quinta-feira, julho 04, 2013

Against State Education

State Education and the 19th Century Voluntaryist Movement

Libertarianism is incompatible with IP

Libertarianism is incompatible with IP por Stephan Kinsella:
.. it's not possible to square libertarian principles with IP .. The debate is over. Principles libertarians know this.
.. The argument against IP does not rest on being anarchist or even anti-legislation. It simply rests on the assumption that property rights in scarce resources are a good thing. Once you accept this, IP becomes impossible to justify. You cannot have both: property rights in scarce resources and IP. RAther, you can have property rights in scarce resources, but not allocated according to Lockean-libertarian principles (first-appropriation and contract). You have to introduce a new ownership rule to implement any form of IP, one that takes property rights in already-owned scarce resources from the libertarian owner and transfers it to a third party, just like any other socialistic welfare redistribution scheme.

This issue is clear. There is a reason libertarians have flocked to it; once they turned their attention to it, the answer is obvious--to those who are honest and have libertarian principles. And it was seen, very very clearly, long ago: by Benjamin Tucker over a century ago, and then in revived form by Sam Konkin, and Wendy McElroy, and then (partially) by Rothbard, and then by Tom Palmer, and, then, starting in the internet age, 1995-, when the issue gained renewed importance, by the bulk of libertarians: Austrians, anarchists, left-libertarians. Even honest utilitarians should oppose IP ..
IP is utterly evil. It is completely in opposition to what libertarians stand for. Principled, honest, thoughtful libertarians pretty much all see this. Thank goodness. Too bad it is not yet enough to defeat this abomination.

Land of the Free

Dan Mitchell

Economic Myths

Ten Great Economic Myths por Murray N. Rothbard:
Our country is beset by a large number of economic myths that distort public thinking on important problems and lead us to accept unsound and dangerous government policies. Here are ten of the most dangerous of these myths and an analysis of what is wrong with them.
Myth 1: Deficits are the cause of inflation; deficits have nothing to do with inflation.
Myth 2: Deficits do not have a crowding-out effect on private investment.
Myth 3: Tax increases are a cure for deficits.
Myth 4: Every time the Fed tightens the money supply, interest rates rise (or fall); every time the Fed expands the money supply, interest rates rise (or fall).
Myth 5: Economists, using charts or high-speed computer models, can accurately forecast the future.
Myth 6: There is a tradeoff between unemployment and inflation.
Myth 7: Deflation – falling prices – is unthinkable, and would cause a catastrophic depression.
Myth 8: The best tax is a "flat" income tax, proportionate to income across the board, with no exemptions or deductions.
Myth 9: An income tax cut helps everyone; not only the taxpayer but also the government will benefit, since tax revenues will rise when the rate is cut.
Myth 10: Imports from countries where labor is cheap cause unemployment in the United States.

Private Property

Propiedad privada: un reto liberal

BÓNUS - Yaron Answers: Why Should All Property Be Private?

argument from freedom vs others

Libertarianism, Bill Maher, and False Dilemmas:
.. if our goal is not just to be right, but to be persuasive, then starting with common ground can be rather more effective. Yes, we take a principled stand against the state coercion behind Social Security, but we also don’t want people to suffer from rampant poverty. In fact, much of what’s appealing about libertarianism is that it’s a genuine path to both: we can be free and prosperous. We shouldn’t water down our libertarianism but we should pay attention to when leading with the argument from prosperity—and using it as a way to then persuade on the issue of freedom—can be more effective than making only the argument from freedom.

The Gestapo-State

On Target Pressure Points: The Federal Gestapo

Hacking Bitcoin

I Tried Hacking Bitcoin And I Failed:
There have been some major thefts – the BitFloor grab at 24,000 BTC, the Linode cloud robbery at 46,703 BTC, even the single user-steal at 25,000BTC.

But BitCoin’s profoundly cool design allows one to track the thieves.

When $50K of BitCoins is stolen today, and is $500K of BitCoin five years from now, every last cent of that filthy lucre can be monitored with acute cryptographic precision until the end of time.

And indeed, as far as I’ve seen none of the stolen BitCoin have actually been spent in any way. There’s actually an entire ecosystem around BitCoin – web sites, “mining pools”, and the like – all of which would have to stamp their approval on a transaction involving the obviously stolen funds, none of which have seemingly been asked to.

And that’s interesting, because possession of stolen property is and will forever be a criminal offense, and nothing is more provably stolen than the cryptographic taint of a transaction with money from a stolen account.

Campos de concentração

Hawaii's Forgotten Internment Camps


The State and BDSM:
There are obvious comparisons between BDSM and the State. BDSM can involve locking people in cages. Statism can involve locking people in cages. BDSM can involve electrocuting people (tasers/violet wand). Statism can involve electrocuting people (tasers/electric chair). BDSM can involve beatings. Statism can involve beatings. BDSM can involve a Dom micro-managing their sub’s life. Statism can involve a legislature micro-managing their citizen’s lives. BDSM can involve sadism, including bringing someone very near death (If the dynamic includes RACK). Statism can involve sadism including outright killing people, even children. BDSM can involve financial domination where someone’s finances are put under the control and supervision of someone else. Statism can involve financial domination where someone’s finances are put under the control and supervision of someone else.

