I.O.U.S.A., I Want a Refund

I.R.I.P.O.F.F.U.S.A.

After the conclusion of the film, the premier’s rather schizophrenic benediction was staged by panelists Walker, Peterson, billionaire investor Warren Buffet, chairman William Niskanen of the pro-Fed CATO Institute, and some hack from AARP. In their best ‘Ah Shucks, folks’ corn pone delivery, they told their assembled Omaha audience (and the multitudes in theaters coast-to-coast, struggling both to keep awake and their dinners down) that the scary bad old film really didn’t mean it. Everything is really alright with the U.S.A. We’ve been in tight scrapes before and we always pulled through. Americans simply must save more and spend less. We need to tighten our belts and cut out all that nasty partisanship in Congress. I kept waiting for Mickey Rooney, Judy Garland, and the Andrew Sisters to rush onstage and break out in a chorus of Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah! Nothing was ever said about our draconian welfare-warfare state, its American Empire based in 130 countries, and their sinister symbiotic relationship with their enablers, the Federal Reserve, the real source of the problem supposedly addressed in the film. But then no one ever expected them to either.

The I.O.U.S.A. Scam

Writes Tim Moore: “The initial impression of this circus was somewhat promising, until the marquee lit up. The farcical exhibit was nothing more than a marketing vehicle in brand recognition for Peterson, Walker, and Novelli. All of whom are fully involved in the ServiceNation national servitude movement and their upcoming summit in NYC on Sept. 11/12. As expected, McBama will be headlining and any reference to the memory hole will be obliterated.”

Movie: Save the State

Writes Keith Mercer: “I just read the posts about IOUSA. I am quite familiar with Bonner and Wiggins work and went to see the film because they were involved. I was quite disappointed, not so much surprised, but disappointed.

“It started out OK with an amusing clip with Steve Martin.

“There was also an unintentionally amusing part later. They portrayed Bill Clinton as an heroic, paragon of fiscal responsibility, which caused a significant portion of the theater to literally laugh out loud.

“The theme for the movie can be summed up in one section. We are told that Eisenhower forced the British to leave the Suez Canal by threatening to trash their currency. The British had to comply because they were dependent on us to finance their debt. Then we were told in an ominous tone, that many historians consider that moment to be the end of the British empire.

“The message of the movie is clear. The state is in trouble and it is time for all good Americans to come to its aid by paying more taxes and saving more money, by force if need be.

“We were shown clips from the 40’s of various celebrities encouraging Americans to buy bonds. We were told that our parents and grandparents faced similar crisis and pulled together to pay higher taxes and buy govt. bonds.

“In case anyone missed it, the point was driven home several times during the panel discussion, which was worse than the movie. We were told repeatedly by Buffett that we don’t pay enough taxes. And the idea of forced savings was received warmly.

“When the event was over, my impression was that they are all statists and they are all in a panic because the state is in trouble and they want us to save it.”

Tim Moore notes how the some of the same people responsible for I.O.U.S.A. are also coalition members and sponsers of Service Nation.

He links to blog of bile too which is nice to see. In a weeks time we get plugged on FTL, Stefan Molyneux trying to log into blog of bile the other day (i’m assuming, username attempted was ‘freedomainradio’ and ’stefbot’ and they came from Canada, the login IP wasn’t in my visitor log oddly enough) and linked from one of the highest ranked libertarian blogs available.

http://www.nytimes.com/…

In years to come, when the oil-and-gas billionaire David H. Koch attends a gala performance of New York City Ballet or City Opera at Lincoln Center, the building he enters in black tie will bear his name.

Mr. Koch, recently called the wealthiest resident of New York City, has agreed to contribute $100 million toward the renovation of the New York State Theater, which is home to the two companies. His gift will be the largest private capital donation in Lincoln Center’s history and a triumph in a period of growing economic uncertainty.

“They seem to like me there, and I like them, so I think we’ve got a deal,” Mr. Koch, 68, said in a telephone interview on Wednesday from Boston, where he was traveling. “Its obvious that this theater needs modernization.”

