NYTimes: Ron Paul answers your questions, Part 1

Posted on November 14th, 2008 by bile Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment »

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/…

Do you love the smell of libertarianism in the morning? If so, today is a good day for you.

INSERT DESCRIPTIONRon Paul

Last week we solicited your questions for Congressman Ron Paul.

There was such a big response (more than 400 comments) that we have split Paul’s answers into two batches, the first of which is posted below.

Thanks to Paul for his answers and all of you for your good questions.

Q: What was your first thought when you found out McCain chose Palin as his running mate?

A: At first, I thought it was a pretty savvy choice from a political perspective. I also knew that she had said some nice things about me in the past. At the same time, I knew that to be on the ticket, she would have to toe the line on foreign policy and the war, so that tempered a lot of my enthusiasm.

Q: Who in Congress would you consider to be your closest peer(s)?

A: There are a lot of members who I work with on a variety of different issues. Walter Jones is a good friend and works with me on foreign policy. Often on spending, if there is a 432-3 vote, the other two congressmen voting with me are Jeff Flake and Paul Broun. A lot of times, I work with Democrats on civil liberties issues.

I guess my point is that people from all over the political spectrum can side with liberty and the Constitution. The goal is to get a majority to vote that way most of the time.



Read More…

Some good news from this election

Posted on November 5th, 2008 by bile Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 3 Comments »
  • Ralph Nader, the Libertarian Party, the Constitution Party, and the Green Party will all substantially increase their raw vote totals over 2004.
  • Ron Paul received 2.2% in Montanna and 0.5% in Louisiana. Third place in both.
  • Ron Paul kept his districts House seat.
  • Few of the Ron Paul candidates won. Lamborn of Colorado 5th District and McClintock of California 4th District. It’s been questioned however whether Lamborn is an actual RP backed candidate.
  • Maine rejects sales taxes and medical claim fees to fund state health program.
  • South Dakota voted not to ban abortion.
  • Massachusetts decrims marijuana.
  • Michigan voted to allow medical marijuana.
  • Washington voted to allow for allowing some terminally ill adults to obtain lethal prescriptions.
  • Arizona shot down requiring revocation of business licenses of any employer who knowingly hires illegal aliens.
  • Colorado fails to define human life as beginning at fertilization.
  • Nebraska bans discrimination and preferential treatment by the State.

Let me include the bad:

  • Few of the Ron Paul candidates won. Lamborn of Colorado 5th District and McClintock of California 4th District. It’s been questioned however whether Lamborn is an actual RP backed candidate.
  • Colorado fails to ban discrimination and preferential treatment by the state.
  • Colorado fails to prohibit mandatory union membership and mandatory union dues.
  • Arizona bans same sex marriage.
  • Arizona shot down requiring that a majority of all registered voters approve any initiative with spending or tax increases.
  • Arkansas bans unmarried cohabitating couples from adopting or being foster parents.
  • California establishes the nation’s first comprehensive farm animal rights law.
  • California shot down expanding treatment programs for nonviolent drug offenders. (better then prison IMO)
  • California banned same sex marriage.
  • Florida bans same sex marriage.
  • Massachusetts overwhelmingly rejects getting rid of state income tax.
  • Massachusetts bans dog racing.
  • Montana provides government funded health insurance coverage for as many as 30,000 uninsured children.
  • North Dakota votes against reducing or eliminating income tax.
  • Oregon votes against requiring that teacher pay and job security be linked directly to classroom performance.

The Department of Homeland Stability?

Posted on October 26th, 2008 by bile Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

http://www.investmentnews.com/…

The financial services industry yesterday called on Congress to enact sweeping regulatory reforms, including creating a “stability regulator” to oversee systemic risk in all financial services firms.

Among those calling for a “financial markets stability regulator” was Timothy Ryan, president and chief executive of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association of New York and Washington.

The U.S. financial markets regulatory structure dates back to the Great Depression, he noted.

In contrast to that time, “financial institutions no longer operate in single product, or business silo, or in purely domestic or local markets,” Mr. Ryan told the House Financial Services Committee, which held a hearing on revamping the financial regulatory structure. “Instead, they compete across many lines of business and in many markets that are largely global,” he said.

However, the U.S. financial regulatory structure “remains ‘siloed’ at both the state and federal levels. No single regulator currently has access to sufficient information or the practical and legal tools and authority necessary to protect the financial system as a whole against systemic risk,” Mr. Ryan said.