I suspect there may also be similarities in the underlying motivations and emotions in Statism and BDSM. Within the division of labor of the modern State, different desires for domination can be played out only in certain roles. For instance, if someone is a sadist who enjoys hurting people they could join the police or the military. If they want a feeling of control or importance in some one’s life they might join the legislature or become a teacher depending on how they have thought about that desire and the way they want to express it. And then there are different departments for more specific kinks, some of which are only legal in the context of working for the State, like a pedophile working for the TSA. (Clearly not everyone who works in these areas necessarily has the related kink, but these departments give an outlet for people who do poses them. Not all TSA agents are pedophiles or vice-versa, but if someone is a pedophile, they’d have an incentive to join the TSA. Also, these desires are necessarily conscious desires.)

There are also examples of the State providing an outlet for submissive desires. Many submissives talk about liking a feeling of being protected or of security ..
Despite some outward, superficial similarities between BDSM and the State there is a huge, bright red line between them: consent.

BDSM is play, but without consent it can be abuse, or rape, or worse ..

assisted suicide

Who Decides How You Die? Inside Montana's Assisted Suicide Fight

The Truth About Slavery

The Truth About Slavery.:

Why are White children not taught about the slavery that their ancestors suffered at the hands of other people and at the hands of their own? Why do we not celebrate the fact that ancestors of the White British children abolished the slave trade, while the forebears of their Black and Muslim classmates were busy fighting tooth and nail to keep the institution alive? If it had have been Muslims and not Europeans who had abolished the slave trade, this would be the focus of much celebration and fanfare.

It is only White children who are systematically stripped of their dignity and self-worth and made to loathe their history and their people. Only White children are publicly humiliated in such a way. Only White children are brainwashed into becoming cowed and rootless citizens, sculpted whilst young to accept all the dictates of the ideology of mass immigration and multiculturalism when they become adults.

The British people today bear no responsibility, either collectively or individually, for slavery. We should feel no guilt and we have nothing to apologise for. The only people who are owed an apology is the generation of White schoolchildren who have been deliberately taught to hate themselves and their people by sick and twisted individuals in pursuit of an equally sick and twisted Liberal-Marxist ideology.

Law and Governance as Disruptive Technologies

Law and Governance as Disruptive Technologies

Freedom: The Unfolding Revolution

Freedom: The Unfolding Revolution por Jonah Goldberg:
Pick a date in the past, and you can imagine someone asking similar questions. “Why should women have equal rights?” some court intellectual surely asked. “Show me anywhere in the world where that has been tried.” Before that, “Give the peasants the right to vote? Unheard of!”

In other words, there’s a first time for everything.

It’s a little bizarre how the Left has always conflated statism with modernity and progress. The idea that rulers — be they chieftains, kings, priests, politburos, or wonkish bureaucrats — are enlightened or smart enough to tell others how to live is older than the written word. And the idea that someone stronger, with better weapons, has the right to take what is yours predates man’s discovery of fire by millennia. And yet, we’re always told that the latest rationalization for increased state power is the “wave of the future.”
What made the American experiment new were its libertarian innovations, broadly speaking. Moreover, those innovations made us prosper. Even Sweden — the liberal Best in Show — owes its successes to its libertarian concessions.

quarta-feira, julho 03, 2013

Government and the Consumer

Milton Friedman - Government and the Consumer

World libertarianism

If libertarianism is so great, why hasn't any country in the world tried it? The answer is that every country has tried it and every country practices it to one extent or another. This is the reason we experience progress, enjoy wealth, and have access to things like longer lives, food to eat, cities, smartphones, financial markets, useful websites, shoes, clothes, and the like. It's why we can mostly say what we want, fall in love and act on that, and do what we want in a general way provided we don't hurt others. These conditions all flow from human volition using private property (including property in ourselves) that is exercised whenever and wherever it is permitted by the authorities. Government doesn't create anything. It just takes stuff, overrides our preferences, and threatens us if we fail to comply. It has the same relationship to human liberty that a tick has to a dog. Just because ticks exist doesn't mean that dogs aren't real or are some untried experiment. Similarly, just because theft and murder exist doesn't mean that we should not rather have a world in which they did not.

