Ron Paul's Speech After New Hampshire Primary

Ron Paul New Hampshire Speech\nMAGNIFICENT. Last time, New Hampshire was such a bitter defeat, this time, an incredible vindication;

\n

Watch Ron Pauls Speech After New Hampshire Primary - YouTube.

","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5d2e4b0ea4e44459757">

Ron Paul New Hampshire Speech MAGNIFICENT. Last time, New Hampshire was such a bitter defeat, this time, an incredible vindication;

Watch Ron Pauls Speech After New Hampshire Primary - YouTube.

Winner of the NH Debate - RON PAUL!

He was strong. He was himself. \u00A0As Leaonard Read used to say, he didn't \"leak\". And ABC re-ran his best lines coming out of the breaks! MAGNIFICENT;
\n
\n","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5d1e4b0ea4e4445974a">
He was strong. He was himself.  As Leaonard Read used to say, he didn't "leak". And ABC re-ran his best lines coming out of the breaks! MAGNIFICENT;

Proposed List Of Demands For Occupy Wall St Movement!

\"\"\nA guy named Lloyd J. Hart proposes a list of DEMANDS the Occupy Wall St. protestors might make, assuming they succeed at, well, I'm not exactly sure what they are trying to accomplish, though I sympathize with the impulse. The demands are listed here. Iam going to take the bait and critique each demand;

\n

\nDemand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending \"Freetrade\" by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

\n

This is actually two or three demands, as far as I can tell. The first demand, a high, protectionist tarriff, has an easy answer - Mr. Smoot, meet Mr. Hawley ( from the US State Department website); \"U.S. exports to Europe fell from $2,341 million in 1929 to $784 million in 1932. Overall, world trade declined by some 66% between 1929 and 1934.\" Also a $20 minimum wage, which will have the immediate effect of rendering everyone whose marginal revenue product is less than $20 unemployed and unemployable forever, or at least as long as it takes for the stupidity of said law to become grotesquely apparent.

\n

\nDemand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

\n

Actually, the only effect medical insurance would have in a completely free market for medical care is that people who have uncertainty about the likelihood of future major medical medical expenses purchase inexpensive catastrophic coverage, and the provider of said coverage makes a profit. Otherwise, everyone else enjoys cheap, freely-available healthcare, unburdened by the awful AMA and FDA.

\n

\nDemand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.\n

\n

Extends demand 1A to people who cannot or will not produce a marginal revenue product at all. As if subsidizing unemployment has ever done anything but create more of it.

\n

\nDemand four: Free college education.

\n

Already done. You can get the very best college education imaginable completely free ,well, almost. You have to have a computer and an internet connection to access MIT's entire curriculum for free, on line. Beats the hell out of spending $250,000, and six years at a shitty state school, drinking beer and hooking up, doesn't it?

\n

\nDemand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

\n

Already well underway. The rise in price of fossil fuels (when you tease out Fed inflation) is moving slowly and steadily upward. Or, at least it would be without massive government subsidies to fossil fuel industries such as pollution permits, tax policy, and direct military intervention. Nuclear power has an even worse government subsidy regime. And as for current alternative energy policies, they only serve to subsidize old tech, are economically dubious at best, or, as in the case of Solyndra, ethanol, and other boondoggles cross the line into criminality and fraud.

\n

\nDemand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.\n

\n

Again, mostly done. the Obama Stimulus spent, what, $750 billion on exactly that. And as you can see, all of our pressing infrastructure needs are completely resolved.

\n

\nDemand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America's nuclear power plants.\n

\n

7a) Give all federal lands back to nature and allow anyone to homestead them. 7b) End the TVA and BPA, here and all other monstrous Federal Dam authorities. 7c) End Price-Anderson, The Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and all state Public Utility Commissions, and make the contractors who built them and the companies that run them fully liable for any damage to persons or property.

\n

\nDemand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.\n

\n

8a) Done, see the 13th amendment. 8b) Tried that, almost passed until women realized what a raw deal it was for them.

\n

\nDemand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.\n

\n

Easy enough. End the Drug War and the Welfare state, or at least put a time threshold on collecting benefits, say 5 years. Then an open border would be welfare-neutral. Small side-effect though - immigrants will work you out of a job, kinda neutralizes Demand 1A.

\n

\nDemand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.\n

\n

Not sure how this helps, when there is no real choice in US elections, but OK, I'll give you that one.

