Comments on Gregory

Some thoughts about the article (see previous post)

I like Alexander Hamilton so my first response is to reject what I see as criticism of him.

Gregory writes

Those who believed in a strong central government, typified early on by Alexander Hamilton, found their political home first in the Federalist Party, then in the Whig Party, and then in the Republican Party, the last of which openly embraced the doctrine of big government throughout the 19th century.

There is a difference between "strong central government" and "big government". Big government is bad but in Hamiltonian terms I think strong central government is good. I don't want to equate the two. We wouldn't have a country today without initial changes that created central government.

My friend responded -

Agreed. It's funny but, even the most ardent advocates of a strong central government (federalists), by today's standards, would be whacko extremist rabid anarchist libertarians.

State Capitalism – or Socialist Corporatism

My libertarian friend at work passed this to me.

First and last paragraphs of Corporatism and Socialism in America by Anthony Gregory posted at lewrockwell.com. The rest is also worth reading.

Principled advocacy of the free market requires an understanding of the differences between genuine free enterprise and “state capitalism.” Although the Left frequently exaggerates and overemphasizes the evils of corporate America, proponents of the free market often find themselves in the awkward position of defending the status quo of state capitalism, which is in fact a common adversary of the free marketer and the anti-corporate leftist, even if the latter misdiagnoses the problem and proposes the wrong solutions.

To convince the anti-corporate skeptic of the benefits of the free market, it is crucial to defend the legitimate systems of profit and private property, but it is also vitally important to make clear that America doesn’t have a free-market economy, and indeed many of the ills associated with free markets are actually the result of state capitalism – or socialist corporatism. That the expansion of government regulations, often done in the name of combating corporate excesses, is frequently supported most enthusiastically by corporate interests makes it all the easier to explain economic liberty to those who have become disenchanted with the current system and misattribute the problems to the free market.

OS Card and Socialism

Orson Scott Card writes a column for Rhinoceros Times that I generally enjoy. Before the 2004 election he was very sensible about the issues. I like his writing. He wrote Ender’s Game and other books that I really enjoy. He is democrat and I have liked learning about his ideas. Not as fired up as Senator Zell Miller, who gave a fantastic speech at the Republican convention, but I like him and appreciate his common sense and lack of fanatical partisanship. In December Card wrote an article about healthcare that I thought was annoying and terrible. It was one of the reasons I started my anti-socialist blog. He is all wrong so I’d like to counter it with good ideas and explanation of why his plan won’t work and shouldn’t work. I think socialism is designed for intentional failure. It’s goal is to make people miserable. The system cannot create, only destroy – and those that try to institute it are tyrants trying to control other people while telling them it is for their own good.

I have to plug Bastiat’s book, The Law, again since it is such a clear explanation of socialism or legal plunder as he calls it.

First off, I am not sure what Orson’s goal for healthcare is exactly. His title says he wants healthcare to be fair, excellent and affordable. Pretty generic and relative terms. That could mean about anything. Fair? What is fair? In this world nothing is fair. Excellent? We have the best health care ever. We are in an era of great and miraculous improvements. Healthcare has never been better in this country (or anywhere else). This healthcare discussion is limited to the United States since socialism on international scale is, for the present, unpalatable to Americans. If the education system doesn’t improve, I doubt that trend will continue but for now we are just talking about our country. Which country has the best healthcare in the world? Ours is the fairest, best and cheapest. If Card argues in relative terms than my answer is that we the best so I see little to complain about.

But I can do better if I look at the detail of his article. You should read it for yourself to know what I am talking about. It is on Ornery.org. His other site Hatrack.com is great too. (Yes, I am still a fan)

Card’s first question is, “How did the American health care system become so expensive?” I don’t think it is expensive so I do not accept the premise on which his question is based. I spend more money on vehicles every month. (I have been blessed with healthy children so perhaps I don’t see the full impact that others have but I think most people are closer to my position.) If the idea is to save money then why are thinking of socializing medicine instead of transportation? I would rather have the government messing with my car than my body. Of course, if they don’t keep their hands off both then it will eventually come to blows. Of course socializing cars would be insane. (A chicken in every pot and a car in every driveway) But I think socialism is crazy, and if not crazy then diabolical.

Then Card asks, “How did our health care, which used to be between us and our doctor, fall under the control of executives at huge insurance corporations whose first concern is profit, not health?”

The biggest contributor here to the problem is once again - government. The reason insurance corporations and HMOs are involved is our tax system. Income tax is not a good idea. Medical benefits have to handled by HMO or other organization so that they are not considered payment to the employee which must be taxed by the IRS. If we get rid of income tax and repeal the 16th Amendment then most of this problem will go away. Then your company can drop medical coverage, hopefully pay you a little more and you write a check to the physician when you get sick. Very simple and cost effective. The problem is government intervention. The solution is less government intervention, not more.

