Skip to main content

Posts

Anything You Want to Do

If you conceive of freedom as somehow the *right* to do anything you want , or the *right* to do anything you want with no ill consequences, then the entire reasoned structure of rights disintegrates into just another philosophy of might makes right.    Take the example even of a  desert island. Even there, a single person can not 'do anything they want' - not in the context of: *and continue living* or *continue living with comfort or security.* Reality itself dictates that the human being must spend of his/her life time acting based on reason to secure values necessary to continue living and live with any kind of comfort or security. How a human persists in conscious existence - what is necessary for that to occur - is dictated by the real nature of a human - his physiology - his physical needs - and the means (reason) - by which he must secure values in the existence in which he finds himself. Here are some conclusions from the  example: Yes, on a desert island, you are fre
Recent posts

Something for Nothing

You will often hear the claim that those supporting socialism or any form of collectivism want "something for nothing."    Do they still get the benefit of the doubt?  I mean, do we still believe that the folks supporting collectivism in whatever form are really aiming at something for *nothing?*   I frankly can't believe it any longer.  I think they know exactly that what they want is "something from somebody else."   Could there really be some left who think the state somehow produces wealth from which to distribute?  I suppose.  But it can't be an appreciable number any longer.   I recommend we no longer give the collectivists even the benefit of the doubt in our common speech.   There has never been, in the history of the world, 'something' for 'nothing.'  Ever.  And they know it.   I think the reason so many are attracted to the socialists or collectivists, is that they have no experience with well maintained law, and lots of experie

True Rights and Morality

Thanks to our very fuzzy state indoctrination, many think that property rights means a right to property, rather than a right to defend the property /goods one has either created or for which one has honestly traded. "Right to property" vaguely subsumes a right to have property of some sort provided by 'somebody' -- usually the faceless, nebulous 'country,' or 'people,' or 'state,' or 'taxpayers,' or 'government.' Since every material value / good / commodity / service is brought to a usable and available state by the work of actual individuals spending a portion of their lifetime, life effort, and life thought - literally using up some of their time,thought, effort on this earth - it is a contradiction to say that one individual has a 'right' to be provided with any property / good /service at all. Why is it a contradiction? Because a right to 'be provided' something that requires the expenditure of another pe

Inflation

From Mises "Human Action" terms inflationism and deflationism, inflationist and deflationist, signify the poIitica1 programs aiming at inflation and deflation in the sense of big cash-induced changes in purchasing power. The semantic revolution which is one of the characteristic features of our day has also changed the traditional connotation of the terms inflation and deflation. What many people today call inflation or deflation is no longer the great increase or decrease in the supply of money, but its inexo- rable consequences, the general tendency toward a rise or a fall in com- modity prices and wage rates. This innovation is by no means harmless. It plays an important role in fomenting the popular tehdencies toward in- flationism. First of all there is no longer any term available to signify what inflation used to signify. It is impossible to fight a policy which you cannot name. Statesmen and writers no longer have the opportunity of resorting to a ter- minology accept

U.S. Law as Crime

Money in Politics

Again campaign finance issues are being bandied about.   The solutions forwarded are all of the kind that proposes some new method of corralling the horses after they're out of the barn.   This is typical of horse thieves who hope to nudge the corrective process to favor their own thieving ways, but put the clamp on the competition rustlers.   This means, how can we write legislation to shut up the opposition and prevent financial support from going to our competition in the political arena.   This means, a directed attack on free speech.    The solution is much more simple.  If you really truly want to stop money from influencing the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government, then separate, as much as humanly possible, the government from economics.   Money in politics is buying MUCH MUCH more money for those choosing to "invest" this way. The 'earmarks,' and all the rest are simply paybacks for bribe money. We must stop government from b

Self Interest

The disingenuous or mentally lazy immediately suggest that self interest means just whacking everyone else over the head and taking their stuff. That is one absurd extreme. Just a consideration of my personal interest in the division of labor shows how asinine that view is. Once you agree that your life is your own, meaning your time, your thought, your effort, and the products thereof, then you are done with the political or governmental question. The government, group, tribe, nation, state, whatever, does NOT have any right to the products of your life effort. That leaves the second question. Morally, what ought you do for the total stranger in need. It is easy to see the rightful self interest in helping a friend or family member return to his/her own self sufficiency. Of course, there too, enabling them to become dependent moochers is NOT helping them. So you have to be careful in discerning what effect your 'help' is having, in every case. So. The stranger in nee