“I’ve been going to the New York State Theater for 40 years,” he said. “I can assure you, I would not make a gift of this magnitude unless I was absolutely convinced that the quality of the work was world class.”

Mr. Koch, a major contributor to the Republican Party and supporter of conservative causes, was the vice presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980. In 2003 he helped establish the nonprofit Americans for Prosperity Foundation, which supports free-market policies and promotes government spending limits. It split off from an earlier Koch-backed enterprise, now called FreedomWorks, which promotes similar goals.

He’s on the board of directors for both the Cato Institute and the Reason Foundation.

There is just something wrong about all this…

The things that the libertarian movement could do with that kind of money. Assuming McCain/Feingold didn’t exist think of what the Ron Paul or Bob Barr campaigns could do with half that? Or what the Free State Project could do with 1% of it?

It’s one thing for a “libertarian” not to give money to the cause. It’s another to voluntarily give money to the State. Why not buy this theatre? Why not build your own? It’s not like he doesn’t have the money to cover the extra cost.

http://arstechnica.com/…

State bureaucrats have converged in Washington DC for a two-day conference on REAL ID compliance. Panels cover such topics as how to get the required funding, how to meet the Act’s deadlines, and how to share data across states.

One session in particular caught the eye of Jim Harper, director of information policy studies at the Cato Institute (Full disclosure: I’m an adjunct scholar at Cato). It’s a panel discussion called “Bringing your public onboard for smoothing legislative changes.” The summary states that “every State DMV needs to find a way to educate their public so that they can ensure the legislature changes necessary to become Real ID compliant.” The panel will also “examine how much of your (i.e., the DMV’s) budget a public relations exercise is worth.” Such a “public relations exercise” would presumably be conducted at taxpayer expense.

Fascist police state. It’s going to be really interesting the next few years. I really hope the several states stick to their guns and refuse to implement REAL ID. It could be a very important showdown. Knowing that it’s unconstitutional I wonder if the federal government has the guts to bring it before the Supreme Court.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22148

In May, the Commonwealth Fund issued its latest comparison of the U.S. medical system with five other wealthy nations’ systems: Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand and Great Britain.

Predictably, the study begins: “Despite having the most costly health system in the world, the United States consistently underperforms.”

I was immediately suspicious, considering the loaded study by the World Health Organization seven years ago. (I wrote about it last week.)

Michael Cannon, the Cato Institute’s director of health policy studies, summed up what’s wrong with the study: “The report does nothing more than reveal which nation does the worst job of satisfying the subjective preferences of the people who conducted this study.”
Fans of the Canadian system should note that Canada ranked fifth out of six and did worse than the U.S. in many ways.

I love how this and the WHO report go out of their way to make the US system look bad without it looking so bad as to be unbelievable. Since most people only read the headlines or the overall ‘rank’ assigned it makes it easy to sneak the truth by the public. It’s interesting how they weight having computers to print medication lists the same as receiving preventive care. Equity doesn’t go into detail as to what ’sick’ means when people don’t go to the doctor when sick. Lots of people don’t go when sick because it’s not necessary. How many of those in the UK (who’s 1st in equity) go just because they can? I’ve read that the elderly will make appointments because they are lonely and in some UK hospitals they’ve had to introduce a small copay to keep them from wasting the doctors time. Freedom will drive down health care and insurance prices and keep our quality up… not more government regulation.

http://www.cato.org/…

A major farm bill being debated in Congress gives policymakers a good opportunity to cut costly subsidy programs. Farm subsidies cost taxpayers up to $35 billion annually and tie farmers in a knot of unproductive regulations.

Most farm programs originated in the Great Depression of the 1930s, but they make little sense in today’s more prosperous and dynamic economy. Here are 10 reasons for Congress to reconsider the need for farm programs and to begin cutting them:

Government subsidies… get rid of ‘em. No more nanny state economic programs.
According to The CATO Institute: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)

• Will spend $89 billion in 2007, or $774 for every U.S. household
• Operates 198 subsidy programs, listed here
• Employs 105,000 workers
• Administers 7,400 offices across the nation
• Oversees 1,791 pages of laws and 10,720 pages of regulations
• Imposes 84 million hours of paperwork burdens on Americans