Over the years, I have grown a renewed interest in the straight line graphic. Working on a version now.
Here is the first draft of the graph, nothing special yet:
“We’re living in a country that is 70-percent socialist, the government takes 60 percent of your money. They are taking care of your health care, of your pensions. They’re telling you who you can hire, what the regulations will be. And you want to suck up to your little liberal friends and say, ‘Oh, but we want to legalize pot.’ You know, if you’re a little more manly you would tell them what your position on employment discrimination is. How about that? But it’s always ‘We want to legalize pot.’”While this might be true about the Reason Foundation branch of libertarians of which John Stossel is certainly a member, the comment approaches straw-man proportions. Yes, those libertarians often frame the drug issue in exactly that way, rather than citing specific laws for repeal, like the Harrison Act. They use that fuzzy term "we want to legalize" which, to our friends on the Left, just means more laws, more regulation and more taxes.
“How is it any of your business what I choose to put in my body if I’m not affecting anyone else?” one student asked during the Q&A, prompting the crowd to give a standing ovation.
“First of all, for alleged individualists, you’re very mob-like,” Coulter snarked. “Second of all, it is my business because we are living in a welfare state … Right now, I have to pay for, it turns out, coming down the pike, your health care. I have to pay for your unemployment when you can’t hold a job. I have to pay for your food, for your housing. Yeah, it’s my business!”
Stossel then asked: “Why can’t gays get married?”
“Well, they can,” Coulter replied. “They have to marry a member of the opposite sex.” The room filled with boos.
“This is another one where you’re just sucking up to liberals when there are big fights,” Coulter explained.
“No, we believe the individual should be left alone,” Stossel shot back.
“Marriage is the most important institution to civilize young people. I’d make divorce a lot more difficult,” she said. “Liberals want to destroy the family,” she continued, eliciting jeers and mocking laughter from the students.If John Stossel wants the individual to be left alone, why is he supporting the government license of marriage position? If he supported that, the question would have been along the lines of "Why can't we repeal the marriage laws?"
The senior and adjunct faculty of the Mises Institute discuss the history, theory, and contemporary meaning of the fascist temptation, and what the Austrian economists are doing to combat it. Mises Institute Supporters Summit 2005, October 7-8, Auburn, Alabama. http://mises.orgⒶ Steve Ⓐ
George Gerald Reisman is Professor Emeritus of Economics at Pepperdine University and author of Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics (1996). He is also the author of an earlier book, The Government Against the Economy (1979), which was praised by F.A. Hayek and Henry Hazlitt.
|Look at me, my personal Anarchism logo!|
1: a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups
2: the advocacy or practice of anarchistic principles
anarchyAN'ARCHY, n. [Gr. rule.]Ⓐ Steve Ⓐ
Want of government; a state of society, when there is no law or supreme power, or when the laws are not efficient, and individuals do what they please with impunity; political confusion.
|Patrick Henry in the House of Burgesses by Peter F. Rothermel|
§ 18.2-345. Lewd and lascivious cohabitation.Here we have a beautiful instance of the people doing what is natural, no matter what sort of stupid laws their overseers concoct. Marriage licensing entered Western Civilization through the Catholic Church, in the 13th century. Pretty recent as far as recorded human history goes. However, throughout the history of bureaucratic tape, couples have lived together as married without the paperwork the whole time. And it is not like people who had the paperwork behaved monogamously if they did not feel like it anyway.
If any persons, not married to each other, lewdly and lasciviously associate and cohabit together, or, whether married or not, be guilty of open and gross lewdness and lasciviousness, each of them shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor; and upon a repetition of the offense, and conviction thereof, each of them shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
(Code 1950, § 18.1-193; 1960, c. 358; 1975, cc. 14, 15.)
The Pentagon announced Monday that it would extend additional benefits to same-sex military couples, including access to base facilities and groups as well as joint assignments, the latest move by the Obama administration to heed calls from gays and lesbians pressing for change.None of these benefits are being "extended" to heterosexual couples who did not visit a courthouse for a permission slip, the same permission slip that homosexual couples can obtain in any of nine States, and counting, i.e., it is no longer a paperwork problem for any couple to gain a permission slip for the feds to look at and check a block.
Activists hailed the move as a meaningful step toward full equality, which they say will remain elusive unless a 1996 federal law that defines marriage as a heterosexual union is repealed. The additional 20 benefits do not include health-care coverage for same-sex spouses or on-base housing privileges.
The Jungle was, first and foremost, a novel. As is indicated by the fact that the book originally appeared as a serialization in the socialist journal “Appeal to Reason,” it was intended to be a polemic—a diatribe, if you will—not a well-researched and dispassionate documentary. Sinclair relied heavily both on his own imagination and on the hearsay of others. He did not even pretend that he had actually witnessed the horrendous conditions he ascribed to Chicago packinghouses, nor to have verified them, nor to have derived them from any official records.Also . . .
Sinclair hoped the book would ignite a powerful socialist movement on behalf of America’s workers. The public’s attention focused instead on his fewer than a dozen pages of supposed descriptions of unsanitary conditions in the meat-packing plants. “I aimed at the public’s heart,” he later wrote, “and by accident I hit it in the stomach.”
When the sensational accusations of The Jungle became worldwide news, foreign purchases of American meat were cut in half and the meat packers looked for new regulations to give their markets a calming sense of security. The only congressional hearings on what ultimately became the Meat Inspection Act of 1906 were held by Congressman James Wadsworth’s Agriculture Committee between June 6 and 11. A careful reading of the deliberations of the Wadsworth committee and the subsequent floor debate leads inexorably to one conclusion: knowing that a new law would allay public fears fanned by The Jungle, bring smaller rivals under controls, and put a newly laundered government seal of approval on their products, the major meat packers strongly endorsed the proposed act and only quibbled over who should pay for it.
In the end, Americans got a new federal meat inspection law, the big packers got the taxpayers to pick up the entire $3 million price tag for its implementation, as well as new regulations on the competition, and another myth entered the annals of anti-market dogma.Ⓐ Steve Ⓐ
To his credit, Sinclair actually opposed the law because he saw it for what it really was—a boon for the big meat packers. He had been a fool and a sucker who ended up being used by the very industry he hated. But then, there may not have been an industry that he didn’t hate.
In the United States, verbal contracts will usually refer to unwritten or oral contracts. An unwritten contract will usually mean that the contract or agreement was made through the use of spoken words as opposed to formally writing and entering into record the provisions of said contract.What we usually deal with in our everyday lives is the anarchy of self governance. Far from a chaotic situation, it is a situation of order brought through customs evolved over the centuries.
Simple Guide to Verbal Contracts - Laws.Com