.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Milton J. Madison - An American Refugee Now Living in China, Where Liberty is Ascending

Federalism, Free Markets and the Liberty To Let One's Mind Wander. I Am Very Worried About the Fate of Liberty in the USA, Where Government is Taking people's Lives ____________________________________________________________________________________________ "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Tolerance in the face of tyranny is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater-

Thursday, April 30, 2009


As the Obamessiah organizes Americans to perform voluntary public service, that is intended to be mandatory, service and its meaning is something that is becoming somewhat confusing to me.... At one time in my life, I thought I had a handle on the meaning of the word....

"It's the act of doing things for other people."
Then I heard these terms which reference the word SERVICE:
Internal Revenue Service
Postal Service
Telephone Service
Civil Service
City & County Public Service
Customer Service
Service Stations
Then I became confused about the word "service." This is not what I thought "service" meant.

So today, I overheard two farmers talking, and one of them said he had hired a bull to "service" a few of his cows. BAM! It all came into perspective. Now I understand what all those "service" agencies are doing to us.

I hope you now are as enlightened as I am.

A very bright future.....

How I see the Obamessiah....

First 100 days, a wishlist of soviet style government intervention......

There is nothing new here with the anti-Christ Obamessiah, its just retreads of typical leftist socialists policies that so miserably failed over the last 70 years. The only thing that will change the nation from continuing to slip down the slope to hopeless ignominy is a defunding of the Federal government and a rework of what their role should be. This passage summarizes the new policy prescriptions that are all fizz and no substance.
So here we are, 100 days into the great eight-year triumph of Hope over Change, a new Era of Really Good Feelings in which only one thing has become increasingly, even irrefutably, clear: President Barack Obama is about as visionary as the guy who invented Dippin' Dots, Ice Cream of the Future. Far from sketching out a truly forward-looking set of policies for the 21st century, as his supporters had hoped, Obama is instead serving up cryogenically tasteless and headache-inducing morsels from years gone by.

On issue after issue, Obama has made it clear that instead of blasting past "the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long," (as he promised in his inaugural address), he's moving full speed ahead toward policy prescriptions that already had less fizz than a case of Billy Beer back when Jimmy Carter was urging us all to wear sweaters and turn down our thermostats. Instead of thinking outside the box, Obama is nailing it shut from the inside.
I hate this guy and hate everything that the nation has become. I am not his kind of American. Its embarrassing to have this empty suited clown as the nominal leader of this formerly great nation.

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Another thought of the day....

For those class warfare leftists....
Upward mobility is alive and well in the United States, at least until Obama took over. A study conducted in the late 1990s examined the economic fate of those consigned to the bottom 20% of incomes in 1980. The analysis concluded that more than four out of five had left the bottom quintile and one in five was now in the top 20%! It is true that the top quintile is getting richer while the bottom is getting poorer, but the bottom is not the same people. There is, fortunately, a constant churning at the bottom as new immigrants move in and those who used to be on the bottom begin their long, thrilling, upward climb to the American dream.

But Obama does not believe in individual upward mobility. He would penalize it, tax it, regulate it, inveigh against it, and disincentivize it. We will be like salmon swimming upstream to mate. We will overcome the currents, the waterfall, the rocks, the predators and will grapple our way up the stream. Then, at the top of the waterfall, will stand Obama the Bear, waiting to scoop us up and have us for dinner. The taxman cometh.
From here.

Thought of the day....

It is very sad that the nation founded on individualism and limited government has more people than ever suckling at the federal subsidy teat. President Barack Obama has proposed a wide range of new subsidies in energy, health care, and other areas. If enacted, they would take America further away from the individual reliance, voluntary charity, and entrepreneurialism that made it so prosperous in the first place.

Americans need to wake up and fight back before the addictive drug of subsidies puts individualism in a permanent coma. People should start using new Internet tools, such as www.usaspending.gov, to research recipients of all these subsidies and complain to Congress about the abuse of their tax dollars.5 There is no time to lose for taxpayers to make their voices heard in Washington because the spending increases envisioned by President Obama are truly frightening.
From this Cato piece.