\n

\nDemand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the \"Books.\" World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the \"Books.\" And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

\n

11a) Forgiveness of sovereign debt - Well, finally a demand we wholeheartedly agree with! I didn't consent to any politician running up a debt, I damn sure don't want me, my children, or my great-great-great-great grandchildren held responsible to pay for Bush's and Obama's wars; 11b)Commercial loans already have a forgivenness provision, it's called BANKRUPTCY; 11c) Ditto for individuals; 11d) I told you you can get a college education for free, why the hell did you take out crushing loans?; 11e) See 11a); 11f) Are you sh!tting me? Letting the BANKS out of their obligations? They have already been bailed out tho the tune of $TRILLIONS. You sound like a corporatist! I assume this was an oversight.

\n

\nDemand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.\n

\n

Tough to do, we do have a thing called the First Amendment.

\n

\nDemand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.\n

\n

DONE. Any worker can sign any paper at any time now. Oh, you mean then that an employer has to recognize said paper as a legal binding obligation on him under penalty of law! Um, that's going to be difficult to do. There are a lot of unemployed people already who will not likely favor this idea once it becomes apparent that this will make unemployment worse.

\n

\nThese demands will create so many jobs it will be completely impossible to fill them without an open borders policy.\n

\n

A complete non-sequitur, but OK, let's see how it pans out.

\n

But come on, people, where is the radicalism? Where are the demands to End the Wars, End the Drug War, and End the Federal Reserve? Too busy grabbing socialist loot I guess.

\n

That's OK - Ron Paul has got you covered.

","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5d0e4b0ea4e4445972d">

A guy named Lloyd J. Hart proposes a list of DEMANDS the Occupy Wall St. protestors might make, assuming they succeed at, well, I'm not exactly sure what they are trying to accomplish, though I sympathize with the impulse. The demands are listed here. Iam going to take the bait and critique each demand;

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending "Freetrade" by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

This is actually two or three demands, as far as I can tell. The first demand, a high, protectionist tarriff, has an easy answer - Mr. Smoot, meet Mr. Hawley ( from the US State Department website); "U.S. exports to Europe fell from $2,341 million in 1929 to $784 million in 1932. Overall, world trade declined by some 66% between 1929 and 1934." Also a $20 minimum wage, which will have the immediate effect of rendering everyone whose marginal revenue product is less than $20 unemployed and unemployable forever, or at least as long as it takes for the stupidity of said law to become grotesquely apparent.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

Actually, the only effect medical insurance would have in a completely free market for medical care is that people who have uncertainty about the likelihood of future major medical medical expenses purchase inexpensive catastrophic coverage, and the provider of said coverage makes a profit. Otherwise, everyone else enjoys cheap, freely-available healthcare, unburdened by the awful AMA and FDA.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Extends demand 1A to people who cannot or will not produce a marginal revenue product at all. As if subsidizing unemployment has ever done anything but create more of it.

Demand four: Free college education.

Already done. You can get the very best college education imaginable completely free ,well, almost. You have to have a computer and an internet connection to access MIT's entire curriculum for free, on line. Beats the hell out of spending $250,000, and six years at a shitty state school, drinking beer and hooking up, doesn't it?

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

Already well underway. The rise in price of fossil fuels (when you tease out Fed inflation) is moving slowly and steadily upward. Or, at least it would be without massive government subsidies to fossil fuel industries such as pollution permits, tax policy, and direct military intervention. Nuclear power has an even worse government subsidy regime. And as for current alternative energy policies, they only serve to subsidize old tech, are economically dubious at best, or, as in the case of Solyndra, ethanol, and other boondoggles cross the line into criminality and fraud.

Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

Again, mostly done. the Obama Stimulus spent, what, $750 billion on exactly that. And as you can see, all of our pressing infrastructure needs are completely resolved.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America's nuclear power plants.

7a) Give all federal lands back to nature and allow anyone to homestead them. 7b) End the TVA and BPA, here and all other monstrous Federal Dam authorities. 7c) End Price-Anderson, The Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and all state Public Utility Commissions, and make the contractors who built them and the companies that run them fully liable for any damage to persons or property.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

8a) Done, see the 13th amendment. 8b) Tried that, almost passed until women realized what a raw deal it was for them.

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

Easy enough. End the Drug War and the Welfare state, or at least put a time threshold on collecting benefits, say 5 years. Then an open border would be welfare-neutral. Small side-effect though - immigrants will work you out of a job, kinda neutralizes Demand 1A.

