This image has become pretty popular and is making its way around Facebook.
The problem, of course, is that it suffers from the fallacy of “post hoc, ergo propter hoc.” A quick google search revealed that, to no surprise, premiums have been rising for many years (at least according to Kaiser/HRET).
While it’s true the Affordable Care Act will likely lead premiums to rise, it’s by no means the only variable.
Also, she might consider calling her health insurance provider about the rate increase, since the health care provider likely won’t know the answer. I may be reading too much into her tweet, but either way, part of the problem with the debate over the ACA is conflating insurance coverage with actual service. The two are of course, very different things.
Releasing human beings for the non-crime of moving without government papers is, by far, one of the single greatest achievements of any president.
It is of course regretable that such an action is done only because the state lacks the means to continue persecuting immigrants.
There now seems to be a small rift growing between Glenn Beck, who claims to be evolving into a libertarian, and a number of the libertarians he hopes to attract with his new media project. Of course many are skeptical of a guy who, for many years supported the Bush administration, seems always to have supported the U.S. government’s wars overseas, and backed this guy for president in 2012.
That he recently accused the founder of Students for Liberty, Alexander McCobin, of being a jerk and a Nazi makes this all the more comical. McCobin was addressing the annual conference of Students for Liberty (SFL) when he suggested Beck’s libertarian cred may not be up to muster. Beck it seems was upset that he’s not being taken seriously and used his radio show to air his grievance.
In response, McCobin challenged Beck to “engage [young libertarians] in a meaningful conversation, embrace the positions where libertarianism is substantially different from conservatism, and work with [them] for a truly freer future.” He also offered that while he may call himself a libertarian, there’s no reason anyone has to accept Beck’s transition. As Andrew Kirell sarcastically put it: “We are glad for your newfound support for legal marijuana, gay marriage, and your backing down from Bush-era hawkishness. But many of us libertarians prefer to say ‘thanks but no thanks.’”
One peculiar point raised by McCobin in his letter to Beck was “that libertarianism is difficult to define, and there is significant room for debate.” Actually no, it’s rather simple to define, and there shouldn’t be any room for debate.
Libertarianism is simply the political system wherein the initiation of force is not acceptable. The use of force may only be used in defense against aggression and where force is being unjustly applied to persons or property. Beyond that all interaction is to be under voluntary terms and any system which deviates from this may not be accurately described as libertarian.
Reuters recently reported that staffers at the White House claimed the spending cuts* set to be effective in March would harm Americans. Among the affected programs are “law enforcement, small business assistance, food safety and tax collection.” Yeah, tax collection.
No doubt the IRS offices in question will be those processing tax refunds, since that’s the only conceivable way in which cuts to tax collection could possibly hurt any of the citizens. The other items on this list aren’t any more crucial either.
Take so-called law enforcement. Presumably there would be fewer arrests or prosecutions for drug offenses, and immigrants could be deported at lower rates. These two issues represent nearly half of all federal law enforcement activities, if judged on the basis of incarceration, so cuts should be welcome.
As for small business assistance, the single greatest thing the federal government could do would be to get out of the way. A vast amount of wealth is never realized for small businesses thanks to the enormous taxing and regulating activities carried out by federal bureaucrats. Again, rolling these back would only help the situation.
That the USDA and FDA, two of the agencies responsible for regulating the food supply, would be given reduced budgets ought to be cause for celebration. Maybe then peaceful farmers can go about their business selling to willing buyers without the threat of their SWAT teams getting in the way.
This was a preview of the president’s address on Tuesday, in which he warned that other crucial services would be subject to cuts, should congress not act within the month. Again, there’s no reason to fear these non-cuts, except to the extent we won’t get our money back. The $85 billion reduction in growth represents roughly $586 per tax payer, or somewhere close to $275 for every man, woman, and child.
*Not actual cuts.
Mike Maharrey on the oppression of regular Americans during WWII:
For most Americans, the debate over indefinite detention provisions written in the National Defense Authorization Act plays out primarily as an academic exercise. The average Joe walking down Main Street U.S.A. simply doesn’t worry about armed government thugs snatching him up, throwing him in the back of a van and hauling him off to some camp somewhere.
But one Washington state senator plunged into the NDAA fray with much more than academic, political or rhetorical interest. For Sen. Bob Hasegawa, indefinite detention without due process is personal.
His family lived it.
Hasegawa’s parents, grandparents, uncles and aunts, along with their entire community, spent three years living in barrack shacks behind barbed wire and armed guards at Minidoka Internment Camp in southern Idaho, not knowing if, or when they would ever get out.
The moral of the story is: don’t be a member of any minority group the state may at some future point oppress. Or, get rid of the state. Read the rest of his article here.