Libertarian commonsense on debt crisis

Click here to see the article by Jeffrey Miron about the debt crisis.

Jeffrey Miron is an economist from MIT and a current lecturer at Harvard. He is libertarian. I found out about him after a friend showed me his article. His non-partisan, practical, point-of-view is fresh and is the type of policy that this country needs.


There is a debt crisis on hand, not a crisis of defaulting which requires us to raise our debt limit, but an actual, omg we are heading in the direction of Greece and economic collapse debt crisis. We have too many long-term promises, too much liability, and not enough revenue, not enough working, value-adding people to pay for it all. This debt crisis, which in the short term is garnering attention by the ploy by Republicans to refuse to raise the debt limit as has been done blindly and without regard for a dozen or so times prior, needs to be fixed sooner or later. The real root of the problem is that entitlement costs are rising too high, and need to be reformed or it will break itself and the country.

The Article:
First, Democrats must accept significant debt reductions, but true debt reductions through the reform of entitlements. The Democrats lack credibility with their ignorant refusal to amend what is clearly broken. Class-warfare is not the correct way to deal with the debt, and will not solve the problem.

Second, Republicans must accept the demise of tax loopholes, which tend to overly benefit the wealthy, and do little for the common people. It hides wealth, is not clear and simple, it is a waste and is part of a solution to streamline and simplify the tax code. Higher taxes may not be good, but tax loopholes are worse.

This balance that Miron strikes, without playing to partisanship, lends him credibility. His ideas logic and sensibility lends his argument strength.

I will definitely be following this author more, & I suggest you do as well.

Because She Would Ask Me Why I Loved Her

(Pull out this beauty next time the significant other pulls out the "why do you love me" card when you are least aware!)

__________

BECAUSE SHE WOULD ASK ME WHY I LOVED HER

by christopher brennan

If questioning would make us wise

no eyes would ever gaze in eyes;

if all our tale were told in speech

no mouths would wonder each to each

were spirits free from mortal mesh

and love not bound by hearts of flesh

no aching breasts would yearn to meet

and find their ecstasy complete.

for who is there that lives and knows

the secret powers by which he grows?

were all knowledge all, what were our need

to thrill and faint and sweetly bleed?

Then seek not, sweet, the "If" and "Why"

I love you now until I die.

For I must love because I live

And life in me is what you give.

__________

(this is one of the best poems I have ever seen, although I am not known to peruse poetry nor would I consider myself a poetry connoisseur, but shit this is good. Also, I've always disliked it when a girl asks why you love her)

GingerGrumpkin!

Be sure to check out the gingergrumpkin at https://www.facebook.com/pages/GingerGrumpkin/143174279095055?sk=wall

Here is a video of me wrestling with the gingergrumpkin in his wrestling alias of Kane Stoke.

Supreme Court Ends Pro-Business Term With Important First Amendment Rulings | American Civil Liberties Union

Supreme Court Ends Pro-Business Term With Important First Amendment Rulings | American Civil Liberties Union

This article provides a very concise recap of the 2010 Supreme Court term with a little analysis thrown in.

Notable Cases of 2010:

1) Arizona's campaign finance law was struck down, which would basically pay the candidate who earned less so that both candidates earnings and funds would be equal. struck down as a violation of free speech.

2) California banning violent videogames to kids was struck down, kids have 1st Amendment rights as well.

3) Free Speech protects the Westboro Baptist Church in picketing Iraq War veterans funerals with signs blaming their deaths on America's support of homosexuals.

4) In the high stakes Walmart case, the court made it more difficult for employees to get class certified and also upheld a contractual clause forbidding employees from joining a class action suit against their company in AT&T. Pro business and anti-consumer decisions.

5) In Winn, the court made a differentiation between a subsidy and a tax credit, a tax credit is not government support, so can go to causes and uses that a subsidy cannot, such as for religious education as was the present case. Who doesnt love loopholes.

6) In Brown v. Plata, California's prison overpopulation was ruled unconstitutional and they must now release a shit-ton of prisoners, I love this.

Caylee's Law

Casey Anthony was acquitted of first degree murder, second degree murder, and manslaughter, she was found guilty of lying to police officers, that is it. The American public is outraged, they are taking out their anger on the jurors. They are shocked that a woman whose child had died would not report it, lie to police at every step of their investigation, and go out partying during this time. It is atrocious. But we were not in the courtroom, we did not hear the evidence, the decision was not on us. 12 jurors unanimously decided on all these charges. A unanimous decision is not easily come by, this was not a hung jury, this was an acquittal. Although it is hard to believe, we need to step back and understand that the law is not an emotional tool of retribution, it is a careful and deliberate tool of justice meant to uphold the law yet protecting those not found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I am thankful that Anthony is acquitted than live in a country where the innocent are locked up arbitrarily or on mere conjecture.

Anthony will live every day with what she did. She may not be in jail, but every night, when she is by herself, and there is no one around her to lie to anymore, just her and her thoughts, she will not be able to escape the truth which she cannot hide. You cannot lie to yourself. She will live with what she did, and that is her punishment, in my opinion.

NOW their is a movement to pass Caylee's Law. Thank god there is a brave person willing to introduce new laws to prosecute people for not acting in a way they believe is upstanding and righteous. This law would make it a crime to not report a missing child within 48 hours. 1) I strongly believe that a person should report their child missing as soon as they know it, 2) I believe that Casey Anthony would have been justly prosecuted by this law had it been in effect when she was charged. However, the law is not a good law.

Just because a person should do something, does not mean it should be criminalized for not doing it. You shouldn't hit your child, you shouldn't smoke cigarettes, you shouldn't cheat on your significant other, but none of these things should be criminalized, none of them should end with the perpetrator in handcuffs being led into a police cruiser. Caylee's case is extreme, and the ensuing outrage naturally makes one want to criminalize what she did, but 99 out of 100 times it will not be the case of Caylee, it will be the mother who did not realize her child was missing for a few days (& do not think that is preposterous, you would be surprised how many parents allow their child to come and go as they please, to stay with neighbors and friends, etc, etc), it will be the well-meaning father who searched for his child with family and friends endlessly, perhaps afraid or wary of calling the police for any number of reasons, who to no avail finds his child, these people would be prosecuted under the law but should not.

Morality and Law are separate, and will not be wed well, they are meant to remain separate, should be kept separate.