Americans have become lazy and dependent upon the dead hand of government. Being born on a certain piece of soil should never guarantee a certain level of economic consumption but it appears as if Americans now want this, whether it be healthcare or retirement income or whatever. Good luck to them. If this is now the United States, then I am not an American. The United States is now a dead country and I will have no part of it.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

The coming disaster in American healthcare......

As I have commented on before, Liberal's arrogant healthcare plans will not only fail to deliver anything of consequence, it will exacerbate the trends towards reducing the availability of primary care.

during the American Presidential campaign, we heard many shrill speeches on the lack of health insurance coverage for 10's of millions of typical Americans. I think that the number most lately battered and flung about is 45 million. So these thoughts come to my mind:
1. Having such a large number of people presumably not receiving adequate healthcare due to the lack of money (its always about money) available to cover their insurance payments would naturally lead one to believe that there conversely should be providers of this needed healthcare that are underemployed and twittling their thumbs. This, I humbly think is is not the situation since this would imply that there are 10's of thousands of unemployed doctors.

2. When speaking to British, Canadian, German, frothing at the mouth neo-expert American Liberals, etc. socialized medicine recipients and adherents where the socialized healthcare systems are also beset by shortages of primary care physicians, argue that they will just import doctors from 3rd world countries to meet the needs. This is also what is going on in the largely non-socialized US, where shortages are being met by importing doctors and nurses from India, Philippines, Turkey and many other places.

3. So as the West scavenges primary care doctors and nurses from 3rd world nations, isn't that going to create great burdens on populations of poor people there? Seems as if the plans are just shifting the crisis from the Rich nations to the poor ones under the stealing doctor and nurses model being offered.
Even the uber-Liberal untrustworthy New York Times has this to say on the looming doctor shortages.....
Obama administration officials, alarmed at doctor shortages, are looking for ways to increase the supply of physicians to meet the needs of an aging population and millions of uninsured people who would gain coverage under legislation championed by the president.

The officials said they were particularly concerned about shortages of primary care providers who are the main source of health care for most Americans.
Now, how is this alarming? Its the normal workings of markets and normal human reality; make something rewarding enough, then there will be human and technological capital movement to meet the need. Force the price of a good or service lower through government fiat and resources will move to other uses that give a better risk adjusted return.

Governments will NEVER be able to effectively and efficiently deliver healthcare for 2 principle reasons....
1. Governments are unable to allocate scarce resources efficiently since no single entity could possibly know how to allocate resources optimally and efficiently in such a large and complex business.

2. Technological changes and innovation constantly change the efficiency and effectiveness of various procedures and processes and in a static system, there are no market feedback mechanisms that change the static government plan.
Furthermore, heavy government intervention will ensure that innovation and technology investment will not be allocated to this business unless there are guarantees that this investment will be allowed to have a payoff. Otherwise, investment will go into other areas away from healthcare.

Monday, April 27, 2009

Rumination of the times.....

With $11 trillion of government obligations that will probably grow at around $2+ trillion a year (remember, obligations grow much faster than the 'deficit' since interest on intra-governmental debt and the social security 'surplus' also increase the debt numbers), and local governments crushed under unfunded Federal mandates, how will this play out?
How will we be living when 75% of our GDP is committed to simply servicing our national debt? Where will jobs come from when reinvestment ceases because corporations are forced to forfeit their earnings to the government? How will the citizenship react the government is forced to confiscate nearly all the earnings of the public while simultaneously eliminating the programs upon which everyone has become so accustomed to relying? From a sociological perspective, this is terrifying. Chaos could ensue. Good thing the second amendment hasn’t been completely repealed.
From here.

