We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
I can pretty much guarantee that this will not be bought by an American, but it will be snapped up fast by some Arab prince, Russian oligarch, South American crony capitalist, or some such international low-life. Nice commission for the realtor. I don't really like the layout (no gun room, no servants' quarters, slave quarters, or space for multiple wives/concubines), but the view sounds good.
One of the deadliest threats with which government has ever had to contend, over the entire pageant of human history, was the immense wealth and mass affluence generated by the industrial revolution. The usual metrics point to the exponential growth of goods and services from 1750 until 1914 if not 1929.
Exponential growth of what we call the private or the “real” sector of the economy—everything that is not government—means that government also has to grow exponentially in order even to be detectable. Moreover, one can ask: if exponential real-sector growth occurs over the long run, what possible need could civilization have for government?
If you're looking for a new outlet for the absurdity of Progressive Elitism, it's available now. Vox.com is up and the first article caught my eye because the headline was something I agree with 100%. How Politics Makes Us Stupid.
It's a fun read, if you're up for it. Because Ezra Klein spends quite a bit of time discussing how we willingly delude ourselves into wanting to win battles we can't win. The problem, of course, is that Ezra only spends time using examples of topics that are contentious and don't have clear-cut answers. Ezra deludes himself with politics, becoming increasingly stupid through the course of the article, without even noticing it, and using it to create a stance of moral superiority built upon...well, not much.
Strong start with the title. Pretty pathetic follow through. Ezra doesn't spend a moment questioning himself or his beliefs, or how he could have fallen victim to the accusations he lays against others. Furthermore, he doesn't take the time to analyze some critical philosophical points which are more meaningful than the numbers he claims support his view. Choice, to me, outweighs all the perceived (and I'd say non-existent, though I know the math says otherwise) benefits of forced behaviors. I should have the choice to get a vaccine. I should have the choice to own a gun. I should have the choice to own a Hummer. Even if Ezra feels the benefits of forcing me to believe what he believes, and behave as he behaves makes him feel better about society as a whole, I should still have that choic
It's not about the math he employs, it's about the choices I should be permitted to be able to make.
Why
are so many people still out of work?: the roots of structural
unemployment - See more at:
http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/04/why-are-so-many-people-still-out-of-work-the-roots-of-structural-unemployment.html#sthash.zcP03Frm.dpuf
Expulsion is the correct response to threats, not "conversation."Oppressed by the Ivy League - What Dartmouth's president should have told bullying students.
The CEO of Mozilla, Brendan Eich, was forced to step down over a personal belief. This is what our country is coming to. You can't have a belief if it is not in line with that which is approved by the shrieking masses.
It's worth noting his donation has been known about since 2008. It's also worth noting Eich penned a blog post about his donation and how it did not conflict with his position, that his role as CEO was to pursue Mozilla's goals regardless of whether employees agreed with his personal views or not.
This is not enough anymore. As this author notes, your views are meaningful and can play a role in what happens to you. Should they? If I disagree with much of what Donna Shalala supports, should I prevent my child from attending her university even if it's the best place for him to go?
I don't agree with most of Zuckerberg or Gates' political views. I still use their products. I fail to see what led to Eich's ouster. They hired him knowing his views, they may have expected a backlash, but felt they could deal with it. They should have.
I opposed gay marriage legislation, too. Admittedly, for wholly different reasons, since I think gay people have the right to be as miserable as the rest of us married folk. I opposed it because I just don't think government is the proper guarantor of contract, or grantor of right, of marriage. Were Martha and George Washington married? As far as I can tell they were, though not necessarily, because the US government didn't exist when they got married. In fact, government involvement in marriage was originally designed as an exclusionary tool, not an inclusive one. The earliest laws were designed to prevent miscegenation. The easiest way to avoid the discussion is to simply say government shouldn't have passed any laws preventing people who consent to marriage from entering that contract. Since I opposed gay marriage legislation, could I suffer the same fate as Eich? Quite possibly, in our intolerant society, I could, because I don't support laws giving special exceptions to existing laws, I just want to do away with those laws altogether.
Personal views are personal views, and as long as Eich was cognizant of his long-term goals as CEO, and didn't let his personal views impact his treatment or management of people within the organization, then he should have been kept on. Otherwise, his removal is an act of cowardice and shame.
...leading Progressive defenses of freedom of expression, such as Zechariah Chafee’s, relied on utilitarian considerations and not on freedom of expression as a fundamental individual right. Progressives identified freedom of speech as a civil liberty to differentiate it from what Progressive understood to be the obsolete, individualist, natural-rights based liberties of the American past. While activist government was inimical to such rights as liberty of contract and property rights, it arguably buttressed a Progressive case for freedom of speech. According to Progressive advocates of constitutional protection for freedom of expression, the more active a role played by government, the more important it is to ensure that public policy is subject to vigorous and uninhibited debate. Such debate not only could bring important considerations to light, but also could serve as a check on those who would use public power for private gain, which in turn would lead to better public policy, which in turn would create a welcome demand for even more government.
Freedom is not utilitarian, and not meant to be. Freedom is, by nature, messy, difficult, and contentious. Furthermore, freedom is not meant to help government, or to help anything in particular other than the human spirit. If anything, freedom is meant to be against government power. Where is Breyer coming from?
America is not a government. America is a bunch of individual people. Who bankrolled Tom Paine's writings? The wealthy Tom Jefferson did, as I recall, out of his own fat pocketbook.
Yes, the 1st Amendment lives to fight another day. Maybe New York was right to insist on the Bill of Rights. Should never have been necessary, though. The fascists and statists hate it.