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

Not sure how this helps, when there is no real choice in US elections, but OK, I'll give you that one.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the "Books." World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the "Books." And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

11a) Forgiveness of sovereign debt - Well, finally a demand we wholeheartedly agree with! I didn't consent to any politician running up a debt, I damn sure don't want me, my children, or my great-great-great-great grandchildren held responsible to pay for Bush's and Obama's wars; 11b)Commercial loans already have a forgivenness provision, it's called BANKRUPTCY; 11c) Ditto for individuals; 11d) I told you you can get a college education for free, why the hell did you take out crushing loans?; 11e) See 11a); 11f) Are you sh!tting me? Letting the BANKS out of their obligations? They have already been bailed out tho the tune of $TRILLIONS. You sound like a corporatist! I assume this was an oversight.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

Tough to do, we do have a thing called the First Amendment.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

DONE. Any worker can sign any paper at any time now. Oh, you mean then that an employer has to recognize said paper as a legal binding obligation on him under penalty of law! Um, that's going to be difficult to do. There are a lot of unemployed people already who will not likely favor this idea once it becomes apparent that this will make unemployment worse.

These demands will create so many jobs it will be completely impossible to fill them without an open borders policy.

A complete non-sequitur, but OK, let's see how it pans out.

But come on, people, where is the radicalism? Where are the demands to End the Wars, End the Drug War, and End the Federal Reserve? Too busy grabbing socialist loot I guess.

That's OK - Ron Paul has got you covered.

Elizabeth Warren, and that "Social Contract"

Sheldon Richman points out in The Freeman today that Elizabeth Warren, late of presidential advising, and snubbed for a prime sinecure is running for Senate from Massachussetts. Her ads mar all my Facebook pages, and as Sheldon points out, her entire schtick is that rich corporations benefitted from taxpayer largesse, so they should pay more, a lot more. Left out of this equation are the other 100 - 200 million taxpayers, and what THEY would rather have done with the money. But that's life in the Left Lane, isn't it? Full of sleight-of-hand and rhetorical tricks.\nI commute in southern New Jersey on either I-295 (taxpayer-paid) or the New Jersey Turnpike (user-fee paid with some taxpayer subsidy) \u2013 they run roughly parallel along this stretch, so they \u201Ccompete\u201D for users. Because the NJTPK is tolled, while I-295 is not, you would think that a business using this route, say Bolt Bus or one of the Chinatown buses would use I-295 exclusively. In fact, while there is some of both, most of them appear to prefer the Turnpike. Why is that so? After all, they are already paying corporate tax, payroll tax, fuel tax, and apportioned highway taxes, but on TOP of that, to use the Turnpike, they ALSO have to pay a (presumably significant) TOLL. Why, exactly, IS that?

","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5cfe4b0ea4e44459717">

Sheldon Richman points out in The Freeman today that Elizabeth Warren, late of presidential advising, and snubbed for a prime sinecure is running for Senate from Massachussetts. Her ads mar all my Facebook pages, and as Sheldon points out, her entire schtick is that rich corporations benefitted from taxpayer largesse, so they should pay more, a lot more. Left out of this equation are the other 100 - 200 million taxpayers, and what THEY would rather have done with the money. But that's life in the Left Lane, isn't it? Full of sleight-of-hand and rhetorical tricks. I commute in southern New Jersey on either I-295 (taxpayer-paid) or the New Jersey Turnpike (user-fee paid with some taxpayer subsidy) – they run roughly parallel along this stretch, so they “compete” for users. Because the NJTPK is tolled, while I-295 is not, you would think that a business using this route, say Bolt Bus or one of the Chinatown buses would use I-295 exclusively. In fact, while there is some of both, most of them appear to prefer the Turnpike. Why is that so? After all, they are already paying corporate tax, payroll tax, fuel tax, and apportioned highway taxes, but on TOP of that, to use the Turnpike, they ALSO have to pay a (presumably significant) TOLL. Why, exactly, IS that?

Ron Paul: The Only One We Can Trust - YouTube

Forbes: Is Thorium the Biggest Energy Breakthrough Since Fire?

Is it, really? Then let them try it, with no subsidies.

No monopoly distribution model.

No State PUC, NRC, or Department of Energy protection from competition.

No Price-Anderson Indemnification.

No carbon taxes.

No disposal subsidy.

No lawsuit protection or "tort reform".

No EPA pollution "permits".

No favorable tax treatment.

Build it on the market, or not at all.