So, what does the US do when we get on the slippery slope? We elect the least experienced and most socialist President in history and expect him to spend even more money. The fat boy is overweight so we feed him more doughnuts. Galt will go on holiday.

Saturday, April 25, 2009

The Obamessiah is in good company with his distain for capitalism.....

Its no wonder that that the Obamessiah gave such a warm reception to the Venezuelan dictator recently. Since we can see the output these guys at their recent communist summit. The communist dictators in the Americas got together and declared the following anti-capitalist manifesto festooned with all kinds of stuff that sounds quite similar to the American political party, the Democrats, positions....
We, the Heads of State and Government of Bolivia, Cuba, Dominica, Honduras, Nicaragua and Venezuela, member countries of ALBA, consider that the Draft Declaration of the 5th Summit of the Americas is insufficient and unacceptable for the following reasons:
1. Capitalism is leading humanity and the planet to extinction. What we are experiencing is a global economic crisis of a systemic and structural nature, not another cyclic crisis.
2. Capitalism has caused the environmental crisis, by submitting the necessary conditions for life in the planet, to the predominance of market and profit.
3. The global economic crisis, climate change, the food crisis and the energy crisis are the result of the decay of capitalism, which threatens to end life and the planet. To avert this outcome, it is necessary to develop and model an alternative to the capitalist system. A system based on:
- solidarity and complementarity, not competition;
- a system in harmony with our mother earth and not plundering of human resources;
- a system of cultural diversity and not cultural destruction and imposition of cultural values and lifestyles alien to the realities of our countries;
- a system of peace based on social justice and not on imperialist policies and wars;
- in summary, a system that recovers the human condition of our societies and peoples and does not reduce them to mere consumers or merchandise.

4. As a concrete expression of the new reality of the continent, we, Caribbean and Latin American countries, have commenced to build our own institutionalization, an institutionalization that is based on a common history dating back to our independence revolution and constitutes a concrete tool for deepening the social, economic and cultural transformation processes that will consolidate our full sovereignty.
5. We question the G20 for having tripled the resources of the International Monetary Fund when the real need is to establish a new world economic order that includes the full transformation of the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO, entities that have contributed to this global economic crisis with their neoliberal policies.
6. The solutions to the global economic crisis and the definition of a new international financial scheme should be adopted with the participation of the 192 countries that will meet in the United Nations Conference on the International Financial Crisis to be held on June 1-3 to propose the creation of a new international economic order.
Well, I for one, think that capitalism has serve the world effectively. Otherwise, we would have seen the USSR, North Korea, Cuba, Eastern Europe pre-1989 and the 1960's Maoist Chinese leading the world and raising standards of living and opportunity amoung its citizens.

Soon this group will welcome the newest member of this communist cabal, the American President and campaigner-in-chief who wants to spread the wealth around and control this through climate change legislation and a coterie of higher and taxes. Good luck, USA, you were once a great country. Now you will be no better than a Nicaragua or Venezuela.

Friday, April 24, 2009

Quote of the day....

We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.

-Adolf Hitler, Speech of May 1, 1927-

Same shite different a55hole.....

Time to restore the US to what was originally intended as an experiment in liberty....

There are methods that are outlined in the US Constitution that allow for the States to call for a constitutional convention to make, change or eliminate amendments. Interesting article here.

Of course, this would be extremely difficult to effect since there are so many 'beneficiaries' of federal largess vs. so few that actually 'pay' for it.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

The golden calf in Washington wants more than just your money....

An interesting passage from this piece here....
Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in Democracy in America that "among democratic nations the notion of government naturally presents itself to the mind under the form of a sole and central power, and that the notion of intermediate powers is not familiar to them."

That is, powerful centralized governments and the politicians who run them have a propensity to operate from the premise that if government is not providing a service, then the service is not being provided at all.


Since Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society, politicians have systematically diminished the intermediating powers of churches and charities that de Tocqueville thought were essential to democracy. Cutting the incentives to give would seem to be exactly the wrong policy — that is, unless the intention was to deliberately weaken them further.
Given the de Tocqueville observation, the door to the systematic dismantling of the nation was opened during the the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations and the foundation was set during this period.

