This content is not yet available over encrypted connections.

Liberal Democracy

Liberal Democracy
The Free State

Friday, April 11, 2014

Liberty Pen: John Stossel- Technically That's Illegal: Rules and Regulations That do Not Make Sense

Source: Liberty Pen- Amy Sattley-
Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat 

Good rule for government: Don't propose new rules unless you actually understand your current rules and are able to enforce them.  That might seem obvious but, in a lot of cases, that's what makes government inefficient.  The rule books are not understandable, even by the people whom taxpayers pay to enforce them.  There are so many rules that some of them are unenforced because of lack of resources, or the rules are poorly written, or unnecessary. Another good rule would be don't outlaw things that don't involve one person hurting another innocent person. Instead concentrate regulations to protect the innocent from predators. Not protecting people from themselves. Tobacco is a dangerous product, but unless someone is being forced to smoke, or face worst consequences like being physically hurt, or killed, don't outlaw tobacco. And instead regulate it. And that would just be one example of a possible overregulation. 

The Obama Administration gets stereotyped as a proponent of big government, overtaxation, and over regulation, but they've decided, led by Attorney General Eric Holder, that they aren't going to enforce marijuana prohibition on using and possessing small amounts.  They are going to enforce the prohibition on selling marijuana only in states where it is illegal.  They are doing this to conserve resources for use in higher priority areas of law enforcement. Now I think the Federal Government shouldn't outlaw marijuana anywhere (for adults that is). But if the Obama Administration were really big government over regulators, (lets say) then they would enforce current Federal marijuana as is. Instead of using their right to prioritize how they enforce Federal narcotics laws. And the reason why they've weakened marijuana enforcement, is because they're responsible for so many more other Federal regulations. And decided that arresting adults simply for using, or possessing marijuana, shouldn't be a high priority. 

The U.S. tax code is another great example of runaway regulation. Through things like corporate welfare, special breaks for the wealthy that allow for them to essentially not pay Federal income taxes. As well as Congress not supplying the IRS with resources to enforce this bloated tax code.  I'm not looking to increase the size of the Internal Revenue Service but they are only human and there's a limit to what they can do. So if you are in government, make sure that you understand your proposed new rules and that the people who'll have to enforce them understand them as well. Again we just need to use basic commonsense here. Are we writing laws to discourage individual decision-making and thinking and trying to make individual decisions for individuals? In other words attempting to protect people from themselves. Or are we writing and enforcing laws to protect the innocent from predators that would hurt them. If it's the ladder than those laws might make sense and be useful. But if it's the former than those laws will probably be wasteful, because they're unnecessary. 
Liberty Pen: John Stossel- Technically That's Illegal

Tvalex Crewson: Prime Minister's Margaret Thatcher's First Speech at the White House 12/17/79

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat

This speech was given about three weeks after the Iranian hostage crisis in which Iranian Islamists took fifty Americans, working at the U.S. embassy in Tehran, hostage in November of 1979.  This was Thatcher's first visit to Washington after becoming Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, about three months earlier. She ran on a platform of completely changing Britain's Democratic Socialist ways and moving past a welfare state that tried take complete care of all citizens.

Prime Minister Thatcher wanted to create an opportunity and entrepreneurial society where Brits would be able to take care of themselves.  She did not want the British government to be running major sectors of the economy.  She wanted energy and aviation to be run by the private sector.  She was certainly not a socialist  nor even a liberal, conservative, or even a libertarian in the American sense.  By American standards, the best way to describe her would be as an economic progressive.

Prime Minster Thatcher didn't want to eliminate the welfare state in Britain but she didn't want the welfare state to take care of people who could take care of themselves if they just had a good job.  She thought that the government should not try to run people's lives and that Brits should be permitted to manage their own economic affairs.  The results, in terms of where Britain was economically when she took over in 1979 and when she left office in 1989, show that she was very successful.