Is Thorium the Biggest Energy Breakthrough Since Fire? Possibly. - Forbes.

Coal -> Natural Gas -> Electricity = Pure Green Insanity

[caption id="attachment_1262" align="aligncenter" width="300" caption="Actual Photo of Coal-To-Gas-To-Electricity Technology"]Actual Photo of Coal-To-Gas-To-Electricity Technology[/caption] "Gov. Pat Quinn will sign controversial "clean coal" legislation Wednesday that paves the way for a new plant in Chicago that converts coal to natural gas, the Tribune has learned"

When is the approval coming for the plant that produces electricity by burning piles of thousand-dollar-bills? OH WAIT - ITS THE SAME PLANT

It would be hilarious, except that real people need the tax money more.

(PHOTO: NASA Global Warming Propaganda Pages)

"A China On Your Desktop" - RepRap

@ Google - Hope this means we won't have to censor ourselves too, LOL;\n\"RepRap is a free desktop 3D printer capable of printing plastic objects. Since many parts of RepRap are made from plastic and RepRap can print those parts, RepRap is a self-replicating machine - one that anyone can build given time and materials. It also means that - if you've got a RepRap - you can print lots of useful stuff, and you can print another RepRap for a friend...

\n

RepRap is about making self-replicating machines, and making them freely available for the benefit of everyone. We are using 3D printing to do this, but if you have other technologies that can copy themselves and that can be made freely available to all, then this is the place for you too.

\n

Reprap.org is a community project, which means you are welcome to edit most pages on this site, or better yet, create new pages of your own. Our community portal and New Development pages have more information on how to get involved. Use the links below and on the left to explore the site contents. You'll find some content translated into other languages.

\n

RepRap was the first of the low-cost 3D printers, and the RepRap Project started the open-source 3D printer revolution. It is described in the video on the right.\"

\n

via RepRapWiki.

","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5cae4b0ea4e444596c3">

@ Google - Hope this means we won't have to censor ourselves too, LOL; "RepRap is a free desktop 3D printer capable of printing plastic objects. Since many parts of RepRap are made from plastic and RepRap can print those parts, RepRap is a self-replicating machine - one that anyone can build given time and materials. It also means that - if you've got a RepRap - you can print lots of useful stuff, and you can print another RepRap for a friend...

RepRap is about making self-replicating machines, and making them freely available for the benefit of everyone. We are using 3D printing to do this, but if you have other technologies that can copy themselves and that can be made freely available to all, then this is the place for you too.

Reprap.org is a community project, which means you are welcome to edit most pages on this site, or better yet, create new pages of your own. Our community portal and New Development pages have more information on how to get involved. Use the links below and on the left to explore the site contents. You'll find some content translated into other languages.

RepRap was the first of the low-cost 3D printers, and the RepRap Project started the open-source 3D printer revolution. It is described in the video on the right."

via RepRapWiki.

Ron Paul, The Compassionate Libertarian

\"...libertarians have the reputation of being hardhearted. It's not true, and Ron Paul--in so many ways--shows that. He is the Compassionate Libertarian.\" - Lew Rockwell\nvia Lew Rockwell's Political Theatre | The Comedy and Tragedy of the Political World.

","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5c9e4b0ea4e444596bd">

"...libertarians have the reputation of being hardhearted. It's not true, and Ron Paul--in so many ways--shows that. He is the Compassionate Libertarian." - Lew Rockwell via Lew Rockwell's Political Theatre | The Comedy and Tragedy of the Political World.

The Thing In Wisconsin

Salaries and benefits in the public sector are unsustainable. This much is obvious. The states are broke, deep in debt, and standing on the edge of bonding oblivion.\nThe ruckus in Wisconsin is being spun by both sides - \"Walker is saving the taxpayers from rapacious unions!\" Walker is destroying working families!\" The pundits on TV and radio are even worse.

\n

Let's be clear here. Scott Walker, Chris Christie, et al did not descend from heaven to defend the taxpayers against the evil unions. Their opponents (Tom Barrett and Jon Corzine) similarly did not descend from heaven to defend the rights of schoolchildren. All of these men ran on and in the event won on campaign contributions from substantial special interests.

\n

To focus on two examples, Scott Walker received substantial backing by the Koch brothers, who run a gigantic, closely-held oil business,\u00A0while his opponent, Tom Barrett also received large contributions from his own peculiar collection of special interests.

