No Texting While Driving sign ILLINOIS — A man was startled to receive a text message from a strange number chastising him for using his cell phone while driving. After admittedly taking a phone call during his daily commute, the driver received an unsolicited text message from a number he had never seen before. It read: “Get off the phone when you are driving!” The sender then provided an identity of “Illinois State Police Officer Robinson #54367.” Police State USA was alerted to this strange new enforcement technique directly from the driver, who wished to remain anonymous. After interviewing the driver and seeing the message directly on his phone, there is little to doubt about his story. (Police State USA)
From the April 11 Seminar: Inflation: Causes, Consequences, and Cure. A seminar for High School and College Students (Six Videos) Click here for the Youtube playlist of the event.
In her latest hit piece on the Mises Institute, WaPo’s Jennifer Rubin quotes a David Weigel hit piece on the Mises Institute in which Weigel attacks David Gordon and Ralph Raico for daring to criticize Winston Churchill. The occasion for these remarks is a comment made by Rand Paul about American policy before 1941: “There are times when sanctions have made it worse,” Paul said. “Leading up to World War II, we cut off trade with Japan. That probably caused Japan to react angrily. We also had a blockade on Germany after World War I that probably encouraged some of their anger.” It’s not my job to defend Rand Paul, but as Weigel notes, these ideas are likely influenced by this
Gary Galles writes in today’s Mises Daily: Both the minimum wage and rent control, despite the fact that the first forces prices up and the second forces prices down, reduce the quantity of the good in question exchanged. That makes them counterproductive “solutions” to the problems faced by those who are unable to sell enough of their labor services or unable to purchase enough housing services. But the rhetoric employed disguises the fact that they make the central problem worse rather than better. For the low-skilled, minimum wage advocates frame the issue as “If you could earn more per hour, you would be better off.” But that sneaks in the false assumption that wanting to work more at higher wages
[A follow-up this Mises Daily article.] I think we can all agree the Feds, in their usual fashion, have employed unwarranted thuggery in their attempts to shut down the Bundy Ranch. Just as the Feds could have arrested David Koresh when he left his compound (which he often did) they instead chose to employ the usual shock-and-awe tactics that are so beloved by federal agents. Bundy lost his case in federal court, and he lost the appeal, so as Judge Napolitano points out here, the feds could simply have put a lien on the property, but they instead resorted to violence by stealing cattle and knocking around protestors. As far as the legal case goes, however, it’s pretty clear that
Like us on Facebook, Follow us on Twitter and Instagram.
Frank Chodorov When the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified just over a century ago, there was no concern that IRS abuses would extend to 501c4 applications for nonprofit status from groups “unfriendly” to the administration in power. Such tax code proliferations were never anticipated. Careful observers of the income tax from the perspective of American ideals and history, such as Frank Chodorov, focused on how income taxation would undermine Americans’ liberty. As he put it in The Income Tax: Root of all Evil: The American Revolution…[established] a government based on a new and untried principle, namely, that the government has no power except what the governed have granted it…in 1913, when the government was invested with the power to confiscate private
One of Rawls’s best papers is “Two Concepts of Rules”. I’m going to discuss one aspect of it here. I’m assuming you’ve read the paper, or at least read a good summary of it. If not, this post will seem obtuse. Rawls points out that there is a distinction between justifying a particular move within a game and justifying the game itself. Inside the game, what justifies players’ and referees’ decisions is adherence to the rules. But we can step outside the game and ask why we should have those rules and not others, or why we should even play that game at all. So, for instance, we play basketball for fun, entertainment, and profit. But when referees decide whether
It usually begins with Ayn Rand, wrote Jerome Tuccille back in 1972, and so it did with me. My first exposure to libertarianism was Rand’s novel, The Fountainhead, and it didn’t take long before I adopted her strong rights-based view of libertarianism as my own. Heck, I even started my own student club, with the appropriately deferential, Rand-sanctioned title and everything. I grimace a bit on reading that interview again now. I still think The Fountainhead is a terrific book. And I still think there is a lot to admire in Rand’s fiction and (somewhat less so) in her explicit philosophy. But as one might surmise from the title of this blog, I’ve moved quite some distance from Objectivism in terms of political philosophy. Up until
Tonight’s live episode of The Independents (9 p.m. ET, 6 p.m. PT, on Fox Business Network, with repeats three hours later) will, like last night’s, feature as fill-in host yours truly. As a result, like last night’s, tonight’s associated blog post will be brief. Oh–go to Facebook to decide what we’re talking about in our second panel with Gavin McInnes and Sherrod Small: That new immigration study, or the standoff in Nevada. Basically, we’ll be kicking off the show with an extended slam on the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA, which fills me with a very special rage. Coming on will be Trisha Moon, a resident of Canada who tore up her citizenship because of the damn-fool law.