second, the blade slammed to a stop.

But as well as the technology works, the major tool companies have failed to put this kind of device on any of their table saws — even eight years after Gass offered to license it to them.

“They came back and said, ‘Well, we’ve looked at it, but we’re not interested because safety doesn’t sell,’ ” Gass says.

SawStop, Gass’ little upstart company, has sold tens of thousands of these safer table saws, and lately things have been heating up in Washington. The National Consumers League last month brought in injured woodworkers to meet with lawmakers and regulators. They want to make the SawStop safety brake mandatory on all table saws.

That’s one of the most dick moves somebody can perform. When you want to make money by creating a better mouse trap that is great and I fully support you. On the other hand if you want to make money by getting the government to use their monopoly on the initiation of force to make people buy your mouse trap I will condemn you.

The reason saw companies aren’t adopting SawStop isn’t because safety doesn’t sell, it’s because safety isn’t worth the asking price to most people:

In other words, let consumers decide. Young says many consumers won’t want to pay for the SawStop technology, which could add $100 to $300 in cost, depending on which side you talk to.

As mentioned earlier in the article SawStop has sold tens of thousands of their safer saws. His customers obviously felt the additional cost of those saws was small enough that it outweighed their fear of getting injured should their finger get near the saw blade. On the other hand other people who’ve purchased saws want something that is cheap (for instance a person who uses a saw sporadically for hobby project) and adding an additional $100 to $300 will make a big difference to those people.

The reason a free market is great is because it allows us to determine what will be available. Different customers have different wants. Some people want an industrial saw because their business requires it while others want a cheap saw because they only use it once every two years. By mandating SawStop the legislature would destroy the market for those wanting a cheap saw as the cost of licensing the technology is more than some of those saws are.

And in the end there is an incredibly cheap and effective safety mechanism for saws called a push stick. Hell you can make a push stick with basic woodworking tools (no saw required) in a few minutes. Not only do I hope legislation mandating the inclusion of SawStop on all saws fails but I hope Mr. Gass goes out of business and ends up poor and penniless on the streets. Does that sound harsh? It should, I’m not a fan of somebody using force to line their own pockets.

That’s Not Really a Victory

The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) have been buy arming Mexican drug cartels which has lead to a hearing. As with most government hearings on the illegal actions of government I expected these hearings to go nowhere and accomplish nothing of consequence. It appears as though I was right:

The Justice Department is expected to oust the head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, according to people familiar with the matter, amid a troubled federal antitrafficking operation that has grown into the agency’s biggest scandal in nearly two decades.

Moves toward the replacement of Kenneth Melson, acting ATF director since April 2009, could begin next week, although the precise sequence of events remains to be decided, these people said.

Yup. The ATF actively arms Mexican drug cartels, claims that they need more authority to stop the traffic of firearms going from the United States to the drug cartels, and now the only thing that will happen is the head of the ATF will be replaced. That should teach them (sarcasm for those who didn’t catch it).

This is one of many reasons that government agencies remain unaccountable. When a government agency does something naughty we have a different government entity rule on the validity of the agency’s actions. Since the entity judging the agency’s actions is also a part of the government generally the agency’s actions are deem legitimate. When the actions are deemed illegitimate nothing of consequence happens and instead one or two people are shuffled around so the next person can continue doing illegitimate shit for a while until he or she is caught red handed as well.