Libertarian Ramblings

Let’s keep marriage the way it’s supposed to be

Posted by gravisman on November 5, 2008

Marriage, in it’s most classical sense, is the joining together of a well-to-do man and a lovely young woman. Man has money, girl has beauty, and a transaction is made. The man gets exclusive rights to a fertile vagina, and the woman is taken care of and financially secured.

What’s blasphemous today is all these beautiful young women marrying men with no money. This has got to be stopped. The ideal couple is, and always will be, a 20 year old full chested young girl to a 60 year old white man. We don’t want our nation’s children being raised by poor people, do we?

We, the people of the State of California, have spoken by passing Proposition 8 and defining marriage to be between a man and a woman. This is a great step toward maintaining its sanctity and denying rights to those who have no business claiming them. Now it’s time to take the next logical step and allow marriages of only 18-25 year old girls to white men 60 and older with 6 figure net worths. Only by denying rights to all the “new age” hippies can we achieve a truly moral society.


Posted in Elections, libertarian, Politics, Rants | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Free Market Government

Posted by gravisman on October 28, 2008

Link – Dealing with Police

Posted in Ideas, libertarian, philosophy, Politics, Videos | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Peter Schiff: Don’t pay your bad mortgage

Posted by gravisman on October 15, 2008

Spot on, as usual.

Posted in Links | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Getting it right

Posted by gravisman on October 12, 2008

“They should FIRE Bernanke and Paulson, and have people like Peter [Schiff] on the helm of US economy.”

The above is a response I read to this video of Peter Schiff dispensing his usual free market based economic wisodom. I felt this worth a comment because it’s important to not simply recognize who is speaking with logic, but to get the whole picture right.

What’s wrong with that quote is the idea that someone should be “at the the helm of the US economy.” The logic that makes Peter Schiff’s words ring so true is based on markets doing what markets do: setting prices and exchanging goods based on supply and demand. The idea of free market by definition shuns leadership (dictatorship) by some individual or set of individuals.

So, while I see little wrong with firing Bernanke and Paulson, let’s remember to get it right – we don’t need Bernanke, Paulson, Peter Schiff, or anyone running the economy – markets and the players in those markets can handle themselves.

Posted in libertarian, Rants | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

A bailout would be unethical

Posted by gravisman on September 28, 2008

I’ve already posted on the logic of why a federal bailout of wall street firms is a terrible idea economically. That should seem obvious to anyone. Government management of economic matters only ever does one thing: artificially affects prices. Printing money inflates the system artificially and drives up prices of everything. Using the Fed to set low interest rates artificially drives down the price of money (more precisely, the price of debt). Purchasing insolvent “illiquid” assets drives up the prices on those assets in the sense that it keeps them from falling down to a level where the market would actually be interested in purchasing.

Artificial pressures on prices are unfair and unethical to the players in the economic system. They always result in bad investment, because goods are being traded for something other than a real market value. An accumulation of bad investment always ultimately results in an economic bubble that must burst to correct itself. That is the nature of economic systems – people must pay the price for poor investment.

Just as much as the initial government pressures that influenced and supported poor investment were unfair to the market, so too is the action of propping up that failed system with an artificial bailout. This prevents the market from draining the bubble, as needs to happen, and course-correcting so that prices and investments can return to a sound state.

In addition to all this economic logic, there is one overriding reason why bailing out ailing investment firms with federal money is completely and entirely unethical, and it has nothing to do with whether doing so will fail or succeed. The simple fact is that the mob (some people call it government) has no right to decide that it needs $3000 dollars of my money (probably more than that, but a rough estimate based on the taxes I pay and the budget for the bailout) to help some private companies that have nothing to do with me, and do this without my consent.

If the bailout plan passes congress and I attempt to withhold $3000 of my tax money, men with guns will certainly come for me and throw me in prison. That is insane! Our people must wake up and recognize that there is an ethical element to government and how it spends its money and how it takes money from the people that cannot simply be ignored. Just because we have the infrastructure in place to take money from citizens whenever we want and spend it on whatever we want does not make it right.

Government should be allowed to collect some taxes and spend them on courts, transportation, non-aggressive defense, and other matters of reasonable infrastructure. The mob cannot take my money just because it paternalistically thinks it knows how to spend it to help me better than I can spend it to help myself. That is truly insanity.

Posted in libertarian, philosophy, Politics, Rants | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

Intervention is the problem – not the solution

Posted by gravisman on September 18, 2008

Posted in Campaign for Liberty, libertarian, Videos | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

What Iran crisis?

Posted by gravisman on September 1, 2008

If citizens of the United States have the right to keep and bear arms, why should the member states of the world not have the right to keep a military? Nobody spends more on their military forces than the United States, and somehow we like to act as though it’s wrong for someone like Iran to develop strength as well. The idea of nuclear non-proliferation is as insanely unfair as saying that anyone who hasn’t yet gotten broadband internet should never be allowed to have it. Nothing like setting the rules expressly against those who are already behind.

I titled this post after reading an article that asked the question of how the US should deal with the “Iran crisis.” The thought of Iran as somehow posing a crisis situation for our country belies a disturbing reality existing in the political thinking of the United States. How can we view a nation as presenting to us a crisis when they have done nothing to either us or anyone else, and they have not threatened to take any aggressive action toward us or anyone else.

Our invasion of Iraq was unfounded enough, but at least they had something to be framed as a history of aggression, even if that history was more than a decade old when we decided we must destroy them.