Obama Africa ignorance

Obama's Hot New Idea to Save Africa: Less Free Trade, More Child Labor

Educação e Agricultura

Educação e Agricultura por José Manuel Moreira:
Tive uma colega na Universidade que .. foi desafiada a passar um fim-de-semana na Holanda .. ficou surpreendida .. cerca de 70% dos agricultores na Holanda eram engenheiros agrónomos.
A surpresa maior foi verificar, quando regressou, que em Portugal cerca de 70% dos engenheiros agrónomos trabalhavam para o Ministério da Agricultura. Percebe-se a ideia. Já naquele tempo os nossos licenciados não gostavam de se sujar: coisa mais para gente de Países Baixos.
Um contraste que ajuda a perceber o porquê de nos países ricos proliferarem os mercados e nos pobres os burocratas. Compreende-se, por isso, que, em vez da melhoria do sector, os agrónomos-burocratas se concentrassem na busca do melhor lugar .. ainda sobrava tempo para a reelaboração de planos falhados e medidas condizentes, acompanhados agora por ineptas entidades reguladoras e mirabolantes observatórios.
A comparação poderia alargar-se a outros ministérios. Mas hoje - em clima de greves espúrias - o que mais importa é a analogia com o da Educação. Durante anos sempre que alguém descobria não ser talhado para professor, logo admitia que o ideal seria ir para o Ministério ou para uma das Direções Regionais, ou então seguir a via sindical. No caso das Universidades, há também a ida para a Reitoria. O objectivo será sempre fugir a dar aulas e poder avaliar e dar ordens aos outros. Um sistema que criou uma monstruosa máquina de infernização em que as políticas educativas, em vez de servirem os alunos, se servem deles como peças de uma engrenagem em que burocratas e sindicalistas se unem no temor à descentralização e à verdadeira liberdade de escolha. Tudo por amor ao centralismo: que fecha escolas, mas não o Ministério.
Em tempos, Nuno Crato defendeu, como bem lembrou Bruno Proença, a implosão do Ministério para salvar a Escola. Não só não o fez como terminou uma entrevista à RTP1 dizendo existir liberdade de escolha em Portugal. Estamos conversados. Merece, como os professores, continuar nas mãos dos "Mários Nogueiras" do nosso tempo.

Doing Bad by Doing Good

Doing Bad by Doing Good (Christopher J. Coyne)

Olhem para o espelho

Olhem para o espelho por Miguel Botelho Moniz:
Querem um bode expiatório? Não será certamente Gaspar, Passos ou o “escurinho” do FMI (para usar as palavras do secretário-geral da CGTP). Olhem para uma constituição que parece um programa de governo. Olhem para um tribunal constituicional que desbarata a sua credibilidade para fazer política corriqueira. Olhem para os governantes que não têm coragem de fazer o que devem e continuam sempre a dar uma no cravo e outra na ferradura. Olhem para os “senadores” da república que não tendo responsabilidades actuais não se coíbem de deitar lenha na fogueira das suas vaidades e ódios pessoais. Mas acima de tudo, olhem para o espelho.
BÓNUS: V for Vendetta Televised Speech

Big Government Undermines Your Future

How Big Government Undermines Your Future

o quarto estado

The Second Superpower is the Real Fourth Estate:
“The Fourth Estate,” as a nickname for the press ..
Three Estates themselves — the Crown, the Lords Temporal and Spiritual, and the bourgeoisie — were in theory supposed to be rivalrous interests that kept each other in check. But by the 19th century, after a limited insurgency by upstart industrial interests against the privileges of the landed classes, they had coalesced into a de facto class alliance: The monarchy, landed interests, Church and industrial capitalists against everybody else.

And in the United States the Fourth Estate, likewise, has ceased to be a check on the official branches of power and instead become part of the same interlocking establishment.
The new technologies of free communication and association mean, for the first time, we can take on powerful institutions — on a more than equal basis — without becoming powerful institutions. And that means the days of powerful institutions are numbered.

O Modelo Sueco

Yaron Answers: How Can Scandinavian Countries Perform So Well Economically?

Sarcasmo Liberal do Dia

A propósito de Dois idiotas,

É preciso uma nova geração de líderes políticos visionários que reformem este sistema político-institucional que só produz geração atrás de geração de políticos medíocres incapazes de pensar no bem comum!

Silly Walks

"Should the Government Subsidize...Silly Walks? | LearnLiberty"

The Truth About Anarchism

The Truth About Anarchism:
The facts: anarchists believe that the initiation of violence is abhorrent, and as such should not be institutionalized into a monopoly force called a “state”, with the laughable dictate that it judge and correct itself in its own court system. Anarchists believe that a “constitution”, as a binding legal document, is not in fact binding upon anyone who doesn’t sign it. Anarchists believe that the market, which already provides us with every product and service of which we can dream, can (and currently does in many places) provide the comprehensible services of defense and justice.

Apple witch-hunt (3)

No seguimento de Apple witch-hunt (2),

John Stossel - Stop Punishing Success


por Miguel Sousa Tavares,
Só uma classe que recusou, como ultraje, a possibilidade de ser avaliada para efeitos de progressão profissional - isto é, uma classe onde os medíocres reivindicaram o direito constitucional de ganharem o mesmo que os competentes - é que se pode permitir a irresponsabilidade e a leviandade de decretar uma greve aos exames nacionais. Nisso, são professores exemplares: transmitem aos alunos o seu próprio exemplo, o exemplo de quem acha que os exames, as avaliações, são um incómodo para a paz de um sistema assente na desresponsabilização, na nivelação de todos por baixo, na ausência de estímulo ao mérito e ao esforço individual.