\n

Last year, Christie and Corzine undoubtedly received cash from similar interests, Corzine being a former CEO of Goldman Sachs, and Christie being a state prosecutor. None of that money was contributed toward closing down New Jersey's public schools. It would have been in no contributors interest to do so.

\n

So let's be clear here. What Scott Walker, Chris Christie and others are doing, however desirable from the standpoint of people who are forced to pay for it, is aimed primarily at the preservation of government for the purposes of government - the contracts and pelf that are stripped from the taxpayer. In other words, they are not doing it to benefit you, they are doing it primarily to keep the scheme alive.

\n

I almost want to favor the unions sometimes, just so the implosion occurs quicker :o(

","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5c2e4b0ea4e444595f1">

Salaries and benefits in the public sector are unsustainable. This much is obvious. The states are broke, deep in debt, and standing on the edge of bonding oblivion. The ruckus in Wisconsin is being spun by both sides - "Walker is saving the taxpayers from rapacious unions!" Walker is destroying working families!" The pundits on TV and radio are even worse.

Let's be clear here. Scott Walker, Chris Christie, et al did not descend from heaven to defend the taxpayers against the evil unions. Their opponents (Tom Barrett and Jon Corzine) similarly did not descend from heaven to defend the rights of schoolchildren. All of these men ran on and in the event won on campaign contributions from substantial special interests.

To focus on two examples, Scott Walker received substantial backing by the Koch brothers, who run a gigantic, closely-held oil business, while his opponent, Tom Barrett also received large contributions from his own peculiar collection of special interests.

Last year, Christie and Corzine undoubtedly received cash from similar interests, Corzine being a former CEO of Goldman Sachs, and Christie being a state prosecutor. None of that money was contributed toward closing down New Jersey's public schools. It would have been in no contributors interest to do so.

So let's be clear here. What Scott Walker, Chris Christie and others are doing, however desirable from the standpoint of people who are forced to pay for it, is aimed primarily at the preservation of government for the purposes of government - the contracts and pelf that are stripped from the taxpayer. In other words, they are not doing it to benefit you, they are doing it primarily to keep the scheme alive.

I almost want to favor the unions sometimes, just so the implosion occurs quicker :o(

Our 30-Year Mistake by Ron Paul

"We see now the folly of our interventionist foreign policy: not only has that stability fallen to pieces with the current unrest, but the years of propping up the corrupt regime in Egypt has led the people to increase their resentment of both America and Israel We are both worse off for decades of intervention into Egypt’s internal affairs. I wish I could say that we have learned our lesson and will no longer attempt to purchase – or rent – friends in the Middle East, but I am afraid that is being too optimistic. Already we see evidence that while the US historically propped up the Egyptian regime, we also provided assistance to groups opposed to the regime. So we have lost the credibility to claim today that we support the self-determination of the Egyptian people. Our double-dealing has not endeared us to Egyptians who now seek to reclaim their independence and national dignity.

“Diplomacy” via foreign aid transfer payments only makes us less safe at home and less trusted overseas. But the overriding reality is that we simply cannot afford to continue a policy of buying friends. We face an ongoing and potentially deepening recession at home – so how can we justify to the unemployed and underemployed in the United States the incredible cost of maintaining a global empire? Moral arguments aside, we must stop sending hundreds of billions of dollars to foreign governments when our own economy is in shambles."

via Our 30-Year Mistake by Ron Paul.

Who’s Afraid of a Free Society? by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

"We know these myths by heart. Government acts on behalf of the public good. It keeps us safe. It protects us against monopolies. It provides indispensable services we could not provide for ourselves. Without it, America would be populated by illiterates, half of us would be dead from quack medicine or exploding consumer products, and the other half would lead a feudal existence under the iron fist of private firms that worked them to the bone for a dollar a week. Thus Americans tolerate much government predation because they have bought into the myth that state intervention may be an irritant, but the alternative of a free society would be far worse. They have been conditioned to believe that despite whatever occasional corruption they may observe in politics, the government by and large has their well-being at heart. Schoolchildren in particular learn a version of history worthy of Pravda. Governments, they are convinced, abolished child labor, gave people good wages and decent working conditions; protect them from bad food, drugs, airplanes, and consumer products; have cleaned their air and water; and have done countless other things to improve their well-being. They truly cannot imagine how anyone who isn’t a stooge for industry could think differently, or how free people acting in the absence of compulsion and threats of violence – which is what government activity amounts to – might have figured out a way to solve these problems. The history of regulation is, in this fact-free version of events, a tale of righteous crusaders winning victories for the public against grasping and selfish private interests who care nothing for the common good.

