Capitalism

Why do I like capitalism? I don’t think it is a perfect economic system or philosophy. To some it means "just to make money" but it is the only system that will guarantee individual rights and property. Uncontrolled it can turn into a disaster. Men would take and survive according to their strength, wit and power. Survival of the fittest. In the past men have tried to control capitalists with labor unions. I guess that worked. I am not in favor of unions but if that was their intent and only interest it would be okay. I have no hope that they could ever limit themselves because once they have power they want to keep it.
The reason I support capitalism is because of charity. Seems odd maybe but think about property rights. You can only give something away when you own it. Under socialism you own less and less. Under communism the government owns everything. When that happens, only the government can help the poor and needy. That is one of the evils of socialism. It takes away chances to help people. Socialism claims to help people so you don’t have to I guess. It’s a lie. It doesn’t work. Not only does it not function in practice but in theory it cannot work. It doesn’t help to make bad ideas bigger. Take education for example. Government education isn’t very effective. It has some success because of the strenuous labor of some dedicated individuals. Any success one could claim is the success of a parent or a teacher and not the system. How does government try to improve the system? By making it bigger and more powerful. That only makes it worse. Education would be better without government involvement.
In the same manner social causes would benefit greatly if government was not involved. Those in need would received better care and it wouldn’t cost as much.

I support capitalism, not to make money but to give it away.

Missions and bureaucracies

from K

Today's Q - NASA funding good or bad? Spend more, spend less, change mission?

Short answer is: They must die!

What I mean is that all programs should have end dates. NASA was a good idea, Social Security, whatever. They may have served a purpose. But the purpose of any bureaucracy is to grow. Doesn't matter if it is needed or not. Bureaucracy never dies or trims itself. They will always provide convincing evidence of their current value and future need So you must purposefully kill them. If you give a capitalist a goal he will achieve it, if he can make money, if there is a future payoff. If you say to NASA, launch 3 more satellites - and then we don't need you, (go to Boeing, Space Ship One instead or something) than the satellites would never get launched. NASA would never finish and self-destruct.
Taxes and programs never go away. remember the story a few years ago when they decided to end the telegraph tax that was originally used to fund the Spanish-American war? Income tax was temporary measure to pay for WWI. Federal withholding was an emergency measure to stabilize cash flow for WWII.

OK - this is no longer a short answer. NASA is cool but there is no reason it could not be disbanded or replaced tomorrow. Our success has made us think that things can't change. I think we have the 6th oldest flag in the world. Almost every country in the world was created since our revolution. We have some of the oldest corporations and institutions, libraries, museums etc in the world. The first corporation was the Dutch East India company I think. We claim to be the new world but it most respects it is no longer true. I think it is because America is the best. The best idea has value and has endured. But there is no reason not to change things that no longer have value.
I would disband the FDA in a minute. They served a purpose but are no longer needed. Labor unions are archaic. The EPA has been around too long. The UN no longer has value. NATO should be revised. People act like all these have been around since the dawn of man and must continue until the end of time. They were ideas and served a purpose. No longer needed so they should go away. They only survive because we continue to pay taxes for them and the monster of bureaucracy constantly tells us how miserable we would be without it.

K- when you say FDA, EPA, and NASA should go away, does that mean they should be replaced with a new organization with a new charter (truncated of course with a fixed end) to be re-evaluated in the future?

I don't think NASA has a clear mission. I think they did. I wouldn't say the whole thing was a waste. It proved our system was better than communism. I think they should complete the space station and downsize. You can always hire more people if they are needed in the future but most space needs can be met by private enterprise. What mission couldn't be?

I don't like the FDA. What purpose do they serve? I would spin them off as a private company and make them compete in the marketplace. They could try to become the "UL listing" of food and drugs. (Underwriters Laboratory) People trust UL. FDA could make money if they gave people the same confidence. This is not a government function, to control what people put in their bodies. And we have plenty of lawyers to punish fraud. I think the FDA was intended to end corruption and deception. I think it has. That culture will continue whether or not the agency does.
EPA = waste. I don't like so I haven't bothered to learn much about them. Bunch of crazies in my opinion. Collecting fines for bad air seems to be their main goal. America has the best air and water in the world. It is has nothing to do with the EPA. Deceptive tree hugging freaks. How is that for convincing logical argument?

Separations

I noticed this quote on atheist websites

Thomas Jefferson said, 'To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.'