Mas a greve dos professores vai muito para lá deles: reflecte o estado de espírito de uma parte do país que não entendeu ou não quer entender o que lhe aconteceu. Deixem-me, então recordar: Portugal faliu. O Portugal das baixas psicológicas, dos direitos adquiridos para sempre, das falcatruas fiscais, das reformas antecipadas, dos subsídios para tudo e mais alguma coisa, dos salários iguais para os que trabalham e os que preguiçam, faliu. Faliu: não é mais sustentável.

100 Things I Hate About Government

John Stossel - 100 Things I Hate About Government

The Production of Security

The Production of Security de Gustave de Molinari (1849):
Now in pursuing these principles, one arrives at this rigorous conclusion:
That the production of security should, in the interests of the consumers of this intangible commodity, remain subject to the law of free competition.
Whence it follows:
That no government should have the right to prevent another government from going into competition with it, or to require consumers of security to come exclusively to it for this commodity.
Under a regime of liberty, the natural organization of the security industry would not be different from that of other industries. In small districts a single entrepreneur could suffice. This entrepreneur might leave his business to his son, or sell it to another entrepreneur. In larger districts, one company by itself would bring together enough resources adequately to carry on this important and difficult business. If it were well managed, this company could easily last, and security would last with it. In the security industry, just as in most of the other branches of production, the latter mode of organization will probably replace the former, in the end.

.. this authority would be accepted and respected in the name of utility, and would not be an authority imposed by terror.

EU Madness

The European Union Explained

NSA - an informed, angry public demanding the constitutional government it was promised

Statement from Edward Snowden in Moscow:
One week ago I left Hong Kong after it became clear that my freedom and safety were under threat for revealing the truth. My continued liberty has been owed to the efforts of friends new and old, family, and others who I have never met and probably never will. I trusted them with my life and they returned that trust with a faith in me for which I will always be thankful.
In the end the Obama administration is not afraid of whistleblowers like me, Bradley Manning or Thomas Drake. We are stateless, imprisoned, or powerless. No, the Obama administration is afraid of you. It is afraid of an informed, angry public demanding the constitutional government it was promised — and it should be.

I am unbowed in my convictions and impressed at the efforts taken by so many.

BÓNUS - Texto completo

terça-feira, julho 02, 2013

Free Markets and Human Freedom

Milton Friedman - Free Markets and Human Freedom

Rant Liberal do Dia

Ainda a semana passada estava o Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa na televisão a falar de salários de professores e profissionais da bola. Ora, o senhor pode ser muito boa pessoa, excelente docente de Direito, um comentador/entertainer muito popular. Em termos económicos é o que os ingleses chamam "ignoramus".

É que esta conversa de "alguma coisa está mal na sociedade quando os atletas recebem mais do que os professores" fica bem para dizer-se à mesa de chá, e uma pessoa faz um sorriso amarelo, e passa. Na TV nacional não.

E não há ninguém que lhe diga "professor, é assim que a realidade funciona. também há imensa gente que percebe pelo menos os rudimentos de economia, e podia estar a aparecer na televisão até sem receber, mas é o senhor que está aqui a ser pago para dizer essas baboseiras pirosas"

A Republic No More

George W Romney - A Republic No More


Who Exploits You More: Capitalists or Cronies?

Krugman e Janelas Quebradas

Paul Krugman: A broken window equals economic strength:
.. Professor Paul Krugman, .. actually argues, presumably with a straight face, that a forced closure of some coal-fired electric generating plants would force new investment in power plants and increase average power prices, thus yielding “an increase in spending” and a “positive effect” on the economy.

Wow. Remember the broken window fallacy? If a window is broken, the result is more employment and economic activity, because, obviously, someone has to pay someone else to replace the window. Sadly, this story leaves out the spending on something else that the first someone would have undertaken had the window not been broken in the first place. The broken window results in a reallocation of resources and not an increase in aggregate wealth; that is a reality that any student in Economics 101 should learn. The spending forgone on something else offsets the dollars spent replacing the window, but in Mr. Krugman’s world, the investments in new power plants and the higher spending on electricity represent new spending that otherwise would not have been made, because without the climate rules the dollars would have remained hidden in mattresses. Or something.

That the promulgation of new rules imposing large costs but yielding no benefits might have the indirect effect of increasing uncertainty and decreasing “spending” is a possibility not considered by Mr. Krugman. Nor is the larger effect of wealth destruction by regulation a parameter that he considers. One wonders why there is any “spending” at all in the absence of federal actions. What is clear, however, is that promises of a free lunch are as old as politics. And it is politics rather than economics that Mr. Krugman is practicing. Would the economy suffer if people spent less for access to the New York Times? The question answers itself.

the best of Farage

encontrado na net...

Nigel Farage - European Parliament - The Fight for Freedom and Democracy

European Parliament videos from 2008 to 2013
Nigel Farage, Freedom and Democracy Party

destroying the monopoly over communication

Hayek (1945) on Why Network News Is Losing Control:
The World Wide Web is steadily destroying the monopoly over the airwaves, and it has just about destroyed the profitability of newspapers. This is a tremendous breakthrough for freedom in our time. It has broken the Progressives' 130-year control over public opinion.
Knowledge is decentralized. This decentralized system of knowledge is now being made available to the whole world. There are a billion people on Facebook. They share links to stories. These stories take longer than two minutes to read and evaluate. People may not read 12 different stories a day, but they read those stories that interest them, and which they can read in depth.

