Archive for the ‘government’ Category
Citizens’ Funding of the Nation’s Elections
December 22nd, 2008
Recently, Lessig posted a two-part election reform proposal for comment:
I propose a two part “citizens’ funding of the Nation’s elections” bill:
(1) modeled on the clean money systems of Arizona, Maine, and the Durbin-Specter bill in Congress, this part provides national funding to candidates who meet a threshold of support. That funding would be designed to enable a candidate to compete effectively in a race for Congress, or the Senate, with the precise amount determined by the cost of media in the particular districts;
(2) inspired by the Obama campaign, every candidate would be free to supplement national funding by an unlimited amount raised through small contributions (I recommend a ceiling of no more than $250 per citizen but keeping it small is the key).
While this appears to be a noble cause to some, my reply makes clear how ignoble I feel it actually is:
By what right does one have to limit how I choose to spend my money? As a business owner, by what right does one have to limit my expenses?
Lessig, I am sure your goal is well-intended but do you value your liberty and that of others so little that you propose its loss as a solution?
Doesn’t it seem wrong to any of you that this proposes the loss of your liberty as the solution — and if this were to pass– that loss would be kept from you by force?
The real solution is clear: there is little reason to bribe someone with little power.
How we limit the power given to those likely to be bribed is the real problem here, not how are we to further limit the liberty of individuals.
Recently, Lessig posted a two-part election reform proposal for comment:
I propose a two part “citizens’ funding of the Nation’s elections” bill:
(1) modeled on the clean money systems of Arizona, Maine, and the Durbin-Specter bill in Congress, this part provides national funding to candidates who meet a threshold of support. That funding would be designed to enable a candidate to compete effectively in a race for Congress, or the Senate, with the precise amount determined by the cost of media in the particular districts;
(2) inspired by the Obama campaign, every candidate would be free to supplement national funding by an unlimited amount raised through small contributions (I recommend a ceiling of no more than $250 per citizen but keeping it small is the key).
While this appears to be a noble cause to some, my reply makes clear how ignoble I feel it actually is:
By what right does one have to limit how I choose to spend my money? As a business owner, by what right does one have to limit my expenses?
Lessig, I am sure your goal is well-intended but do you value your liberty and that of others so little that you propose its loss as a solution?
Doesn’t it seem wrong to any of you that this proposes the loss of your liberty as the solution — and if this were to pass– that loss would be kept from you by force?
The real solution is clear: there is little reason to bribe someone with little power.
How we limit the power given to those likely to be bribed is the real problem here, not how are we to further limit the liberty of individuals.
Posted in freedom, government, liberty | Comments (0)
An Economic Race to Third-world Wages?
July 7th, 2008
Recently I had a conversation with Paul_W regarding a piece I wrote for NowPublic. The conversation happened in the comments section of the article, so I will just reproduce it here. Enjoy!
—
Paul_W
at 01:40 on June 12th, 2008
“While Pinker’s questions are valid their conclusions do not appear to be consistent with how China is growing both technologically and scientifically.”
Were it not for Western capital investments in China and greedhead capitalists outsourcing their fellow Americans jobs to China, China wouldn’t have such growth “both technologically and scientifically”. But ‘Muricans are too stupid to realize that. Keep voting Republican and Democrat. Let’s all enjoy our economic race to third-world wages.
futureprogress
at 03:47 on June 12th, 2008
I don’t think invoking the stupidity of Americans is important to your argument. Namely, should jobs be outsourced to China (or anywhere else for that matter)? As a firm believer in free markets, I am inclined to answer yes. Every private organization should do what they feel will bring more value to their shareholders, including capital investments in foreign ventures.
The problems do not really stem from the changing employment patterns in the U.S., the problems stem from government repression in the marketplace, specifically, allowing less money to be controlled by the people to act in their own interests. These policies have a further effect on supporting local monopolies by shielding them from competing with monopolies in other countries which further inhibits smaller competitive growths in those markets.
Small business is adaptable and fuels much of the economy so that the outsourcing of jobs is a temporary adjustment in an open market. Again, the problems you seem adamant about come from the Governments intrusion on our rights, not cheaper labor in China.
Posted in Economics, Free Market, conversation, government, jobs, overseas, price controls, subsidization, tariffs, wage controls, wages, working class | Comments (0)
2010 DEHISTROY.US | Share & Share-alike.
Recently I had a conversation with Paul_W regarding a piece I wrote for NowPublic. The conversation happened in the comments section of the article, so I will just reproduce it here. Enjoy!
—
at 01:40 on June 12th, 2008
“While Pinker’s questions are valid their conclusions do not appear to be consistent with how China is growing both technologically and scientifically.”
Were it not for Western capital investments in China and greedhead capitalists outsourcing their fellow Americans jobs to China, China wouldn’t have such growth “both technologically and scientifically”. But ‘Muricans are too stupid to realize that. Keep voting Republican and Democrat. Let’s all enjoy our economic race to third-world wages.
at 03:47 on June 12th, 2008
I don’t think invoking the stupidity of Americans is important to your argument. Namely, should jobs be outsourced to China (or anywhere else for that matter)? As a firm believer in free markets, I am inclined to answer yes. Every private organization should do what they feel will bring more value to their shareholders, including capital investments in foreign ventures.
The problems do not really stem from the changing employment patterns in the U.S., the problems stem from government repression in the marketplace, specifically, allowing less money to be controlled by the people to act in their own interests. These policies have a further effect on supporting local monopolies by shielding them from competing with monopolies in other countries which further inhibits smaller competitive growths in those markets.
Small business is adaptable and fuels much of the economy so that the outsourcing of jobs is a temporary adjustment in an open market. Again, the problems you seem adamant about come from the Governments intrusion on our rights, not cheaper labor in China.
Posted in Economics, Free Market, conversation, government, jobs, overseas, price controls, subsidization, tariffs, wage controls, wages, working class | Comments (0)
2010 DEHISTROY.US | Share & Share-alike.