Why should we care one may ask? We should care, I think, since the systematic movement towards central government control is debilitating towards American society and makes it less caring and more coarse. The goal is replacing the individual with the leviathan government and it its values. In this environment, why should anyone care about their neighbor if it is now the role of the central authority to perform that role? Why care about the poor or those that are less than fortunate?

The suggestion by the Obamessiah to increase taxes on the charity giving of the wealthy is more than pernicious, it shows that the government is not just willing to tear down tradition, tear down the fabric of American life and history but is actively pursuing an equivalent of the Cultural Revolution, where wealthy and non-Liberal people, those that do not conform to the leftist thought are vilified....
The political changes after the 1949 Communist takeover also resulted in sweeping social changes, particularly the labeling of much of the former ruling class and intelligentsia as rightists and “revisionists,” “black elements” or “black gang elements.” Their houses were confiscated, and any items that did not conform to Mao’s values were smashed. Hardly any family with a problematic record against the system could escape the turmoil.
The USA is well on the road towards a debilitating socialism that focuses on massive social engineering that will eventually destroy what made that nation great.

I support any and all efforts to thwart this trend and take the country back even if they include violence.

Goin the wrong way.....

The Night of the Living Government. Government is no different than zombies. Good luck USA, you are in for a much more difficult period than anyone can imagine.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

This guy elaborates on my central thoughts....

Reducing or even eliminating most of the Federal Government will go a long way to reducing corruption, influence peddling and the power of individuals over elections and government officials. Why we give these people this much economic power is a complete mystery to me. With TRILLIONS of resources available to a small numbers of individuals instead of the millions that it is seized from, how could one expect that this massive pile of money will do nothing but attract many many people seeking a piece of this pie?

Passage of the day....

As a free market man, I see the Democrat Party as consisting of a collection of parasites on the productive economy that has lost any capacity to understand that they all depend on a healthy host. The groups regard the economy as a commons, and each is determined to loot as much as possible for as long as possible, regardless of the long term. Democrats make corresponding claims about the Republicans, of course.
I completely agree with these sentiments. And further add that I think that the only good Democrat is a dead Democrat. Unfortunately, when one considers the tragedy of the commons, Republicans have understandingly tried to take advantage of the resources before they are destroyed and have not been good stewards either.

For those of you that care, the above quote came from this interesting and worthwhile piece.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

The Sopranos....

Monday, April 20, 2009

Amazing media bias....

Is the media really think that it job is reporting or do the people that work there think that their jobs are to support Democrats an their leftist policies. As this reporter shows, at least she thinks that her job is to support the big government polices of the campaigner-in-chief.

Computer problems....

I was having trouble with my computer so I called Richard, the 11 year old next door whose bedroom looks like Mission Control, and asked him to come over.

Richard clicked a couple of buttons and solved the problem.

As he was walking away, I called after him, 'So, what was wrong?'

He replied, 'It was an ID ten T error.'

I didn't want to appear stupid, but nonetheless inquired, 'An, ID ten T error? What's that? In case I need to fix it again.'

Richard grinned. 'Haven't you ever heard of an ID ten T error before?'

'No,' I replied.

'Write it down,' he said, 'and I think you'll figure it out.'

So I wrote down: I D 1 0 T

I used to like the little shit.

Saturday, April 18, 2009

The coming disaster in healthcare.....

Worries over how the new world of personal healthcare in the USA is one that is being pondered in certain circles. Arguments that government will be able to ferret out inefficiencies and be able to properly ration healthcare is what Democrats are asserting these days.
Democratic blogger Ezra Klein appears to be positioning Dem health care reforms as a way to cut costs, on the grounds that a reformed system will be able to make "hard choices" and "rational" coverage decisions, by which Klein seems to mean "not providing" treatments that are unproven or too expensive--when "a person's life, or health, is not worth the price." Matthew Yglesias' recent post seems to be saying the same thing, though clarity isn't its strong suit. (He must have left it on Journolist.)