We are seeing the breakdown of the Progressives' control over the electorates of the West. They have possessed a government-granted monopoly since 1928 in the United States. All over the world, government-granted monopolies of control over radio spectrum are declining in political value. The spectrum is very valuable for other kinds of communications, but its value to the monopolists who are in bed with the federal government has declined for over a decade, and it will continue to decline.

Population and Ecology

Milton Friedman - Population and Ecology

Writing for Liberty

Why I Write por Walter Block:
Why do I write, publish, engage in public speaking, teach at university, try to mentor young people? Why am I a hard working member of the Austro-libertarian movement? There are several reasons. Let me discuss them in the order of increasing importance to me.
a. To improve things
b. Twist noses
c. Give something back; pay off Rothbard
d. Immortality
e. Beauty

Nove anos de A Arte da Fuga


NSA - E-Verify

If You Like the Surveillance State, You’ll Love E-Verify:
According to David Bier of Competitive Enterprise Institute, there is nothing stopping the use of E-Verify for purposes unrelated to work verification, and these expanded uses could be authorized by agency rule-making or executive order. So it is not inconceivable that, should this bill pass, the day may come when you are not be able to board an airplane or exercise your second amendment rights without being run through the E-Verify database. It is not outside the realm of possibility that the personal health care information that will soon be collected by the IRS and shared with other federal agencies as part of Obamacare will also be linked to the E-Verify system.

Those who dismiss these concerns as paranoid should consider that the same charges were leveled at those who warned that the PATRIOT Act could lead to the government collecting our phone records and spying on our Internet usage. Just as the PATRIOT Act was only supposed to be used against terrorists but is now used to bypass constitutional protections in matters having noting to do with terrorism or national security, the national ID/mandatory E-Verify database will not only be used to prevent illegal immigrants from gaining employment. Instead, it will eventually be used as another tool to monitor and control the American people.

BÓNUS (youtube): Ron Paul's Texas Straight Talk 7/1/13: If You Like The Surveillance State, You'll Love E-Verify

Syria (2)

No seguimento de Syria,

Ben Swann's Reality Check: The U.S. Government Created Al Qaeda

sobre-população, solução socialista

Malthus Revisited: Statists Seeding Fear Again:
In his June 24th interview with VICE, environmentalist-politician Michael E. Arth advocated Birth Credits, an authoritarian wet dream:
“Each person would be issued half of a birth credit, which he or she can combine with a partner to have one child, or a person can sell his or her (half) credit at the going market rate. Each additional child costs one more credit. Noncompliance would bring a fine greater than the cost of the credit, and there would be sanctions for non-compliant countries (such as migration restrictions).”
Cuidado - o artigo depois discorre para umas baboseiras esquerdistas...


6 Reasons Libertarians Should Reject the Non-Aggression Principle - Rebutted!

Professores e Atletas

- Why is it that professional athletes get paid more than teachers?:
Best Answer .. It is called economics .. After college, you could train for a year and get a teaching certification. For 99% of us, no amount of training would ever prepare us to play at a professional level as an athlete. You either have it or you don't.

If you have a problem with it, then just don't pay the athlete's salaries. Don't go to games or buy products that they endorse. Don't watch the games, because the networks earn money based on ratings. Use the money you save and hand it over to your teachers.
Why Athletes and Movie Stars are Paid More than Teachers:
Salary is not a pissing contest between whose job is the most 'important' or 'necessary'. It is a function of the utility that individual provides. Yes, an education is worth more than a baseball game. But while less than 100 people at a time can partake in the labor of an educator, thousands (millions if you include TV) can watch one man play 162 games per year.

By looking at rational actions of the individual this truth comes to light. Another reminder that, when dealing with economics, aggregates tend to distort the inner workings of the market and lead to false assumptions about what people do and do not value.

Why athletes earn a lot (and teachers don't):
As we look around the economy and assign some level of importance to jobs, we see that pay and importance don't always seem to match. Jobs like school teachers, police officers, firefighters, and nurses – all performing essential work that we can't do without – are paid substantially less than professional sports players, nationally renowned entertainers and actors and executives of big companies. It makes many people, like my wife, wonder whether the job market is fair and logical.
.. we don't have a national economic dictator or governing board that sets what various jobs will be paid. Instead, we have a virtual economic “free for all” where workers and businesses are free to negotiate, accept, and reject job offers and demands.

In this setting, the determination of salaries is rather simple. Salaries will be set by the interaction of the demand for workers in a particular job and the supply of workers able to do that job. Jobs for which there is a high demand but there is a low supply will pay the most, jobs with a low demand and high supply will pay the least, and the pay of other jobs will be in the middle.

Rich Athletes, Poor Teachers:
Aspiring athletes get to be superstars because they have some type of rare talent. Top athletes can do things that mere mortals can't. Most have paid a heavy personal cost to get there. Many more try, but don't even come close. Only a tiny fraction actually make it to the big time. The level of ability and dedication it takes to be a superstar is, indeed, very rare. That rarity makes athletes the diamonds in the realm of professional endeavors. They have millions of adoring fans willing to pay money to see them. The supply is extremely low and the demand is extremely high. They command a high price for the same reason that diamonds are expensive.