The way we treat other countries both reflects our current attitudes toward individual rights and inevitably shapes the evolution of those attitudes into the future. If we view Iran as a problem when they have not even done anything to hurt any other country, then what stops us from passing more and more laws to criminalize people haven’t hurt anyone else? The war on drugs has seen enough innocent people just trying to live their own lives put behind bars. If we continue down this path, we are sure to see more of the same.

My question remains, in the end, what Iran crisis?

Posted in libertarian, Politics, Rants | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Ubiquitous Wifi

Posted by gravisman on July 9, 2008

Sometimes people criticize me or libertarianism in general for being too cold and seamingly selfish. They argue that people can do great things if they work together. Frankly, I couldn’t agree more. People naturally work together to accomplish their greatest work. This is why we form corporations, and is really the heart of free enterprise and capitalism. One of the greatest benefits of true liberty is the freedom to work together and to find great ways to work together without governmental meddling.

One of the greatest ways in which we could all work together for mutual benefit is right at our fingertips in millions of homes across the USA. I’m talking about ubiquitous wifi. Ubiquitous wifi is the idea that virtually wherever you go, there will be an open wifi network with which to connect to the internet. We already live in a world where you can pick up a wifi signal almost anywhere, but the odds of that signal being unencrypted are getting lower every day.

The basic logic behind locking down wifi networks with encryption is that people don’t want others leeching their connection. Ok, that makes sense. But, what if you could share your connection under the expectation that most of the time nobody will be using it anyway, and even when they are, you probably won’t notice, and then in return you could have the awesome reward of accessing others’ connections wherever you go. The small loss of bandwidth you would give up to allow visitors on your network from time to time would be greatly overshadowed by your awesome ability to connect all around whatever city you live in.

I understand that we’re all sort of stuck in a prisoner’s dilema here. Everyone is afraid that they will be the only one to open their network, and people will leech off them without getting any benefit. I think this is a movement worth starting, though. Open your network. And when you do, put a comment saying “I opened my network.” After that, tell everyone you know or meet with a closed network that they should open theirs, too. Even in the beginning you can quickly get positive benefits by having easy access to the internet whenever you’re hanging out at any of your friends’ houses – because you will have made all them open their networks. With one circle of friends all enjoying easy access, you can grow from their. Things can only get better.

Posted in Ideas | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

Free people get to have fun

Posted by gravisman on July 2, 2008

The above video is a bit of hilarity from the very talented ventriliquist Jeff Dunham. The next bit is a collection of responses to the video posted by MobLogic.

“Most of the people who watch these videos are racist.” What?! My message to anyone who finds racism in this video, or any joking of this nature: you are the ones giving legitimacy to any ideas of real difference, and thereby promoting racism – not the rest of us who are just having fun.

One of the great concepts of slander is that in order for something to be truly slanderous, it must be considered believable by a normal person. If someone posts a video joking that Libertarian Ramblings can’t even write a complete sentence, it can be easily left as simply a joke because it’s so obviously untrue. If I fight back on behalf of my blog and cry foul, it can only be from the perspective that it’s possibly true, and thus hurtful. Thus, it’s not the joke that brings bad light on LR, but the cry of foul play that suddenly brings people’s attention to the thought that maybe LR really does suck.

Additionally, embracing difference is generally considered to be a part of anti-racism, anti-sexism, etc. Embracing difference means we don’t avoid ever making mention of differences or potential differences – we don’t ignore them. Embracing difference means acknowledging that it’s ok to have differences, and so differences becomes a thing of smiling and laughter, not a thing of hate, as some pretend they must be. These people push what I call “tolerance by ignorance” – make everyone appear to be exactly the same and ignore all differences. If we can’t actually handle differences, then what the hell is the point?

The fact is, if we’re a free people, we can be free to embrace our idiosyncratic differences – even those that are associated with identifiable groups of people. More than that, we can be free to have fun with those differences; to make jokes and to laugh. What is freedom worth without laughter anyway?

Posted in Rants, Videos | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

The government’s most blatant act of slavery

Posted by gravisman on July 1, 2008

I was reading this argument against the Supreme Court’s recent decision on D.C.’s handgun ban when I felt it necessary to comment on one of the laws I’ve always found most perplexing: it’s illegal to commit suicide. WTF? 

If I own a television set, I’m perfectly within my rights to break it. If I own my refrigerator I’m perfectly within my rights to unplug it. If I own a pig I’m perfectly within my rights to kill it. If I own my own life I’m perfectly within my rights to break it, to unplug it, or to kill it, right? The answer is, unequivacably, YES. The problem is, the government has never been of the belief that you own your own life!

You are a citizen, and as such the government views you as a piece of its property – a pawn in its games, both international and domestic, for power. You may notice that it can be perfectly legal for the government to kill you in different scenarios, whether at the hand of police or the courts. Since the government thinks it owns your life, that seems perfectly reasonable. Any attempt to end your life by anyone other than the government – including yourself – is seen as an attempt to steal the government’s property, and thus it intervenes with its legal forces.

The idea of the government claiming ownership over people’s lives in this manner is horrendous, especially when viewed with the realization that we are born into this country and this government without ever having a choice about it. We could not be given a chance to consent to a life of citizenry and governance before we are thrust into this life, and yet even after the choice is made for us and we are capable of choosing for ourselves, the option of revoking consent is deemed illegal.

It is clear what is going on. We are slaves to the government toward the end of continued economic production, military power, and physical reproduction so that the government maintains a steady supply of slaves. Couple this with the illegality of vagrancy and we see the full circle: it’s illegal to leave life, and it’s illegal to do nothing with it. In this way the government drives its slaves toward continued achievement of its ends.

Posted in philosophy, Rants | Tagged: , | 3 Comments »