This commentary from the Wall Street Journal reflects some of what I’ve been feeling in the past few weeks. The people have gone to the polls and elected themselves a social architect. In the book Atlas Shrugged, the author details how a relatively small economic downturn balooned into the [...]]]>

The art for a 1999 postage stamp.

This commentary from the Wall Street Journal reflects some of what I’ve been feeling in the past few weeks. The people have gone to the polls and elected themselves a social architect. In the book Atlas Shrugged, the author details how a relatively small economic downturn balooned into the full scale collapse of civilization as the government enacted hundreds of anti-competition, redistributive give-aways, and ‘essential need’ projects ‘designed to stimulate the economy.’

Short Civics Lesson:

The office of the President is so named because his job is to ‘preside‘ over the executive branch of government. The word executive essentially is just the power to enforce laws made by the legislature, and is only granted other power in Article 2 of the Constitution. The legislative branch is granted only those powers enumerated in Article 1 of the Constitution.

But that lesson can be ignored because it is ‘widely conceded’ that the federal government can do pretty much anything it wants, whenever it wants, in any manner it wants.

I’ll just note, laws in general are good and necessary. The Bush administration made some horrible mistakes that lead to ‘John Galt’ style engineers taking positions in finance companies and applying their ingenuity to the distribution and packaging of debt, when they could have been applying their brilliance to technology, science, or even better policy. The world is a worse place because of this. But that does not justify the rampant spending of trillions of taxpayer dollars in ways that reward foolish decisions.

Hat Tip to Ryan Gleason who sent me the WSJ commentary.

Basically, a few policy groups are asking the legislature for some laws that have applied to media content before the Internet, to be applied to Internet content. It makes intuitive sense to me until I realize that the government should have no right to regulate media [...]]]> Google actively lobbying against it.
Michael Geist describes the situation in detail.

Basically, a few policy groups are asking the legislature for some laws that have applied to media content before the Internet, to be applied to Internet content. It makes intuitive sense to me until I realize that the government should have no right to regulate media content in the first place.

It reminds me of the proverbial candidate for class president who promises CocaCola in the water fountains.

The list of expensive stuff he wants to do is only offset by his increases in taxes that will shrink the economy. He hasn’t mentioned a single program that he wants to stop, just programs he wants to start [...]]]> http://www.barackobama.com/issues/technology/

It reminds me of the proverbial candidate for class president who promises CocaCola in the water fountains.

The list of expensive stuff he wants to do is only offset by his increases in taxes that will shrink the economy. He hasn’t mentioned a single program that he wants to stop, just programs he wants to start and expand.

Back to that point, When the author [...]]]> This was posted 2 years ago, and I just now found it. I have now seen it 3 times, examining it closely for any idea that I even in part disagree with. The only point I have found is a minor one that can wait until you’ve seen the clip.

Back to that point, When the author says that people should stop asking their governments to initiate force on their behalf, it assumes democratic governments. Dictators pursue ownership of the life and liberty of their subjects as an objective for their own life. And may cause global atrocities without the deliberate consent of their people.

—- Original Message —–From: [...]]]> I don’t know for sure that Mr. Paskel is the gentleman who authored this text. But I thank him for forarding it. I especially thank Jerry Holsworth for sending it to me. I don’t beleive in forwarding emails myself, but I encourage my friends to read my blog, so I’m posting this here.

—- Original Message —–
From: Stanley L. Paskel Sr.
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 9:18 PM
Subject: What is a Billion???

The next time you hear a politician use the word ‘billion’ in a casual manner, think about whether you want the ‘politicians’ spending YOUR tax money.

A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of its releases.

A. A billion seconds ago it was 1959.
B. A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive.
C. A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age.
D. A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet.
E. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate our government is spending it.

Add to this list: A billion grains of salt fills a bathtub.

UPDATE: I don’t know how long this has been circulating, but I just recalculated how long it takes to blow through a billion dollars. According to figures in this white house report, it takes the federal government 3 hours, 7 minutes, and 48 seconds to spend a billion dollars.

There is a lot more to this email and you can see the rest at GoogleDocs.
I highly recommend it.