Card gives an story of how when he was young “"calling the doctor" meant that he'd come over to our house and stick an icy stethoscope on the chest of a sick kid while worried parents fretted in the background.”

I would bet that if and when that was true “calling the doctor” was rare because people didn’t expect to be free from all ills. Parents and their friends knew how to identify illness and deal with it. When they had to call him they likely paid the doctor in cash on the spot. Why does he propose socialized medicine (Hillarycare) if his ideal is a friendly neighborhood doctor?

Our healthcare is better now and people get treated for illnesses that likely would have been ignored previously. We both agree "that health care is astonishingly, fantastically better than it was in those days. "

Adult stem cells

Stem cells are amazing. The debate over this and cloning seems to be clouded but I think it is simple.

Adult stems cells - good

embryonic stem cells - bad

Adult stem cells are more effective and meet moral and ethical guidelines.

socialism and the courts

I was looking at a summary of the ANNUAL REPORT ON THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY, written by the Chief Justice of the United States William H. Rehnquist a weeks ago that was posted on AIM.org. The full text is in the Special Issue of the NEWSLETTER OF THE FEDERAL COURTS -- this year Volume 37, # 1. Thinking of contracts (see previous post) my eye caught on this paragraph where the Chief is addressing judicial activism and impeachment of judges.

If judges cannot be removed from office for judicial decisions, how can we be certain that the Judicial Branch is subject to the popular will? The answer...may be found in President Franklin Roosevelt's clash with the Supreme Court of the 1930s. The Court had invalidated legislation FDR thought was essential to restore...prosperity during the Great Depression. Roosevelt, and an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress, faced a Court that had for 30 years been reading into our Constitution a doctrine of "freedom of contract"...hostile to social legislation, and had adopted a very limiting view of congressional authority under the commerce clause.

So this battle over socialism was fought before. I didn’t know that. I mean, I knew about people fighting against communists but I didn’t know socialist issues had been rejected by the courts. Ultimately FDR won when he was able to appoint 5 justices in his second term. Social Security began in 1935 and FDR’s second term doesn’t start until 1937 so that doesn’t explain everything but is a new avenue of research. The Court had fought socialist tendencies for 30 years and lost after FDR stacked the court. Come to think of it, those previous 30 years were pretty bad. WWI, Great Depression and Federal Reserve, introduction of income tax, battles over prohibition, direct election of senators (17th Amendment - a huge blow to power of the states), League of Nations. A lot of bad ideas. What were they thinking? I have always thought of inventions when I think of that era. I am a nerd. Advances in electrical engineering, autos, aviation etc were amazing.

Communism has failed. Our run at socialism has just taken a little longer to cannibalize itself but a few more years and it will all fall apart. How can we make it end sooner and with less upheaval? No one wants revolution, it is always bloody. Another Great Depression would be devastating. Everyone in MSM keeps talking about fixing the system. I don't want it fixed. I want it gone.

What is citizenship

Have you ever read Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein? It is a cool book. It has almost nothing to do with the lame movie. He raises the question of citizenship. One cannot vote, hold office or have other priviledges without serving in the armed forces first. Interesting idea - how did I become a citizen? I was born. I didn't make any choices or contracts. The Pledge of Allegiance recited by school children is not binding. A mexican girl whose baby is born on this side of the border has granted him citizenship. The 14th Amendment says that is all it takes. Is it time to re-think that plan? (We got rid of the 18th Amendment. I am in favor of getting rid of the 16th and 17th but that is another topic)

I had to sign HOA agreements to buy my house. I gave consent to pay State, county, local taxes when I bought my house in this town. But when did I agree to Social Security? What sort of contract law would uphold this arrangement where they take money against my will? They don't even promise to pay it back or supply other benefit. It is a scam. If I started YOUR SECURITY INC. as a business under the same principles I would be thrown in jail.

So how does one become a citizen and give consent to live in the community in which they are born? I think the community has authority to enforce its rules. A town can give a ticket to a speeder who comes through. A murderer will be hunted down even though he never agreed to the community rules not to kill anyone. But can that apply to a nation wide ponzi scheme sold as 'never to be used as retirement' charity plan using 'never to be used as identity' cards?

How Social Security works

Budgets are a good thing. I am not under legal obligation to use one and that often leads to trouble. Our Government is required to spend every dime it recieves in that year. They always spend it which is why no one gets a rebate for too much tax paid year. Social Security must follow the same rules. There is no lock box trust fund. I don't know who started that myth. I lose huge amounts of money to those people who retire and accept government money. I have no choice. I did not sign up for this program. It is not charity. It is sanctioned theft. Legal Plunder.

