We must cease this senseless war on marijuana and this unconscionable undermining of marriage law. The opposition (primarily) comes from the religious sector who attempts to make the morality argument. In both cases the proposal set forth is that both activities are moral evils and as such any measure to prevent (including willful law breaking not civil disobedience) them is considered heroic. The fault lies in that the arguments are based on appeals to emotion and authority, not logically rational discussion. Indeed on these issues it would appear that there are gross gaps and severe lacking of any rational reason for prohibition and mountains of impartial evidence on why both activities, under the social contract theory law is based on, should be permitted. It is the willingness of the populace to buy into the fallacies of the prohibitionists and the willful blindness of the consequences inherent in allowing those arguments to hold sway at the ballot box. We must, to progress socially and individually, see past these scam arguments to the facts and reason and carry that into the voting booth. Thoughts or comments?
Category Archives: IRS
The Bare Minimum
What is the job of the state? Ultimately it breaks down to (according to social contract theory) a responsibility to protect and provide for its citizens what they either can not provide for themselves or are in need of protection from. The job of capitalism is to make the most money with the least cost. Usually this eventually leads to paying the employee the least amount they have to pay. Without the intervention of the state, this amount will gradually approach 0. The state is needed to protect the worker from abuses that are inherent in a free market system. All of this is, of course, very basic but appears to be a concept that we have forgotten. Currently the federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. Let us assume that the rare miracle of a full time job pops up (a quick aside, when employers can’t decrease pay they will invariably decrease hours). Let us also assume that taxes will only decrease that wage by $0.25 per hour. Now we have a person that has the following income monthly: $1,120, which turns out to be $13,440 per year. Bear in mind that this person will pay on average $949 in rent alone per month (http://www.myapartmentmap.com/rental_data/) amd thus really makes around $200 per month for food, clothing, car affairs (gas, tax, registration, maintenance, etc.), and all the other trappings of life.
For some strange reason, no one has a problem with this. Those that do, manage only to increase the wage in their state to a few pennies more. Meanwhile, our paymasters in congress, the Supreme Court, and the executive are sitting on large salaries, multiple perks (pool, spa, vacations, only work about half a year but still get housing, etc.), and a complete disconnect from the plight of those who can’t even afford to see D.C. much less have a voice there. All of this is acceptable to the American Public it would seem. While those who work their fingers to the bone can barely survive, those who can’t even be bothered to lay aside their own wants for others unless its a press shoot, relax comfortably in their expensive offices, grumble at the “help”, and get drunk on the misery and misfortune they don’t even acknowledge exists.
What is the point of all this? Our government has been tasked with ensuring justice and liberty for all. It has failed. For over a decade now the people have cried out for an increase in wages to make ends meet. The government has shown it is deaf to those cries. Though it has the means and knowledge of how much is required to live with dignity, it has deliberately failed to put that to any use. We must choose to either accept things as they are and allow the injustice to continue, or claim our right to a government that cares and rise up against those who are apparently trying to starve their own citizens. Unfortunately the pleas of the people and the current system has failed to produce results. It is our duty, therefor, to get a living wage for all, whatever the means.
The New Hampshire Rebellion
The idea that the system is broken and needs to be fixed is by no means a new or novel one. Novelty arises in all the ways it could be fixed or should be fixed. To this end one in particular stands out as a plausible, albeit optimistic, way of changing things while still keeping the basic framework intact. Lawrence Lessig is the face of this and similar movements in The New Hampshire Rebellion which endeavors, in a nutshell, to use the loopholes and lack of campaign finance regulation to raise enough money to elect people who will ultimately get rid of those problems thus allowing future congressmen to be a truer representation of the people and therefore willing to pass laws that will address all of the other woes America has. In principle this seems to be a very accurate representation as to the root cause of our social ailments. At the moment, Representatives and Senators both are far richer than their constituency. They are also allowed to accept enormous sums of money from special interest groups which undoubtedly sways their vote on a great many things. This makes the run for Congress far less about platforms and issues and far more about who can pay enough to get their image out there favourably. All of these things are very true and in addressing the central issue of cash flow, the NHR would seem to have nailed it on the head.