Every comment I have read or heard about this terrible incident is ignorant beyond belief.
In fact, all too ignorant and stupid for me to respond to. This time, I have neither the time nor the inclination. It's tragic, unavoidable. There is no perfect safety from either nature or from human nature, and any perfect safety would be a living death.
The Kochs are needed to counterbalance Soros. If you want to do character assassination, Soros is a Jewish Nazi collaborator, a market manipulator, and a convicted felon. How's that for starters?
Official
Policy: Male Federal Workers Can Use Women's Restrooms, Locker Rooms -
See more at:
http://cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/official-policy-male-federal-workers-can-use-womens-restrooms-locker#sthash.FjcOgjgH.dpufKoch: I'm Fighting to Restore a Free Society - Instead of welcoming free debate, collectivists engage in character assassination.The Kochs are needed to counterbalance Soros
Who's been getting rich in the US? It's not the 1%, it's not even the 0.1% - it's the 0.01%
Do we all really hate and envy those star athletes, pop stars, movie stars, TV stars, inventors, successful entrepreneurs, and captains of industry? I sometimes envy their talents, skills, and money, but I sure don't hate them.
I agree with that. (I also believe that not all poverty is via 'culture of poverty.' There are a thousand sorts of poverty, including genteel poverty.) Dr. X summarizes that debate:
Is racism fundamentally causing the problems that afflict large swathes of urban black America or does an independently self-sustaining culture itself account for the afflictions? I think many people all too readily take one position or the other, feeling certain about it. I don't see things as quite that tidy. Jonathan Chait and Ta-Nehisi Coates have been hashing this out in a series of posts. Begin here with Coates, then a reaction from Chait, response from Coates, then Chait answers.
The United States passed its first sugar tariff in 1789, before Rhode Island got around to ratifying the Constitution. We’ve had some major public-policy changes over the years — abolishing slavery, women’s suffrage, direct election of senators, gay marriage here and there — but the sugar tariff stays and stays, the economic version of drug-resistant syphilis. It is a matter of pure political power: The sugar producers believe that the price that Americans are willing to pay for sugar is not the right price — which is to say, it’s a lower price than the one they would prefer — and so we pay more thanks to the cowardice of Congress and the predictable victory of the producers’ concentrated benefits over the consumers’ dispersed costs. As Willi Schlamm said, the problem with capitalism is capitalists, a motto that should be engraved in marble above the entrance to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
I agree that it is unfair and market-distorting - just like 1000 other government "favors."My view is that I want the Feds to have less money, less power, and less control.
Plato,
Rawls and the Liberal 'Comfort Zone' at Harvard - See more at:
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2014/03/plato_rawls_and_the_liberal_co.html#sthash.t65m8fsX.dpuf
I plan to turn on every piece of electric I have. Make some banana/strawberry daiguiris with the blender, too. Electricity is the greatest invention ever, and it deserves one hour of celebration and gratitude.
"Even with its too-high, too-fast assumptions, the recently leaked draft of the IPCC impacts report makes clear that when it comes to the effect on human welfare, "for most economic sectors, the impact of climate change will be small relative to the impacts of other drivers," such as economic growth and technology, for the rest of this century. If temperatures change by about 1C degrees between now and 2090, as Mr. Lewis calculates, then the effects will be even smaller.
Indeed, a small amount of warming spread over a long period will, most experts think, bring net improvements to human welfare. Studies such as by the IPCC author and economist Professor Richard Tol of Sussex University in Britain show that global warming has probably done so already. People can adapt to such change—which essentially means capture the benefits but minimize the harm. Satellites have recorded a roughly 14% increase in greenery on the planet over the past 30 years, in all types of ecosystems, partly as a result of man-made CO2 emissions, which enable plants to grow faster and use less water."
Fasten Your Seat Belts – Yet Again? – Fabled money manager, Jeremy Grantham did a recent, rather sharp-edge interview with Fortune. He was very critical of Fed policies, claiming they were ineffective and/or counterproductive. At the end, he seems to be looking for an imminent roller coaster ride in the stock market. Here's a bit:
Okay, but then I guess that means you think stocks are going higher? I thought I had read your prediction that the market would disappoint investors.
We do think the market is going to go higher because the Fed hasn't ended its game, and it won't stop playing until we are in old-fashioned bubble territory and it bursts, which usually happens at two standard deviations from the market's mean. That would take us to 2,350 on the S&P 500, or roughly 25% from where we are now.
So are you putting your client's money into the market?
No. You asked me where the market is headed from here. But to invest our clients' money on the basis of speculation being driven by the Fed's misguided policies doesn't seem like the best thing to do with our clients' money. We invest our clients' money based on our seven-year prediction. And over the next seven years, we think the market will have negative returns. The next bust will be unlike any other, because the Fed and other centrals banks around the world have taken on all this leverage that was out there and put it on their balance sheets. We have never had this before. Assets are overpriced generally. They will be cheap again. That's how we will pay for this. It's going to be very painful for investors.
Man
Arrested for Public Consumption of Iced Tea Urged to Take a “Deal” from
Prosecutors - See more at:
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/man-arrested-for-public-consumption-of-iced-tea-urged-to-take-a-deal-from-prosecutors_032014#sthash.0kaZdyYd.dpufBoko Haram: How a Militant Islamist Group Emerged in Nigeria
Consumers 
Image from 
Nomination For The Biggest Single Fraud On The American Consumer: Vitamins
Image stolen from 
I agree with Bernstein: 
A friend took that pic of a gamer at a gamer convention in Boston last week.
The incredible 
Thanks to our pal at 