Isn't it an epic mistake to try to sell Democratic health care reform on this basis? Possible sales pitch: "Our plan will deny you unnecessary treatments!" Or maybe just "Republicans say 'yes.' Democrats say 'no'!" Is that really why the middle class will sign on to a revolutionary multi-trillion dollar shift in spending--so the government can decide their life or health "is not worth the price"? I mean, how could it lose?
How governments can make rational decisions over the value of any healthcare procedure unfortunately completely eludes me. How will they know all the moving parts inherent in any procedure overtime since all healthcare will be binary in nature -you will either have access to it or you will not.

Furthermore, the idea that a government will be able to deny healthcare to its citizens in any form is silly. Since its not their money, why do they have to be rational? The government will be subject to lobbying by drug companies, healthcare providers, trial lawyers and a raft of other interest groups that will ask for their piece of the pie. The pie will only get bigger and bigger and less and less rational over time.

And in socialized medicine Britain, one of the very models that the US communist Democrats want to emulate since it is so very successful, we find this...
A woman died in labour in a hospital lavatory after her induction was delayed because of a lack of specialist staff, an inquest was told yesterday.

Sarah Underhill, a policewoman aged 37, was in her 36th week of pregnancy when she was admitted to hospital suffering from pre-eclampsia.
Here. An its pregnancy and broken bones that the British healthcare system is suppose to handle so very well.

We will all be forced to endure government run, insect infested hospitals in the very near future that will be staffed by principally foreign born providers since working int he industry will become much less attractive to bright young people. I will laugh at all the mess that this will create as people will be dying horrible deaths that were unnecessary.

Friday, April 17, 2009


Instructions for how to prepare when the anti-Christ comes to visit you..... here.

For the fools that love paying your taxes....

Taxes in the US will become such a burden there, that the people will become poor.

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Regulation causes greater compensatory risk taking?

The Smithsonian magazine has an interesting article on risk compensation where some argue that humans compensate behavior to assume a certain level of risk. The argument, as illustrated by the adoption of seat belts and other safety devices into automobiles has not decreased traffic fatalities and injuries as much as would be expected since the increase in safety devices has allowed (not caused) people increase risky behavior. Furthermore, other areas of risk compensation are illustrated....
The phenomenon has been observed well beyond the highway—in the workplace, on the playing field, at home, in the air. Researchers have found that improved parachute rip cords did not reduce the number of sky-diving accidents; overconfident sky divers hit the silk too late. The number of flooding deaths in the United States has hardly changed in 100 years despite the construction of stronger levees in flood plains; people moved onto the flood plains, in part because of subsidized flood insurance and federal disaster relief. Studies suggest that workers who wear back-support belts try to lift heavier loads and that children who wear protective sports equipment engage in rougher play. Forest rangers say wilderness hikers take greater risks if they know that a trained rescue squad is on call. Public health officials cite evidence that enhanced HIV treatment can lead to riskier sexual behavior.
Glenzo calls the risk compensation phenomenon "the law of unintended consequences." As government foist well intentioned regulations and rules upon the populace, people change their behavior to accept risk in other areas. Some argue that in any endeavor, that people are willing to accept a certain amount of risk and so if risk is reduced in one area, it may raise in other venues.

I think that we can look upon the recent upheavals in the financial markets as a fine example of risk compensation and Glenzo's law of unintended consequences. One may ask themselves if banking has actually experienced a decrease in risk even with the heavy handed regulatory regime foisted upon this business since the 1930's. Banking seems to go through cycles where there are crises every 15 to 20 years or so.

Even when adjusting for government meddling in housing mortgage markets, banks seek risk and the compensation associated with that risk. If there is a banking crisis every 20 years, then bank executives can reap above economic profits by engaging in risky behavior during the good times, get paid for creating these profits and then taking losses for the relatively short periods of crisis.