I heard it from FRC who wants to end government support of cloning. Separation is a good thing. I like the first amendment. I think separation of school and government is just important as church and government. How about separation of charity causes and government. People should support causes they believe and work for them. Spreading Christianity is a good thing. Education is good. I would like to see people support it without taxes because the atheist like to support abortion and cloning with taxes too. It is better if people vote with checkbook and support what they like rather than giving themselves power to use my checkbook. It is tyranny.

baseball, judges and taxes

A friend of mine saw an article about debate over a new baseball park and asked my opinion. Writing the response was enjoyable enough that I will add it here

K - RE: baseball park. It seems like it is a vote on a huge $27 million expenditure. The concept sounds cool if I had a son that played baseball. What do you think?

I don't like any of these things. I am surprised that Dave Petersen likes it. The vote will secure funding for construction. Doesn't sound like a bond issue, just more city taxes. Gilbert builds the park and hires the company to run it. Why not sell the park and let the company build their own park? You get revenue from the sale and you can still tax the sales if the town needs cash. I don't like development projects. Well, not true. I love them. I just wish they weren't all run by the government. City parks, city pools, skateparks, malls etc etc. If these are such great ideas then let the companies spend their own development money and recoup their costs later. I don't using taxpayers as credit as though all government has deep pockets. Other alternative is to develop the park with donations. If people want a park they can pay for it with grants and donations and then later tickets to get in. Name the park after the largest donor like the good old days.

K- How about the middle of the road agreement that was made by moderate senators yesterday on Judicial nominations? I worry about the verbage of no filibusters except in the case of "extreme" circumstances. That just left them a way to default on their agreement.So to get this straight, do you not like bonds for things like education, road building, etc?

I must admit: I am too far right compared to these guys to see this as middle of the road agreement. McCain and the others are liberals, left whatever name fits.
I think the agreement is silly. Its a bad idea and McCain typically got it wrong. He said that people are tired of the stalled nominations and upset by the process. I interpreted that to mean that people want action. Every nominee should get a vote. He thought it meant time to compromise. He has been talking compromise for months. This isn't a compromise really. Democrats are giving in a few votes and maintaining their threats. I think they should take the votes, approve the 3 judges that can agree on and then start the fight again. Call their bluff, "shut down Senate business". So what? Make the votes against the nominees.

The deal doesn't hold much weight really. Every Senator can do what they want. This is only a deal that they won't change the rules on filibusters if they pass the 3 judges. Fair enough. Accept the 3 judges and keep voting, let them filibuster if they want. Democrats lose with that tactic which is why they are trying to compromise.

I don't like bonds. I don't like property taxes. I think taxes should be as painful and personal as possible. Just like an electric bill. Comes every month and changes depending on my usage. If I turn the lights off and adjust the thermostat I can save money. If you turn your house into an icebox I don't have to pay for it.

If I want to go to the park - I will pay admission as a tax. Tax my gas to pay for roads etc. Pay monthly tuition for schools, to the teacher. Making taxes painful keeps them low. Spreading payments over 20 years is just like using credit cards. It is wasteful and deceptive spending.

income redistribution

today's quote from Walter Williams
"Let's do a bit of analysis of efforts to assist the elderly, but let's use our brains instead of our hearts. According to a 2003 Housing Vacancy Survey, conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau in conjunction with the Current Population Survey, 42 percent of Americans 35 years of age owned their homes compared to 80 percent of those 55 and older. The bureau's May 2003 report, 'Net Worth and Asset Ownership of Households: 1998 and 2000,' shows that excluding home equity, the median net worth of householders 35 to 44 years of age was $44,000 and that of householders 70 to 74 years of age was $120,000. The bottom line is that seniors are far richer than their mid-life counterparts who are in the workforce paying income taxes. They're being taxed to care for those who are not only less likely to be in the labor force paying income taxes but are wealthier than they. That's a particularly perverse form of income redistribution." --Walter Williams

FDR and socialism

I have always despised FDR as the father of socialism and big government. He started Social Security. That is practically a mortal sin in my book.

Well, I heard another viewpoint. I was surprised but I will have to consider it. I enjoy Charles Krauthammer's columns and especially those on the war against islamist terrorists. I saw an interview with him and he said that Pres. Roosevelt was one of the people he admires most. I was stunned. Never heard such a thing from people I considered sane. I am reading President Reagan autobiography and he said the same thing. He thought Roosevelt did the right thing for the time. He added that he mourned the constant growth of government.

So, some people whose views I respect spoke well of the enemy.

Deal on confirmation

I don't like Sen. McCain. I like him less now that he has championed this "deal". McCain said he was very concerned about the reaction of the nuclear option and the damage that would be done to the Senate. He said that the people were clearly concerned and wanted action. He said everyone was upset by the conflict.