Now I am by no means belittling Lawrence Lessig nor am I belittling his intelligence (he is nowhere near a stupid man and has many accomplishments to prove this). I do find fault though with his project in this, he has not accounted for the issues that allow the system to function this way to start with or at least has not underscored their importance. A little thought experiment can help illustrate one of the issues. Let us say that the NHR raises a sufficient amount of money to accomplish their goal (presumably electing at least 51% of both House and Senate and the President or 2/3 of both Houses without the President who are sympathetic to his cause and willing to actually implement it), and let’s say that the money is distributed to the individual candidates and said money is spent on advertising, campaigning, debating, and the whole lot. Then let us think about election day bearing in mind the platform has been campaign finance reform and apply the trends of the last several elections in regards to turnout. A problem should immediately come to mind, i.e. even spending as much or more than the other candidates the actual turnout is still not representative of even half of what the nation wants. Even if it were, it does not represent those who are almost perpetually forbidden to vote (the felons, illegal immigrants, legal immigrants in some places, even just minorities in some communities where they are “discouraged” from voting, etc.). It belies a very powerful idea that no amount of reform can change, i.e. we do not have “government by consent of the governed,” nor can we as long as we remain bound in our own chains and bound again by the immense effort put forth to keep us distracted from those chains.
Voter turnout aside (for that is within the change Lessig proposes) it is exceptionally optimistic to think the wealthy and powerful would stand by and simply let their gravy train be derailed. It is also optimistic to think that by uniting people under one flag that the other issues would be solved. After all, special interest groups do have a role to play in helping to protect the rights of those not able to get into the halls of Congress, they have simply gotten out of hand in their available power. Who is to say that by reforming Congress that it will not need reforming quickly again? After all, the source of power does not change, and even a Congress of this type can not strip money of its power; only the Fed (non-elected) could conceivably do that on any degree.
All this said, Lessig is a brilliant man and his ideas deserve merit, even this one. The issue of campaign finance reform is a vital one, and one that should have been reviewed long ago. It is simply too optimistic to think that the broken system can be fixed with the broken system. It is like hammering a nail in with a nail. Perhaps at one time if this issue had been addressed in this manner and if the people of America still had the time to wait for this change to happen would this be a realistic goal. The simple fact of the matter is that the system has given itself over to despotism and additional delays will only cause more unnecessary suffering. Now is the time for action, and Lessig is a valuable asset to that action, but the current plan as it stands simply won’t work. Something a little more drastic is required.
Sovereignty
Wouldn’t it be nice to have the ability to decide whether or not you wanted legal action taken against you? Unbeknownst to most people, the States and their employees (Governor, Lt. Governor, Sec. of State, etc.) as well as most federal officers (President, Congress and Supreme Court, which to respond to my Google+ comment yes it is odd for such a liberal judge to issue a stay outide of her power, but she also receives a large contribution from the mormons and the Supreme Court is no stranger to seizing unlawful and unethical power. As well as the Cabinet of states and the President which can claim sovereignty) all have this ability as well as immunity from all “minor” offenses (misdemeanors, which include Notary fraud and bribes under $5000). Justices of our Supreme Court can even claim more power (the Supreme Court’s power is specifically enumerated in he Constitution but since Marbury v. Madison they have been adding on powers under the guise of “Judicial Review”) AND has the ability to hold in contempt anyone who disagrees with them. They have little interest in justice (see Snyder v. Phelps and listen to the arguments of the justices as well as the announcement of their opinion and you can see their bigotry and complete ignorance of jurisprudence) and often times vote either to appease the public (DOMA ruling came only after a Gallup poll that said 73% of approved of repealing it) or to put themselves in the limelight because they know people forget about them (Snyder v. Phelps was issued not in the interest of protecting free speech, it was issued because Westboro Baptist “Church” was constantly in the news for their atrocious and repugnant behavior as well as Ms. Phelps complete moronic arguments in the Arizona courts). Congress passes law that benefit their pocket books and the President has no courage to challenge any of it. Yet we, as Americans, allow them to continue their behavior and give them infinite “Get Out Of Jail Free” cards with not one qualm. We refuse to hold them accountable (STILL doing the Electoral College and not direct vote), and live in fear of criticizing them or even being civilly disobedient.
What do you think? Should Sovereignty still exist and if so why? Should the people hold everyone in office accountable to their oath to defend the Constitution and represent the will of the people or are things working out just fine as they are? What do you think?