All athletes, however, are not diamonds: some are rubies; some are quartz; some are coal.

Those who are not diamonds command less pay and may play at lower levels, farm teams, semi-pro or amateur leagues.

There are also different levels in teaching. While some are not called "teachers," they still need to be included for comparison. Some are called professors, consultants, professional trainers, public speakers, writers, etc. The level of pay for any of them depends on the perceived value of the skill each individual exhibits in relation to the skills of those that would replace him or her.

Hence, a renowned consultant or professor with a significant reputation, someone who is a popular writer or has taught many thousands of people, may actually make millions of dollars. He or she is just as much a teacher, and, though called by a different name, can be thought of as a superstar of teaching.

Gay Marriage

Gay Marriage Is Not a Threat to Freedom - The right to marry a person of the same sex fits perfectly within Thomas Jefferson's conception of freedom.:
One reason Americans have moved so rapidly toward support of same-sex marriage is their stubborn bias toward liberty. When interest groups demand something material, or when they seek to take something from other groups, the public is apt to resist. But when a group asks to live and let live, it can usually count on getting its way.
The right to marry a person of the same sex fits perfectly within Thomas Jefferson's conception of freedom. "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God," he wrote. "It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

The beauty of gay marriage is that it grants something to one group that doesn't come at the expense of anyone else. Heterosexual rights are undisturbed. Straight people could marry before any state legalized same-sex matrimony, and likewise after.
It's a bit rich for these groups to complain that the court is infringing on their freedom to infringe on the freedom of gays. Advocates of same-sex marriage are not trying to exclude heterosexuals from matrimony. They are only asking to be free to practice it, as well.
The only liberty they will lose is the liberty to deprive others of their liberty. Sorry, but that's one freedom a free society doesn't offer.

political systems

Se bem que a comparação com a "democracia" é um cheap shot,

Eric X. Li: A tale of two political systems

post-traumatic Road to Serfdom

Quotation of the Day…:
As time went on, the fact that Britain and the United States did not become totalitarian was cited to discredit Hayek’s warning [in The Road to Serfdom]. His critics did not realize how the experience of the war had inured people to the loss of freedom; their argument seemed to be that as long as planning took place outside forced-labor camps there was no danger.

segunda-feira, julho 01, 2013

Private police

This is What Budget Cuts Have Done to Detroit ... And It's Freaking Awesome:
Detroit is absolutely bankrupt .. Thanks to the financial situation of Detroit, emergency services like police and fire departments are being severely cut short ..
Dale Brown and his organization, the Threat Management Center (TMC), have helped fill in the void left by the corrupt and incompetent city government .. Brown explains how and why his private, free market policing organization has been so successful. The key to effective protection and security is love, says Brown, not weapons, violence, or law. It sounds a bit corny, yes, but the results speak for themselves.

Almost 20 years later and Detroit's financial mess even more apparent, TMC now has a client base of about 1,000 private residences and over 500 businesses. Thanks to TMC's efficiency and profitability, they are also able to provide free or incredibly low-cost services to the poor as well.

The reasons TMC has been so successful is because they take the complete opposite approach that government agencies, in this case law enforcement, do. Brown's philosophy is that he would rather hire people who see violence as a last resort .. TMC's funding is voluntary and subject to the profit-loss test; if Brown doesn't provide the services his customers want, he goes out of business.

This means that Brown is not interested in no-knock para-military SWAT raids, "officer safety" as the highest priority, bloated union pensions, or harassing people for what they have in their bloodstream. TMC works with its customers on the prevention of crime as well rather than showing up after the fact to take notes like historians.
Detroit's city government may be in shambles financially, but the citizens of Detroit are showing what happens when people are given their liberty back. For centuries, libertarians have been arguing for strict limits on state power, the benefits of private, civic society, and the bottom-up, spontaneous order that arises where free markets and voluntary interactions dominate. Perhaps we shouldn't be so scared and sicken with political Stockholm Syndrome the next time politicos fear-monger over budgets cuts.

Charter Cities (13)

No seguimento de Charter Cities (12), The Blank Slate State:
.. where most observers see a dysfunctional state, a few dreamers see hope for an experiment that may upend our notions of what a state can accomplish. For the last few years, libertarians and other futurists have gazed upon this misgoverned mess of mountainous jungle and imagined a clean slate for innovations in political and economic growth. Honduras, they believe, can become a laboratory for creating wealth-producing institutions that can then be replicated worldwide. The only catch: To become a 21st-century trailblazer, Honduras—or at least a small territory within it—must become, well, not Honduras.

The notion of carving out an area inside an existing country with its own set of laws—economically freer and less complicated for businesses and citizens to navigate—has been popularized under many names: charter cities, free cities, future cities, and LEAP (legal, economic, administrative, and political) zones. The notion of zones for trade and economic activity freer than the nation-states around them dates back as far as the Greek island of Delos in the second century B.C. and the Hanseatic League in the late Middle Ages. Hong Kong and other Chinese “special economic zones” are more direct ancestors.