Or if we think about deposit guarantees by governments where people's deposits are protected from losses in the event of bank failures. This creates an environment where people that make deposits do not differentiate between those banking institutions that engage in risky behavior and those that operate in very prudent manners. Those that are prudent cannot fund in the deposit market cheaper than those that engage in risky or very risky behavior since all deposits are guaranteed by one central agency and therefore carry the same exact risk. So there is a bias towards banks to engage in greater risk since even those that have riskier investment profiles can fund at the exact same cost.

Furthermore, when people these days argue that problems in banking require greater regulations, I think that this is folly. Bankers, given the foundation issues surrounding risk and rewards will ALWAYS find ways to create excess profits and will seek out the shortcomings in regulations and exploit them. They may-or-may not do it consciously but markets will ALWAYS seek excess profits in aggregate and create the systematic risk that these regulation seek to mute.

I argue that we must consider reducing government intervention and regulation and allow the markets to sort out the risk differentials associated with each aspect of the capital markets. There is value differential to the safety of people depositing their money in 'safe' institutions whereas some will seek out excess return by accepting greater risk compensated by greater returns.

I argue that we need to embrace the fact that we are humans, that we behave in a certain way, whether conscious or sub-conscious, and that we will ALWAYS have banking crisis's. When we finally understand this and that governments are incapable in reducing these risks and only capable of changing behavior and sometimes creating sub-optimal behaviors, then we can move forward. The only outcome of the current model is that governments will continue to meddle and risk taking behavior will one day cause even these governments to fail.

Sunday, April 12, 2009

Quote of the day....

President Barack Obama has recently completed the most successful foreign policy tour since Napoleon's retreat from Moscow. You name it, he blew it. What was his big deal economic programme that he was determined to drive through the G20 summit? Another massive stimulus package, globally funded and co-ordinated. Did he achieve it? Not so as you'd notice.
The Obamessiah's answers are tired socialist non-solutions to the typical problems that face every economy. Feed the fat boy more doughnuts to make him thinner and healthier. Nope Europe won't help on that.

And how about the conflict in Aghanistan? Europe has never pulled its weight there since no one liked GWB. So of course when the messiah shows up, he will get all kinds of help from these lazy but potentially helpful Europeans. Nope, just 5,000 non-combat troops. Maybe some better cooks from the French? Maybe some Spanish and Italian nurses? And of course, the Germans are great at drinking beer and whining. The Taliban must be very very worried.

From here.

So why did the worshipers in Europe not acquiesce to the messiah? Maybe because they know that all they need to do is to praise this clown and that will make him happy. We are in the best of hands.

Wednesday, April 08, 2009

Its patriotic to pay your taxes!!!!!

The Utopian wealth distribution of the current 'golden calf' administration in Washington, argues that it is 'patriotic' for the 'wealthy' to pay their taxes. The question that I have is....
Is it 'patriotic' for just the wealthy to pay their taxes? Or is it 'patriotic' for everyone to pay taxes?

-Glenzo, 2009-
It appears as if some of the Obamessiah's cabinet appointees were not very 'patriotic' since they did not pay their taxes. But I suppose that they are tireless good intentioned public servants so we can overlook their cheating on taxes. Lots of issues about these 'unpatriotic' Democrats?

But, also, apparently, 38% of all American taxpayers pay negative or no Federal income taxes....
About 38 percent of households have zero or negative income tax liability, but they pay other federal taxes.

Visually, its like this where the top 50% pay almost all of the income taxes....

Are poor people 'unpatriotic' since they do not pay income taxes?

More visuals here.

Of course, they pay Social Security taxes, but these are not considered income taxes since Social Security is something completely different. If we think that paying into Social Security is taxes, then maybe we could also claim that putting money into an IRA or into a 401K is also 'paying taxes'? So is Social Security REALLY government taxes or not? If it is taxes, then what is Social Security? What SS is besides just one gigantic Ponzi scheme still eludes me.