But let’s suppose that the federal government has in fact been an enemy of the people’s welfare, and that the progress in our living standards has occurred quite in spite of its efforts. It pits individuals, firms, industries, regions, races, and age groups against each other in a zero-sum game of mutual plunder. It takes credit for improvements in material conditions that we in fact owe to the private sector, while refusing to accept responsibility for the countless failures and social ills to which its own programs have given rise. Rather than bringing about the "public good," whatever that means, it governs us through a series of fiefdoms seeking bigger budgets and more power. Despite the veneer of public-interest rhetoric by which it camouflages its real nature, it is a mere parasite on productive activity and a net minus in the story of human welfare.

Now if this is a more accurate depiction of the federal government, we are likely to have a different view of the consequences of the coming fiscal collapse. So an institution that has seized our wealth, held back the rise in our standard of living, and deceived schoolchildren into honoring it as the source of all progress, will have to be cut back? What’s the catch? This is no calamity to be deplored. It is an opportunity to be seized. The primary purpose of the book, therefore, is to demonstrate that we would not only survive but even flourish in the absence of countless institutions we are routinely told we could not live without."

via Who’s Afraid of a Free Society? by Thomas E. Woods, Jr..

Buy the book through the Amazon link on the LRC page to benefit LRC of course :o)

The World Is a Hologram - New Proof Of an Old Concept?

[caption id=\"attachment_1061\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"293\" caption=\"New Proof Of An Old Concept?\"]\"New[/caption]\nReality as a high-frequency hologram? A proof of this may be coming soon;

\n

\"The holographic principle, derived from weirdness theorized to occur at the boundaries of\u00A0black holes, says reality could be a 3-D projection of a 2-D plane of information. It\u2019s much the same way a hologram printed on a credit card creates the illusion of a 3-D object but, as Hogan explained, we can\u2019t perceive the 2-D surface.

\n

\u201CWe could be living inside that 3-D projection, with the truer vision of it as a 2-D sheet hidden by scale,\u201D Hogan said.

\n

Ultra-precise devices such as laser interferometers might be able to detect noisy fluctuations in the projection, which Grote says might \u201Cblow up\u201D the pixelation to a larger, detectable size. Yet Grote suggests Hogan\u2019s holometers, which are slated to be finished in a year, may be too late if progress with GEO600 continues on-schedule.

\n

\u201CWe are not at the point where we can verify the noise we discovered is holographic, but we can falsify it as soon as our instrument is more sensitive than the limits of Hogan\u2019s theory,\u201D Grote said. \u201CI\u2019m confident we will reach that point over the next half of a year and find the source of the noise.\u201D\"

\n

I'll bet there are no more than a hundred people in the world who can conceive of all the ramifications of this if it is true.

\n

(image from the Guided By Voices Database)

\n

Read More

\n

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/10/holometer-universe-resolution/#ixzz145ugfTeV

\n

World\u2019s Most Precise Clocks Could Reveal Universe Is a Hologram | Wired Science | Wired.com.

","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5bee4b0ea4e44459596">

[caption id="attachment_1061" align="aligncenter" width="293" caption="New Proof Of An Old Concept?"]New Proof Of An Old Concept?[/caption] Reality as a high-frequency hologram? A proof of this may be coming soon;

"The holographic principle, derived from weirdness theorized to occur at the boundaries of black holes, says reality could be a 3-D projection of a 2-D plane of information. It’s much the same way a hologram printed on a credit card creates the illusion of a 3-D object but, as Hogan explained, we can’t perceive the 2-D surface.

“We could be living inside that 3-D projection, with the truer vision of it as a 2-D sheet hidden by scale,” Hogan said.

Ultra-precise devices such as laser interferometers might be able to detect noisy fluctuations in the projection, which Grote says might “blow up” the pixelation to a larger, detectable size. Yet Grote suggests Hogan’s holometers, which are slated to be finished in a year, may be too late if progress with GEO600 continues on-schedule.

“We are not at the point where we can verify the noise we discovered is holographic, but we can falsify it as soon as our instrument is more sensitive than the limits of Hogan’s theory,” Grote said. “I’m confident we will reach that point over the next half of a year and find the source of the noise.”"

I'll bet there are no more than a hundred people in the world who can conceive of all the ramifications of this if it is true.

