Recent comments

Baldwin is a kook.

I was a long haul trucker in the '80s and '90s. I lived during the tail end of the old era of the independent trucker. Now paramilitaries staff many of the roadside truck inspection stations, all drivers are on random drug testing programs, you need to pass an FBI background check to haul hazardous materials, and have a passport to enter port facilities. Today most trucks have satellite tracking and there are proposals for in-cab monitoring of drivers. Fines for minor infractions can run into the tens of thousands of dollars. So much for the freedom of the open road and the independent drivers.

Hayek is my homeboy.

The author of a book, software or music has the choice to either release the material for free or charge for the good. It seems that if the author decides to charge for the good, and they want to restrict further distribution of the material, then it is the author's responsibility to produce or purchase a protection or distribution method that is sufficient with their goal to restrict their product's distribution.

I'd go even one more step than does Davies in not worrying about how much violence is "created" by movies and such. I heard Paul Cantor say, in a long-format interview some time ago, "The expression of taboo behaviors [as seen in "The Simpsons"] provides a cathartic release that lessens the behavior versus increasing it!" I agree, and I think the data would support such an assertion. In other words, people get to release their urges to shoot--given that these urges actually exist--from these games. As such, this release does not increase those urges; it mitigates them. Further, I'd also assert that it matters very little if people are "good" or "evil" as long as we know that they are self-interested. If so, then all the conclusions Davies draws about the government are borne-out and it is only via the banishment of coercive rule that such expressions of evil as war can be eradicated.

Fred Reed is my new hero! A man ready and willing to expose the Emperor's lack of clothes in a refreshingly direct and fearless fashion.

The article claims that they're trying to force people into buying government debt, but that doesn't seem to be happening (so far). What they're trying to do is get people to buy annuities. Annuities have two relevant characteristics, first they pay off a fixed monetary amount each year, quarter or month, second nobody wants to buy them. The latter is probably due to the near certainty of high inflation or hyperinflation that would reduce the value of these securities. Forcing people who don't want them to buy annuities changes the risks in financial markets, but it doesn't lessen them. Firms selling annuities take on the risk that the assets they buy won't deliver sufficient returns to make payments. This could lead to losses or even bankruptcy. Annuities are generally sold by insurance companies, who may not be as secure as they've lead the regulators to believe. AIG being a rather spectacular example. Of course if lots of companies providing annuities go bankrupt the Feds might step in to insist we buy T-bills, which people like even less. People who buy annuities, willingly or not, lose the incentive to manage their investments. They are divorced from the effect on their money of bad decisions, which is a big part of why the current crisis happened. It wasn't retail investors who drove us all into the ditch, it was professional money managers making lots of dough off of OPM.

I think they're right. The system is doomed because medicare, medicaid, and now the prescription drug benefit will never be repealed without some type of revolution or major economic disaster. And of course the mainstream media will never interview anyone who claims that government is the problem. So the pressure will always be on Congress to "do a little more" and "fix" the health care problem with more government.

A great video that will show you how to take control away from the government when they demand information of you is here: http://oneheartbooks.com/resources/videos/think_free_gov_deception.htm This is a MUST SEE video. Maybe Rob will link to it on a future STR because everyone needs to watch this. His method for dealing with traffic tickets towards the end is brilliant.

@Ken Out of curiosity, do you read the Chomsky articles? If so, do you have specific disagreements?

If an average person had taken a few teaspoons of Stevia sweetener from a large container and put it in a small plastic bag to travel with you can imagine what would happen to this person. This screener who would be the one to declare DEFCON 4 on a Stevia carrier may have lost his job but was most likely promoted.

"Let's dispose of the notion, popular with Stephan Kinsella and his hangers-on, that goes like this: Copies of an electronic work are almost effortless to make; therefore they're worth nothing, and nobody need feel bad for taking one and flipping off the original author." If Kinsella has argued this, it's news to me (and I've read most of his writing on "IP"). Kinsella's argument has nothing to do with the fact that it's easy to copy an electronic work; his argument is that property rights are a consequence of scarcity and ideas are not scarce. "To advocate a world without copyright is to advocate taking bread off my table, bread I have honestly earned, so that thieves can steal my program or anything else that has been created by another, and profit from selling it with zero creative effort on their part. It is a world which rewards parasites and fleeces the productive." If I "pirate" a program you wrote, what have I stolen from you? You've still got any copies of the program that you possessed before the act of "piracy". You can still run the program or sell copies of it. You haven't been deprived of anything. Trying to conflate copyright infringement with theft = fail. It sounds to me like you think you're entitled to an income. That's a peculiar idea to be expressing on a libertarian website.

Quote : 'We had to give him the benefit of the doubt for the obligatory although arbitrary 100 days'. fine, though after reading i felt that even Gregory may have had an element of faith in the then new Puppet Prince, or is it that the only way i'd waste my breath near him or any of those of him is when i'd just eaten some extremely potent cheese.