So the question is.... Since poor people pay little or no income taxes, are they 'unpatriotic'? Maybe, in fact, according to VP Joe "The Bloviator" Biden, they must be.

Tuesday, April 07, 2009

The deficit trials of 1917.....

I do not think that it will be that bad. All the US will do is repudiate its debt and pay cash for those things that we need.

Monday, April 06, 2009

Quote of the day....

After 35 years in America, I never thought I would see this. I still can't quite believe we will sit by as this crisis is used to hand control of our economy over to government. But here we are, on the brink. Clearly, I have been naive.
From here.

Sunday, April 05, 2009

When feeling a little untidy....

Mow the lawn. I don't get it?

Friday, April 03, 2009

Quote of the day.....

French President Nicolas Sarkozy says that the economic maelstrom that has captivated the world's attention for the last 17 months is "not a crisis of capitalism" but, in actuality, a breakdown of a system that has "drifted away from capitalism's most fundamental values."

From here. My opinion is that he is partially right. The United States has definitely drifted away from the basic tenants of capitalism and the basic tenants of American values starting 70 years ago. We have been on the slippery slope ever since. The World has played with Socialism since early in the last century. My question to the the statists, is "Whee has this socialism worked?" Soviet Union? Post WWII China? North Korea? The dead hand of socialism is the solution that Americans want today. It is the death of the nation.

History lesson; Conservatives vs. Liberals.....

For those who don't know about history... here is a condensed version:
Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.

The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:
1. Liberals
2. Conservatives

Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.

Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the Conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.

Some of these Liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.

Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer, mostly Bud. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Marines, airline pilots and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.

Here ends today's lesson in world history:
It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it.

A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to tick them off.

And there you have it.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have"---Thomas Jefferson

Thursday, April 02, 2009

How not to behave in Hong Kong....

Miss your flight in Hong Kong? Just throw a fit.

No sharkfin soup? Just throw a fit.

Banking Queen....

I love it!!!!!

Your government is going to police excessive executive pay. What is excessive pay? No one really knows? Really? There must be a book that defines excessive pay somewhere. Why bother restricting pay? Just tax all pay over a certain amount at 90%. Our government is filled with a bunch of fools. And Americans deserve everything that they get.

And new Central Government taxes on tobacco have just been announced. Why raise taxes on tobacco too? Remember that 95% of Americans were not going to see their taxes raise 1 cent? Why not make smoking illegal? Can't do it because it would bankrupt the States that depend upon the billions of dollars of these taxes.

I can only laugh at these idiots and await when the government finally implements the new "fairness doctrine" and squashes all opposition to their intrusions in daily life. Good luck. We will have more freedoms in China than in the US very shortly.

The government can do anything!!!!!!!

Welcome to the Obamanation!!!!!!

Wednesday, April 01, 2009

The Fatal Conceit....

Hayek's book, The Fatal Conceit,
attempts to conclusively refute all forms of Socialism by demonstrating that socialist theories are not only logically incorrect but that the premises they use to form their arguments are incorrect as well. To Hayek the birth of civilization is due to the start of societal traditions placing importance on private property leading to expansion, trade, and eventually the modern capitalist system. Socialists are wrong because they disregard the fact that modern civilization naturally evolved and was not planned. Additionally, since modern civilization and all of its customs and traditions naturally led to the current order and are needed for its continuance, any fundamental change to the system that tries to control it is doomed to fail since it would be impossible or unsustainable in modern civilization. Price signals are the only means of enabling each economic decision maker to communicate tacit knowledge or dispersed knowledge to each other, in order to solve the economic calculation problem.
If socialism was so wonderful, then would not North Korea, mid-20th Century China, the pre-1989 Soviet Union and the pre-1989 Eastern Europe have been much more dynamic than the non-socialist world?