The problem is the people did want action, they were upset. They wanted votes on the judicial confirmations! They didn't want to compromise.

Why are people afraid of this fight? I don't care if they democrats "shut down the senate" if they can't filibuster judges. So what? Let them.

They should and must vote on every nominee. Take the break, confirm the three that the democrats have agreed to and then vote on more nominees.
And recall McCain! The effort was gaining steam before Sept 11. I can't believe he won another Senate race.

Revenge of the Sith

Star Wars
I liked Revenge of the Sith a lot. I saw it once and the more I thought about it the better it got. I was excited to see it again and wasn’t disappointed. I am grateful for Lucas’s warning about the content. It deserved the PG-13 rating. I let the kids see it anyway and they enjoyed it

Death of Tillman

Pat Tillman
One of the worst things about traveling is sitting in the airport listening to CNN. They are so lame. How did they get that gig? Why not play Fox news or something normal?
The latest story I hear as I sit here is about an suspected cover-up involving the death of Pat Tillman. I would be interested in learning more about what his family thinks. The story is that the Army knew a month before it was released to the public that Ranger Tillman was killed by friendly fire. Does it make any difference? Friendly fire is always a problem in battle. It is very tragic but increasingly reported. I would guess it will continue to increase as the weapons used on the battle field increase in lethality. Anyway – the guy was a hero because he volunteered for the Army with the intent to serve his country. He was tragically killed in that service. The method of death is not what determines the quality of the man. There are many soldiers killed in traffic accidents and moving and maintaining their gear. Their death is mourned and their sacrifice should be remembered.

Letter to Sen McCain

re: Judicial Nominees
Dear Senator McCain
No deals. No compromise. Vote on each nominee. Each judge needs to be voted on. That is what is required by law. Let the obstructionists continue to refuse to vote if necessary. They will continue to lose. Call for a vote on judges every day. Let them obstruct the vote every day.
Follow the Constitution!
Michael Green

p.s. And please stop wasting time with baseball steroids and so-called "campaign finance reform"

Rand's "Anthem"

Some of the best lines from Anthem were written in the forward

The greatest guilt today is that of people who accept collectivism by moral default; the people who seek protection from the necessity of taking a stand, by refusing to admit to themselves the nature of that which they are accepting; the people who support plans specifically designed to achieve serfdom, but hide behind the empty assertion that they are lovers of freedom, with no concrete meaning attached to the word; the people who believe that the content of ideas need not be examined, that principles need not be defined, and that facts can be eliminated by keeping one's eyes shut. They expect, when they find themselves in a world of bloody ruins and concentration camps, to escape moral responsibility by wailing: "But I didn't mean this!"
Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating or condemning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead.
They must face it, then decide whether this is what they want or not.
--Ayn Rand.
April, 1946

I would apply this to socialism since this is my favorite target. Social Security has failed because people gave money to the government and expected to be taken care of. The system is a failure and the country is going broke. "But I didn't mean this!" Ha, very funny!
-Michael

Pres. Bush on Yalta

President Bush gave a speech on May 7th in Riga during his tour of Europe. This week marks the 60th anniversary of VE day. He said some interesting things. This paragraph startled me.

As we mark a victory of six days ago -- six decades ago, we are mindful of a paradox. For much of Germany, defeat led to freedom. For much of Eastern and Central Europe, victory brought the iron rule of another empire. V-E Day marked the end of fascism, but it did not end oppression. The agreement at Yalta followed in the unjust tradition of Munich and the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Once again, when powerful governments negotiated, the freedom of small nations was somehow expendable. Yet this attempt to sacrifice freedom for the sake of stability left a continent divided and unstable. The captivity of millions in Central and Eastern Europe will be remembered as one of the greatest wrongs of history.

He is admitting that Roosevelt and Churchhill made a mistake and gave away too much to Stalin. They were afraid of more fighting. The communists were allies in defeating fascism but it is a mistake to forget that they were not friendly to us. It was a lie and cost a lot in lives and -hardship. Pres. Bush said he doesn't want to repeat the mistake in the middle-east which is encouraging.
-Michael

5/24 more commentary on the mistake at yalta from Paul Weyrich

A month?

I can't believe it has been a month since I wrote. I
have been busy. Hopefully you have enjoyed the
current debate about Social Security as President Bush
tries to sell his reforms. And there is plenty of
info at NCPA.org. If you like email then their Daily Policy Digest is a good one to sign up for.

Someone wrote that baby- boomers
are refusing to see the light about the failures of
Social Security and will be known as "the Greediest
Generation"
-Michael