A NOTE WESTBORO BAPTIST CHURCH IS NOT PART OF ANY BAPTIST DENOMINATION AND HAS BEEN DENOUNCED BY ALL OF THEM FOR THEIR MESSAGE OF HATE AND IGNORANCE. THEIR ACTIONS (PRIMARILY PROTESTS AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES), IF EVALUATED BY THE IRS WOULD PROBABLY CHANGE THEM FROM A 501(c)3 (CHURCHES, RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS, ETC) to a 503(b) (SOCIAL CLUBS, AND SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS). THEIR STATUS AS A CHURCH IS DUE TO MS. SNYDER (THEIR “ATTORNEY” WHO HAS NUMEROUS BAR COMPLAINTS FOR UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR).
James Bianco, Valeyard
Welcome Back! Part 1 of “The Ideal Government”
I apologize for the delay but I have been contemplating a solution to the problems inherent in our government. At the moment our government is inefficient, overpaid, not listening to their constituency, spying on their own people as well as their own allies, and has on numerous occasions threatened the very existence of our Union. In the Senate they have misused the power of unlimited debate to simply block the passage of laws that the people desire (Filibuster). In the House they have refused to use their power to remove elected and/or appointed officials who have transgressed the public trust (Impeachment). The laws passed rarely reflect the desire of the people and those elected are rarely qualified to do what a public SERVANT should do. Our elected officials are wealthy and indulgent while the average American is middle class and quickly losing all they own to the wealthy. Those in power have made sure that power is retained by the wealthy and prohibit those who represent the interests of the middle class from possibly winning an election (winning an election is directly related to the amount of money put into a campaign, rather than platform or qualifications). Watching Congressional Hearings and speeches is a cavalcade of idiocy. Congress refuses to do what we pay them handsomely for with most speeches given to an empty house and debates are nearly non-existent. Congress does not alone share in this damnable indictment. Our President ignores and acts directly opposite to the people, delegates authority to his bureaucracy who creates law (regulations carry the force of law) not based on true science, but on those they pay to create the conclusions they wish. The Department of Defense, the IRS, INS, CIA, FBI, US Marshalls, NSA, FDA, and most importantly the DEA all infringe on liberty unnecessarily, harass the populace continually, and refuse to listen to science, unless it involves groups like the MPAA (who rely on obscure and unwritten rules. Literally, they just watch a movie and make an arbitrary decision) or special interests who pay to have their “science” justify a particular regulation. The President has become a neutered dog and parrots whatever sound bite sounds good. Rather than lead our nation, he allows ignorant and bloated morons whose pay and benefits are NOT commensurate with their qualifications and who rely on inaccurate data to lead us to fear everything from Marijuana to trans fats (Its amazing how both have been around forever and never caused massive problems until Bloomberg (Sieg Heil Bloomberg!) banned them and now just looking at trans fats can cause a heart attack)(Also, just to clarify, neither trans fats that are in even soda pop and marijuana, which the AMA and numerous other truly scientific agencies have approved in its smoked form as a medicine and is SUBSTANTIALLY less dangerous than the legal drug Alcohol).
Finally, the Judiciary has overstepped its bounds in that they have claimed the right of judicial review without any good reason (read Marbury v Madison) and without approval of the people. They have created and vetoed laws which is not their right. They have ignored the Court of the People, prohibited representation to attorneys which only they can license even when representation by a non lawyer is desired. They have prohibited private criminal prosecution despite it working in every other civilised country and exists now only in despotic regimes. They make access to the court and records expensive and difficult to obtain for all but the wealthy. Judges are corrupt, preferring to stay with the old boys club where they listen and give deference to anyone with a JD, even when the other party has a valid case. Judges do not understand or know the law and attorneys bend the rules and are allowed to. Any question of a judge or attorney will place someone in contempt. Judges are bloated, ignorant, incapable, overpowered, overpaid, and refuse to apply the law equally, even to the point of discrimination.
This is a short indictment of our system and so through the next few weeks I will show you how to fix this. Perhaps with any luck we can call a Constitutional Convention and fix this system that is slowly but surely destroying this nation I love. Let me know what you think would be part of a better government!
The Valeyard 