(image from the Guided By Voices Database)

Read More

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/10/holometer-universe-resolution/#ixzz145ugfTeV

World’s Most Precise Clocks Could Reveal Universe Is a Hologram | Wired Science | Wired.com.

Volt Fraud At Government Motors

HAHAHAHAHA, this is TOO funny; "The Chevy Volt, hailed by the Obama administration as the electric savior of the auto industry and the planet, makes its debut in showrooms next month, but its already being rolled out for test drives by journalists. It appears were all being taken for a ride."

via Volt Fraud At Government Motors - Investors.com.

Coming Soon To Windy Fields Near You - Europe's Ill Wind

Even if you don't buy the arguments against wind turbine efficiency, think about the corrupt, \u00A0autocratic and ill-considered way the various European governments, in cahoots with turbine manufacturers are implementing these questionable mandates;\nEurope\u2019s Ill Wind \u00BB Europe's Ill Wind.

","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5bbe4b0ea4e4445955a">

Even if you don't buy the arguments against wind turbine efficiency, think about the corrupt,  autocratic and ill-considered way the various European governments, in cahoots with turbine manufacturers are implementing these questionable mandates; Europe’s Ill Wind » Europe's Ill Wind.

Seventh Level Supercollider Shutdown

[caption id=\"attachment_1025\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"789\" caption=\"What's That Sucking Sound? \"]\"What's[/caption]\n
\n\"A Cold War-era construct from the 1950s, CERN was in part formed to get European nations working together again in the spirit of science. Today, much of CERN's drama centers on the Large Hadron Collider, a $10 billion particle accelerator buried 30 stories below green pastures 20 minutes west of Geneva.

\n

Switched on in 2008, the machine made headlines for what it could potentially do - create mini black holes, even search for new dimensions - and for what it could not - which was, namely, work. Ten days after starting operations, it broke down, forcing a costly refit of its super magnets and towering circuitry that funnel along a 17-mile circular track.

\n

Fully functional since only last March, the collider was already scheduled to go down in 2012 for year-long upgrades, leaving the center's other eight particle accelerators for its 2,000-plus researchers to work with. But with European governments now demanding budget cuts of $135 million over five years, Heuer made the decision to put all the accelerators on hiatus.\"

\n

It's not investment, it's sunk costs. It turns out that the expenditure wasn't sustainable, maddening, yes, that these government morons would sink billions into an unsustainable project, then abandon it, but what's the other choice? To operate it at terrible cost, and destroy more wealth?

\n

What if the project we were talking about was the war in Afghanistan? \"Well, yeah, it's unsustainable, but we have already spent so much THIS far...\" It's the socialist calculation problem Mises wrote so eloquently about. They have no rational basis for calculating the costs versus the benefits.

\n

In Europe, science collides with the bottom line.

","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5bae4b0ea4e44459546">

[caption id="attachment_1025" align="aligncenter" width="789" caption="What's That Sucking Sound? "]What's That Sucking Sound? [/caption]

"A Cold War-era construct from the 1950s, CERN was in part formed to get European nations working together again in the spirit of science. Today, much of CERN's drama centers on the Large Hadron Collider, a $10 billion particle accelerator buried 30 stories below green pastures 20 minutes west of Geneva.

Switched on in 2008, the machine made headlines for what it could potentially do - create mini black holes, even search for new dimensions - and for what it could not - which was, namely, work. Ten days after starting operations, it broke down, forcing a costly refit of its super magnets and towering circuitry that funnel along a 17-mile circular track.

Fully functional since only last March, the collider was already scheduled to go down in 2012 for year-long upgrades, leaving the center's other eight particle accelerators for its 2,000-plus researchers to work with. But with European governments now demanding budget cuts of $135 million over five years, Heuer made the decision to put all the accelerators on hiatus."

It's not investment, it's sunk costs. It turns out that the expenditure wasn't sustainable, maddening, yes, that these government morons would sink billions into an unsustainable project, then abandon it, but what's the other choice? To operate it at terrible cost, and destroy more wealth?

What if the project we were talking about was the war in Afghanistan? "Well, yeah, it's unsustainable, but we have already spent so much THIS far..." It's the socialist calculation problem Mises wrote so eloquently about. They have no rational basis for calculating the costs versus the benefits.

In Europe, science collides with the bottom line.

When Is Charity Not Charitable?

