The men who start out with the notion that the world owes them a living generally find that the world pays its debt in the penitentiary or the poor house.
Categories
It doesn’t seem at all surprising that New York Mayor Bloomberg supports both his unconstitutional anti-Big Gulp paternalism and his now-overruled “Stop and Frisk” police state nastiness. It’s “for our good,” not any wise dedication to principle, that he wants to prevent us from drinking big sugary sodas, and “for the peace” that he wants police to stop and manhandle thousands, millions of “suspicious looking” people.
Both policies clearly impinge on individual liberty. The former, in that it prevents people from peacefully doing what they want. The latter, in that it treats innocent people as guilty, as “suspicious” just because of the way they appear — mainly their clothing choices, age, and (especially) race.
The judicial ruling is, in its own way, inspiring. “The goals of liberty and safety may be in tension, but they can coexist,” Judge Shira Scheindlin writes, adding that “the Constitution mandates it.” The ruling is also something of an education, for the judge notes that it’s not her business to make policing effective. It’s to make policing constitutional. Constitutional limits are necessary to rein in the potential of government to morph into tyranny.
And “stop and frisk” sure seems like tyranny to the people continually harassed on the streets. After all, the judge found that “the stopped population is overwhelmingly innocent, not criminal.” Treating innocent citizens like criminals doesn’t inspire respect for the law.
And it sure is nice to see Bloomberg take another big gulp from a judicial ruling limiting his power.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Say we have evidence that entrepreneurs can build roads, railroads, and other means of transport even without government-spewed largesse and macro-mismanagement.
Would President Obama tell us?
Considering the man’s wonted denigration of individual achievement, probably not. Why should mere track records put a damper on his lust to conclude that social cooperation as such, especially as shoved and molded by government, somehow renders individual achievement less pivotal or praiseworthy? “You didn’t build that,” not all by your little lonesome, the Discourager-in-Chief says of anyone too proud of personal accomplishment; government’s always been there to help, however hinderingly.
Turns out, though, that as historians Larry Shweikart and Burton Folsom detail in a recent article, we do “build that,” even roads, when allowed to. Nothing about getting from here to there is intrinsically gotta-be-made-by-government.
The authors observe that auto makers put cars in “almost every garage” long before the 1956 Highways Act. They “began building roads privately long before [governments] got involved.” Businessmen also helped build the first transcontinental highway in 1913.
Before the Civil War, railroads were built and financed privately. When government decided to push for transcontinental railroads, the only continent-spanning railroad to be consistently profitable was the only one not scooping federal stimulo-funding: James J. Hill’s Great Northern.
What about, earlier, Robert Fulton’s steamboat? Was the steamboat able to ride the rivers even before subsidies for canals?
Must airports be government-owned?
Read the whole thing.
You too, Mr. President. It is, after all, a brief brief. But if you are looking for longer accounts, complete with footnotes and citations of primary documents, they are available, too.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Categories
William Graham Sumner
It is the supreme test of a system of government whether its machinery is adequate for repressing the selfish undertakings of cliques formed on special interests and saving the public from raids of plunderers.
Categories
Townhall: Obama vs. Snowden
For this weekend’s Common Sense column, click on over to Townhall.com for the Obama vs. Snowden showdown. Sneak back here for more intel:
- Transcript of President Obama’s Aug. 9 News Conference
- Washington Post: “Obama announces proposals to reform NSA surveillance”
- Policy Mic: Transcript of Snowden interview with Glenn Greenwald
- Reason: “President Obama Claims He Was Totally Moving Forward on Reviewing Surveillance Operations Before Edward Snowden’s Leaks That Let Us All Know About Them”
- The Guardian: “NSA loophole allows warrantless search for US citizens’ emails and phone calls”
- The Hill: “Obama approval drops to 42 percent”
- Washington Post: “Privacy concerns rise after NSA leaks”
- Cato Institute: “Opposing Bulk NSA Surveillance”
- Townhall: Obama – “We’re going to have some problems here”
- Common Sense: Welcome Debate?
- USA Today: “Mr. President, is NSA debate really welcomed? Our view”
- Washington Post: “Privacy board meets with Obama”
Categories
William Graham Sumner
If I want to be free from any other man’s dictation, I must understand that I can have no other man under my control.
Categories
Video: Justin Amash on Obama’s “spy” lies
Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) fields questions from Laura Ingraham, guest-hosting on The O’Reilly Factor:
Categories
Boris Yeltsin
Liberty sets the mind free, fosters independence and unorthodox thinking and ideas. But it does not offer instant prosperity or happiness and wealth to everyone. This is something that politicians in particular must keep in mind.
Writing about Walmart is like reading The Nation: neither is as much fun as shopping at Walmart.
At Walmart I get good deals. In The Nation I get skewed analysis. Just look at the old progressive rag’s online “petition” to Walmart:
While Walmart rakes in annual profits of more than one billion dollars, the average hourly wage of a Walmart sales associate . . . is just $8.81. That translates to an annual salary . . . far below the federal poverty level for a family of four.
On top of being unjust, Walmart’s low wages come at a high price for American taxpayers: a recent report revealed that, because the retail giant’s employees are forced to utilize government benefits to supplement their meager income, a single Walmart Supercenter could cost taxpayers from $900,000 to $1.7 million per year.
Typical: there’s so much left out.
What would Walmart workers’ wages be if Walmart hadn’t employed them? More? Not plausible. Walmart’s mom-and-pop competition typically pay lower wages.
Net effect: Walmart lifts workers out of poverty.
Whose responsibility is it to feed “a family of four”? The employer of one family member? No. The parents in the family, who might be morally compelled to develop more lucrative skills or a plan for abstinence. (Of course, many Walmart workers are single, or have spouses or parents who work as well.)
Recently, a Walmart bigwig got a bit testy and sent out an email noting that The Nation has been paying its interns a monthly stipend of $150 per week, far below the minimum wage.
Normally I’d defend The Nation’s (and the nation’s) internship policies. But for now let’s just chuckle.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Categories
Boris Yeltsin
You can build a throne with bayonets, but it’s difficult to sit on it.