The idea seems to be gaining steam in the early 21st century, with policy entrepreneurs from all over the political spectrum hatching their own versions. Each variant proceeds from the insight that bad government hurts an economy’s prospects more than most people realize, yet can be escaped easier than you might imagine. Good governance, the theory goes, can blossom even within a bad system.

Manners and Morality

Robert LeFevre on Manners and Morality

A Alimentação não pode ser um negócio

A/C Seguro e amigos da Terra da Demagogia, Louçãnettes, Comunocassetes, Motas Soares e camaradas e cheerleaders do Governo, etc:

La alimentación no puede ser negocio:
El líder del trasnochado socialismo español, Alfredo Pérez Rubalcaba, .. antes que decir algo sensato, prefiere dar rienda suelta a su habilidad para las frases bonitas. La última que ha lanzado este famoso químico español ha sido: "La salud no puede ser negocio". Desde luego, en un primer momento suena bien .. El problema es que, en la vida real, se trata de una soberana estupidez. Una frase hueca y ridícula, tras la cual sólo existe el vacío intelectual y la falta de propuestas serias.

Parece censurar con ello cualquier iniciativa privada que pretenda ofertar servicios sanitarios a cambio de dinero. Como si los servicios públicos sanitarios fueran gratis. La sanidad de calidad cuesta dinero, mucho dinero .. Es decir, se trata de uno de los servicios que necesitan de más recursos económicos y, sin embargo, su gestión la hemos puesto hasta ahora en manos casi exclusivas de lo público. Craso error.
Puestos a decir frases lapidarias ridículas, imagino que dentro de poco podríamos escuchar: "La alimentación no puede ser negocio"; y que acto seguido se expropiara Campofrío, Cuétara, Navidul, Telepizza, Cinco Jotas, Puleva o Ybarra. Si a Rubalcaba le parece mal que empresas privadas ganen dinero con la salud de los ciudadanos, imagino que también le parecerá un escarnio que haya empresas que obtienen pingües beneficios por ofrecer productos que calman nuestra necesidad básica de alimentarnos.

Seguimos siendo, en ocasiones, un país de pandereta, en el cual siguen produciendo urticaria conceptos como negocio, beneficio, capital, propiedad, privado o enriquecimiento. El hecho de que ofrecer un producto o servicio sea negocio es realmente estupendo, porque eso significa que será sostenible en el tiempo, que generará empleo, pagará impuestos y ofrecerá beneficios, lo cual será bueno para todos, porque esos beneficios se dedicarán a consumo, a reinversión o a ahorro, y las tres posibilidades son positivas para toda la sociedad.


Full Disclosure: What the Media Isn't Telling You About War in Syria

o socialismo vendido ao estatismo

Dos nossos "amigos" left-anarchists do C4SS, Socialism: Caught in the Political Trap de Emma Goldman:
The aim of Socialism today is the crooked path of politics as a means of capturing the State. Yet it is the State which represents the mightiest weapon sustaining private property and our system of wrong and inequality. It is the power which protects the system against every rebellious, determined revolutionary attack.

The State is organized exploitation, organized force, and crime. And to the hypnotic manipulation of this very monster, Socialism has become a willing prey. Indeed, the representatives or Socialism are more devout in their religious faith in the State than the most conservative statists.

The Socialist contention is that the State is not half centralized enough. The State, they say, should not only control the political phase of society, it should become the arch manager, the very fountain-head, of the industrial life of the people as well, since that alone would do away with special privileges, with trusts and monopolies. Never does it occur to these abortionists of a great idea that the State is the coldest, most inhuman monopolist, and if once economic dictatorship were added to the already supreme political power of the State, its iron heel would cut deeper into the flesh of labor than that of capitalism today.
Socialism in its inception was absolutely and irrevocably opposed to this system. It was anti-authoritarian, anticapitalistic, anti-religious; in short, it could not and would not make peace with a single institution of today.
The political trap has transferred Socialism from the proud, uncompromising position of a revolutionary minority, fighting fundamentals and undermining the strongholds of wealth and power, to the camp of the scheming, compromising, inert political majority ...


Walter Block - Prostitution

Gun Control and the War on Drugs

Gun Control and the War on Drugs:
In both cases — laws that restrict which guns people may buy, own, and carry and laws that restrict which drugs people may buy, possess, and ingest — what we’re dealing with are possession crimes: victimless offenses against the state, whereby merely having something is branded a crime and punishable by fines and imprisonment.

Both types of laws are terribly immoral, as they are affronts to basic personal liberty. In a free society, all individuals own themselves and the products of their labor and exchange, and are free to do as they wish so long as they do not commit violence and fraud against other people. Arresting, prosecuting, and incarcerating people for the weapons they choose to own or the drugs they choose to consume are immoral violations of the rights of self-ownership and the corollary rights to control one’s own body and property.

The right to self-ownership necessarily implies the right to self-defense and the right to peacefully acquire the means of self-defense. Hence, all gun control immorally violates the right to self-defense and self-ownership.