[caption id=\"attachment_968\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"837\" caption=\"Full of Something\"]\"Full[/caption]\n

\"The Giving Pledge is the brainchild of billionaire businessmen\u00A0Bill Gates and\u00A0Warren Buffett. The two of them have teamed up to ask the world's wealthiest people to donate at least 50% of their fortunes to charities. They believe that the richest people in the world can eradicate many of the world's problems through philanthropy. The pledge is not a binding contract but more of a \"moral commitment\". Individuals are free to donate money to whatever cause they would like. So, far about 40 billionaires have accepted the giving pledge challenge. That's not a large number when you consider that there are nearly 1,000 billionaires in the world, according to\u00A0Forbes. So, who hasn't signed up and for what reason? \"

\n

Gates and Buffett will not give away ONE DIME.

\n

Instead, they will put all of their billions into foundations they and their heirs control, to lobby for things THEY believe in, at everyone else's expense.

\n

Also, they are both HUGE proponents of letting the estate-tax cut expire, because then, when small businessmen die, their heirs will have to sell their companies, at a huge discount, to pay the estate tax.

\n

And who will buy these companies at a huge discount?

\n

Uh-huh, people like Buffett and Gates.\u00A0Screw them.

\n

Also, it is turning the concept of (Christian) charity on its head - proclaim your \"giving\" as loudly and ostentatiously as you can, and bullyrag others to do do likewise;

\n

\"Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. Matt 6:5,Matt 6:16,Matt 23:5

\n

Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. Luke 6:24

\n

But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. Jer 17:10, Matt 6:6, Matt 6:18\"

\n

(Thanks to my wife for bringing this to my attention)

\n

Billionaires Who Havent Taken The Pledge.

","wysiwyg":{"engine":"code","isSource":false,"mode":"htmlmixed","source":""}}" data-block-type="2" id="block-507cb5b6e4b0ea4e444594f1">

[caption id="attachment_968" align="aligncenter" width="837" caption="Full of Something"]Full of Something[/caption]

"The Giving Pledge is the brainchild of billionaire businessmen Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. The two of them have teamed up to ask the world's wealthiest people to donate at least 50% of their fortunes to charities. They believe that the richest people in the world can eradicate many of the world's problems through philanthropy. The pledge is not a binding contract but more of a "moral commitment". Individuals are free to donate money to whatever cause they would like. So, far about 40 billionaires have accepted the giving pledge challenge. That's not a large number when you consider that there are nearly 1,000 billionaires in the world, according to Forbes. So, who hasn't signed up and for what reason? "

Gates and Buffett will not give away ONE DIME.

Instead, they will put all of their billions into foundations they and their heirs control, to lobby for things THEY believe in, at everyone else's expense.

Also, they are both HUGE proponents of letting the estate-tax cut expire, because then, when small businessmen die, their heirs will have to sell their companies, at a huge discount, to pay the estate tax.

And who will buy these companies at a huge discount?

Uh-huh, people like Buffett and Gates. Screw them.

Also, it is turning the concept of (Christian) charity on its head - proclaim your "giving" as loudly and ostentatiously as you can, and bullyrag others to do do likewise;

"Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. Matt 6:5,Matt 6:16,Matt 23:5

Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. Luke 6:24

But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. Jer 17:10, Matt 6:6, Matt 6:18"

(Thanks to my wife for bringing this to my attention)

Billionaires Who Havent Taken The Pledge.

Americas Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution

The nut of this very long, but very worthwhile essay by Angelo Codevilla on our emergent ruling class;

"Its attitude is key to understanding our bipartisan ruling class. Its first tenet is that "we" are the best and brightest while the rest of Americans are retrograde, racist, and dysfunctional unless properly constrained. How did this replace the Founding generations paradigm that "all men are created equal"?"

via The American Spectator : Americas Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution.

Psychopathy Legitimized by Fred Reed

Today, on LRC, Fred Reed ticks almost all the boxes (categories) with this one; "Perhaps the US should recognize that it has a second-rate military at phenomenal cost – an enormous, largely useless national codpiece. It is embarrassing. The Pentagon’s preferred enemies are lightly armed, poorly equipped peasants, which makes for a long war and thus hundreds of billions of dollars in juicy contracts for military industries. Yet the greatest military in history (ask it) gets run out of Southeast Asia, blown up and run out of Lebanon, shot down and run out of Somalia, with Afghanistan a disaster in progress and Iraq claimed as an American victory rather than Shiite. Do the aircraft carriers intimidate North Korea? No. Iran? No. China? No. For this, a trillion dollars a year?"

via Psychopathy Legitimized by Fred Reed.