Great idea for teaching the younger ones, but teaching a class of older kids Trigonometry, Calculus or Chemistry would be quite difficult with little ones running about. Also, by that point, expecting the students to understand how to take notes, and prepare wouldn't be instilled if the education system was as drastically changed as you describe. I agree that having older students interact with younger would help the younger ones significantly, but the assumption that there will be continued advanced students to help out (without the necessary preparation especially in those previously mentioned subjects) would be unlikely in time. Student directed education has been tried in many situations (Celebration, Fl was where I saw a student directed system in action years back) and the problem with that situation is in essence the same problem with the current system (which I fully admit is flawed) and the problem is MOTIVATION. No Child Left Behind (stupid name for a governmental program...btw) addressed teacher preparedness (better in some states than others) and standards (again better in states where they took the process more seriously than other states). What was not considered is that its the STUDENTS who have to actually learn the material. The current view of education from government is comparable to telling law enforcement that speeding needs to stop, but drivers are not to be inconvenienced, stopped, fined or threatened with anything in accomplishing this goal. I can predict the successfullness of such a program (and so should anyone with a brain). Education is being treated in the same way. 1. No more social promotion (at any grade level). Waiting until high school to stop automatically promoting a student means that high schools will face more students who can barely add(etc), read or write a sentence. Without such skills no student should even be in high school. 2. You can't read at the 9th grade level and can't do math at a similar level, then society does not need you travelling 70 mph pushing a ton+ of metal down a street/highway and unable to comprehend the signs or the numbers flying by (especially distracted by hormones and cellular devices) 3. If you're a little snit who gets in trouble at least weekly in a school environment and are distracting from the educational potential of others, you need to be removed from the system and placed into another one (the military won't thank me, but they have the best chance of fixing such problem kids). If the kid learns the value of education later in life, maybe they'll do a better job of instilling the value of education in their own children than their parents did in them. 4. Parents...if you made the student then you need to show enough interest to try and solve the problems of your offspring. Failure to do so will result in something. (mandatory councelling, tutoring, parenting classes) For the chronically poor, don't let government solve this problem. Demand parental assistance or face loss of earned income credit to pay for the necessary councelling, tutoring or whatever. 5. Encourage more vocational education. Lets get America back to making things again. 6. Stop fearing hurting a kid's self-esteem. Self-esteem comes from accomplishing something worthwhile. If a student's self-esteem can really be damaged by all the red marks on their paper (a real complaint from a parent), then having the teacher switch to purple ink (a suggestion made by the parent and enforced by administration) is not a real solution (and when the parent wanted the purple changed to green, I feigned an allergy to something in green ink) How's that for striking the root of the education problem? ~Chills

This is an excellent and well-documented summary of Obama's first year in office.

I've become inured to the abuses of the Federal Reserve and how much they get away witth, but I took the time to watch the 5 minute video of the Inspector General for the Federal Reserve responding to questions from a House subcommittee, and it reminds me of something you'd see on the Daily Show. Its eye-opening.

You never know about the intentions of others. Freedom dictates two paths: trust and distrust. Do you trust the intentions of Mr. Hantz or do you not? Do your research and determine, by his past actions, whether to trust him. This trust, ultimately, falls to you. I truly hope that your trust is well placed. Good Luck.

I agree with your sentiment regarding the term "capitalism." It is a loaded word with many negative connotations. "Free market" is better, but it, too, has some baggage, and is also used derisively by anti-free market statists. Perhaps "open markets" would be a better term? How can anyone be against open markets? Michael Cloud said that "words are weapons; words are tools." We must choose wisely the words that define our beliefs. Mike Powers

Abolitionist, I think you're missing the point. What about the article implies that STR has deteriorated into a statist tool, as you say?

Abolitionist, I agree that Woo is despicable, but STR is just linking to a mostly negative review of Yoo's book as a news item. I don't think the fact that STR is linking to this review can in any way be taken as some sort of endorsement of Yoo.

What a tendentious, steaming, festering pool of rancid diarrhea from a sick dog. This is no doubt how lawyers acquired their stellar reputation - by desperately attempting to concoct some duplicitous fig leaf of a defense for each other no matter how heinous their crimes. -A

Yay! Copying is not theft Stealing a thing leaves one less left Copying it makes one thing more That's what copying's for Copying is not theft If I copy yours you have it too One for me and one for you That's what copies can do If I steal your bicycle You have to take the bus But if I just copy it There's one for each of us Making more of a thing That is what we call copying Sharing ideas with everyone That's why copying is fun!

If those who try to trick idiots into valuing religious / advantages for their parochial group would step back and do a cost / benefit evaluation of the conflict of discrimination, it would be readily apparent that ALL parties are on a path to non-survival. When push comes to shove, people value ability to economically survive over ideological conflicts. Israel should restore the "rule of law": http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/ross/ross3.html Once this is done, Israel would occupy the factual / moral high ground. They can achieve their security and expand their influence by honest trade and voluntary consent of their neighbors. Clearly Israels neighbors have zero clue regarding civil society, economics and prosperity. Israel can become a regional leader, but NEVER a ruler.

Please pay attention. Before you posted this, Visa, MasterCard, Discover, and American Express all announced that not only were they making substantial corporate donations to the rescue and aid efforts, but also were waiving their transaction interchange fees for donations to most major charitable organization. For example: http://corporate.visa.com/media-center/press-releases/press976.jsp "Credit Nazis" indeed, you offensive oaf.