The right to self-ownership implies the right to self-medication and also the general right to decide what to put into one’s own body. Either you own yourself or you do not.
So thousands of people who didn’t even commit the crime — much less were proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt — end up in prison .. the punishments against people who break these laws end up being grossly unjust and disproportionate.
This atrocious assault on the basic human right .. has gotten precious little attention, partly because many supporters of gun rights are not sympathetic toward drug offenders, and many drug war reformers are all too apathetic about gun ownership rights.

As long as gun rights advocates don’t see the direct threat to all our civil and financial liberties that inevitably follow from the drug war — and as long as opponents of the drug war fail to understand the evils that predictably come from a war on guns — Americans will continue to see their priceless liberties steadily stripped away by both programs, in all their unconstitutionality and immorality.

green the deserts

Allan Savory: How to green the world's deserts and reverse climate change

NSA - no clemency for Obama

Pardon Me? It isn’t Snowden Who Needs Clemency:
Edward Snowden committed no crime. Rather, he exposed the crimes of the very administration being petitioned (and “classification” of information for the purpose of concealing criminal activity is itself illegal). To presume, as this petition does, an entitlement on the part of an acknowledged criminal to pardon — or to persecute — the hero who brings that criminal’s actions to light is, in a word, perverse.

Obama and his associates haven’t just violated “their” own codified laws. They have, by their own admissions, declared and prosecuted war on the very people in whose names they claim their power, wandering well beyond the pale of authoritarianism and raising the totalitarian flag over their battlements.

It isn’t Snowden who needs clemency. It’s Barack Obama, his co-conspirators and his accessories before and after the fact.

Sundown in America (6)

Na continuação de Sundown in America (5),

Sundown in America (5)

Anarchy Defended by Anarchists

Anarchy Defended by Anarchists:
.. there is no such thing as good government, because its very existence is based upon the submission of one class to the dictatorship of another. “But men must be governed,” some remark; “they must be guided by laws.” Well, if men are children who must be led, who then is so perfect, so wise, so faultless as to be able to govern and guide his fellows.

We assert that men can and should govern themselves individually. If men are still immature, rulers are the same. Should one man, or a small number of men, lead all the blind millions who compose a nation?
I have met very few intelligent women and men who honestly and conscientiously could defend existing governments; they even agreed with me on many points, but they were lacking in moral courage, when it came to the point, to step to the front and declare themselves openly in sympathy with anarchistic principles.
When once free from the restrictions of extraneous authority, men will enter into free relations; spontaneous organizations will spring up in all parts of the world, and every one will contribute to his and the common welfare as much labor as he or she is capable of, and consume according to their needs. All modern technical inventions and discoveries will be employed to make work easy and pleasant, and science, culture, and art will be freely used to perfect and elevate the human race, while woman will be coequal with man.
..Selfishness is not a crime; it only becomes a crime when conditions are such as to give an individual the opportunity to satisfy his selfishness to the detriment of others. In an anarchistic society everyone will seek to satisfy his ego; but as Mother Nature has so arranged things that only those survive who have the aid of their neighbors, man, in order to satisfy his ego, will extend his aid to those who will aid him, and then selfishness will no more be a curse but a blessing.
The popular demand for freedom is stronger and clearer than it has ever been before, and the conditions for reaching the goal are more favorable. It is evident that through the whole course of history runs an evolution before which slavery of any kind, compulsion under any form, must break down, and from which freedom, full and unlimited freedom, for all and from all must come.

Every day we live our principles, we truly live

Assange's Year on Ice: 'Every day we live our principles, we truly live'

BÓNUS - Wikileaks founder Assange: We are helping NSA leaker Snowden

Hayek e Pinochet

Leitura interessante - On the Hayek-Pinochet connection


Bill Whittle - GAY MARRIAGE (Virtual Press Conference)

NSA - Truth vs Power

The Truth Shall Keep Us Free por Andrew P. Napolitano:
Which is more dangerous to personal liberty in a free society: a renegade who tells an inconvenient truth about government law-breaking, or government officials who lie about what the renegade revealed? That’s the core issue in the great public debate this summer, as Americans come to the realization that their government has concocted a system of laws violative of the natural law, profoundly repugnant to the Constitution and shrouded in secrecy.
These Snowden revelations continue to cast light on the feds when they prefer darkness. Whatever one thinks of Snowden’s world-traveling odyssey to avoid the inhumane treatment the feds visited upon Bradley Manning, another whistleblower who exposed government treachery, he has awakened a giant. The giant is a public that has had enough of violations of the Constitution and lies to cover them up. The giant is fed up with menial politicians and their media allies demonizing the messenger because his message embarrasses the government by revealing that it is unworthy of caring for the Constitution.

Think about that: The very people in whose hands we have reposed the Constitution for preservation, protection, defense and enforcement have subverted it.

Snowden spoke the truth. Knowing what would likely befall him for his truthful revelations and making them nevertheless was an act of heroism and patriotism. Thomas Paine once reminded the Framers that the highest duty of a patriot is to protect his countrymen from their government. We need patriots to do that now more than ever.