I do not wish to pay into Medicare and Social Security. There is no form to allow me to opt out and nothing on my tax return to allow me to claim any excemptions. (I paid very little in taxes this year BTW and I am grateful for that. The tax revolt is cancelled until next year) In 2011 Social Security will break even. That point is just 6 years away by current estimates. And then it is all downhill. They have to use up the so-called IOUs. That "money" will evaporate in no time. Long before I reach 65 there will be nothing left but debt, debt, taxes and debt. I don't want any part of it. I promise now that any government money I recieve for "retirement benefits" I will sign over to my kids as an apology for not having rid the country of that tyrannical system.

Socialism cannot offer Security

His Excellency book review

His Excellency

Joseph Ellis

I read this book since I loved Founding Brothers so much. It was short and very informative. Washington was not discussed in great detail so I glad to learn more about the man in this book. My son idolizes him so I had to learn more and keep up with him. I can’t let a six year old show me up in history.

Washington was an amazing man. He will always be known for his ability to give up power. He has some faults which Ellis points out but nothing compares with his insight into history and the generosity of returning power to people and not holding it himself. He was freely given command of armies and the nation and gently laid it aside when he felt it was complete. That precedent is one of the greatest legacies that lives on today and can be seen in the contentious election of Bush/Gore and Kerry. Clinton gave up power; regardless of other complaints against him he followed that rule. We enjoy a peaceful turnover of power. After Washington how can the American people accept any thing else? Who else in history was able to do the same? Others with similar power are known as killers and tyrants. Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Saddam etc. They would rather see a million people dead than diminish their power.

Another thing that fascinates me with the Revolutionary era is slavery and their attempts to end it. I hadn’t learned that in school (but not much of a surprise there with the quality of government education). It is important to know how people compromised, avoided war and built a nation despite differences so deep that they caused civil war 60 years later. We have similar conflicts today.

Gilbert Mayor Elections

I like Gilbert, that is why I live here. I want it to stay a nice place so I am interested in the elections coming up for Mayor and Town Council. The mayoral race is starting off bad. They have begun a silly argument over crime rates. Gilbert is quiet, it is growing fast which causes problems but this is not the first concern. We want Gilbert crime-free of course. But that is like arguing about how much air we want to breath.
I have been involved in the local republican party and I still don't know any bit of difference between Dunham and Burman. I would like to know which one will keep property taxes down and keep the traffic construction under control since 20,000 people try to move here every year.
The race is dull and I think that means the city will lose out.
But vote for Dave Petersen for town council. He will do a good job and annoy any bureaucrats he can find.

Blog Book review

I finished reading Blog last night by Hugh Hewitt. He inspired me to do this, of course. I picked it up while on business when I finished my other book early. I was interested but not sure I wanted to buy it. I like books and my wife would like another bookshelf before cramming more books in.
The book is good. It captured Hewitt's enthusiasm for blogs well. That was the downside to the book though. I already knew he liked blogs and why. I listen to his show as often as I can and he has talked about this constantly. But I will give the book to some friends of mine who haven't heard about blogs before. The impact may be greater there. The book inspired me to continue writing so I am sure Hugh will be happy with that.
I don't see how you could be reading this and not have understood the power of blogs but I will give it a summary of Hewitt's book.
The Future is Blog.
There will always be new influences, ideas and communication tools but this is the latest and most powerful. People's desire for info appears to be endless (I have some theories as to why) and blogging allows people to interact with one another on a new level. Experts and enthusiasts write what they know and people read it and build on. There are no filters or gatekeepers. The info you want is out there. You can add to it.
I have always wanted to start a school. This will be a good teaching tool. I plan to find a way to make it work.
Hugh Hewitt's book is worth reading.

minimum wage is bad

NCPA.org has collected some articles on the minimum wage and why it is a bad idea. Read them if you aren't convinced already. It is socialist garbage that hurts everyone while claiming to be beneficial. Evil lies.

I recall my first raise when I made more than minimum wage. I was proud of the fact that my boss wanted to give me a few more cents since I had proved reliable and friendly with customers. The increase was mostly erased when a minimum wage increase was passed. So much for the rewards of hard work.

Minimum wage hurts the poorer people the most. If it was increased now it would have less of an effect on me. I would pay for it in small doses but others would lose jobs or have cost of living increased. You can't help people by passing stupid laws.

Socialism is still a bad idea.

funny quote from John Stossel

I just read this at Fox News and laughed.
From John Stossel: "....hatred is funny, in that people hate their employers, but their employers pay them. People love the government and the government takes a third of our money and squanders it. It's a mystery."

Gilbert elections

Gilbert Arizona town council primary election is March 8th. Please vote for Dave Peterson. His website is http://www.thecouncilman.com/

anti-socialism

I do not like socialism. I think it is evil and destructive. I was not happy with the President's recent State of the Union address. It is just a lot of socialist programs. Socialism is bad. When did people forget that? Pres. Bush wants to save social security. Garbage. It just needs to die and go away! I think we should immediately raise the age for benefits to 75 and only for those that can prove a need.
I thought of a few anti-socialism bumper stickers.

Baby-Boomers: It's your turn to save the country. End Social Security!
-Michael