Spoken like a true believer in centralized economic planning. Good luck with that. Perhaps you should check with the USSR and Mises to see how well that works out.

Worried about your 401k? Perhaps you should be moreso.

Posted on October 23rd, 2008 by bile Tags: , , , , , , , , , , 3 Comments »

http://www.usnews.com/…

House Democrats recently invited Teresa Ghilarducci, a professor at the New School of Social Research, to testify before a subcommittee on her idea to eliminate the preferential tax treatment of the popular retirement plans. In place of 401(k) plans, she would have workers transfer their dough into government-created “guaranteed retirement accounts” for every worker. The government would deposit $600 (inflation indexed) every year into the GRAs. Each worker would also have to save 5 percent of pay into the accounts, to which the government would pay a measly 3 percent return. Rep. Jim McDermott, a Democrat from Washington and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee’s Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, said that since “the savings rate isn’t going up for the investment of $80 billion [in 401(k) tax breaks], we have to start to think about whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 billion for a policy that’s not generating what we now say it should.”

http://www.workforce.com/…

Under Ghilarducci’s plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3 percent a year, adjusted for inflation.

The current system of providing tax breaks on 401(k) contributions and earnings would be eliminated.

“I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s,” Ghilarducci said in an interview. “401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won’t have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break.”

Under the current 401(k) system, investors are charged relatively high retail fees, Ghilarducci said.

“I want to spend our nation’s dollar for retirement security better. Everybody would now be covered” if the plan were adopted, Ghilarducci said.

Argentina did it… why not the USSA?

Fascism for the win: US government to own shares in major Wall Street companies

Posted on October 14th, 2008 by bile Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment »

http://www.bloomberg.com/…

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson urged banks receiving $250 billion in capital injections from the government to use the funds to spur economic growth.

“We must restore confidence in our financial system,” Paulson said at a press conference in Washington. “The needs of our economy require that our financial institutions not take this new capital to hoard it, but to deploy it.”

With the equity purchases, Paulson is using more than a third of the $700 billion in government support Congress gave him the authority to use on Oct. 3. He didn’t identify any of the lenders. People familiar with the plan said nine companies will get $125 billion: Citigroup Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Wells Fargo & Co., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp., Merrill Lynch & Co., Morgan Stanley, State Street Corp. and Bank of New York Mellon Corp.

Mussolini would be tickled.

Paulson said the Treasury will dedicate $250 billion for boosting bank capital through preferred stock purchases. The regulators said in a statement that “thousands” of financial companies would participate.

Participating banks will need to accept limits on executive pay and so-called golden parachute payments. They also will need to give the Treasury warrants for an amount equal to 15 percent of the senior preferred investment, with a strike price determined by the bank’s share price at the time of issuance.

The senior preferred shares will pay a dividend of 5 percent for the first five years and 9 percent after that, the Treasury said. The purchase price of the stock will be the market price of the banks’ common shares at the time of the transaction. Companies will be able to buy back the equity at par after three years.

The possibility for this to turn out bad is pretty high. Even should the companies buy back their shares and the government get out completely from this setup… the precedent alone is incredibly dangerous. What will this mean for these corporations? How involved will the government get? Now that they are partial owners all previous barriers are gone.

It just gets worse by the day.

Reason.tv’s Drew Carey Project Episode 20: Get Some! - How to Fix America’s Health Insurance Crisis

Posted on October 13th, 2008 by bile Tags: , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment »

reason.tv’s Nick Gillespie isn’t making a run for the White House, but he knows how to get coverage to at least half of the 45 million Americans who need it. And while Barack Obama and John McCain argue about who’s got the best health care plan, each ignores the simplest solution. Call it the Gillespie Plan: If you want health insurance, get some.

“Of people currently classified as uninsured, a conservative estimate says about 45 percent of them would be able to get health insurance right now if they wanted it,” says economist Glen Whitman. That estimate comes from a study headed by a Johns Hopkins University researcher, which separates those who could get insurance into one of two categories: Those who earn enough money to buy it, and those who qualify for existing government programs.

So how about some real straight talk for a change? If we separate those who can’t get coverage from those who can, we can focus more on helping the needy. “So if you can get coverage,” says Gillespie, “don’t wait for Washington. Go on out and get some.”

“Get Some” is written and produced by Ted Balaker. The director of photography is Alex Manning.



Free State Project 4

© 2008 blog of bile is powered by Wordpress