no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics

Gitmo: Plus Ça Change…

September 24th, 2009

During the reign of Bush the Younger, the democrats frequently criticized many of the “powers” that the former president assumed, declared or usurped. This changed the moment that Obama the Great took office, and the Dems got their hands on Bush’s shiny new Police State. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss:

The Obama administration has decided not to seek new legislation from Congress authorizing the indefinite detention of about 50 terrorism suspects being held without charges at at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, officials said Wednesday.

…the Obama administration is adopting one of the arguments advanced by the Bush administration in years of debates about detention policies.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

The decision not to seek authorization relies on the “precedent” set by Bush and his cronies, and evidences the lack of substantial difference between the two parties.

The legal interpretation applies to detainees whom the government concludes should be held because they are a continuing danger to national security but who cannot be brought to trial for various reasons, like evidence tainted by harsh interrogations.

In other words: The DOJ can not bring the “detainees” to trial where justice would be meted out swiftly and (presumably) fairly, determining once-and-for-all their guilt (or lack thereof) and so the Administration decides to keep them locked up in perpetuity. For lack of better description, they are being treated as “guilty” because the government can’t prove their guilt! The following babies were reportedly thrown out with the bathwater:

  • Decency, and respect for human rights
  • Common sense
  • Due process of law

I think this is a bellwether for things to come. It’s only a matter of time before the usurpations become more common-place, and more intrusive into the everyday-lives of ordinary citizens. Enjoy what’s left of your freedoms.

Happy Constitution Day

September 17th, 2009

Take a few minutes out of your hectic schedule today, and read Lysander Spooner’s No Treason (No. 1, No. 2, and No. 6 — Nos. 3 through 5 were never published and have been lost to history).

A man’s natural rights are his own, against the whole world; and any infringement of them is equally a crime.

Go now, read what you never learned in school.

Health Care: Rationing vs. Allocation

September 17th, 2009

In a recent discussion about the no one should die because they can’t afford health care meme, I made the distinction in passing that markets allocate, only governments ration.  Responding, the person with whom I was discussing the matter on FB argued that “a free market also engages in rationing”.

I didn’t give this topic a thorough exposition at the time; consider this my penance, because it’s crucial that people understand the distinction.

Rationing vs. Allocation

Make no mistake about this: if the government mandates some form of health care (and I have every reason to suspect it will come down to this), rationing will prevail.

Allocation is the product of exchange: when those doing the demanding exchange value-for-value with those doing the supplying. You might not like the manner in which prices allocate goods and services, but if the price mechanism has no other virtue it is this: you don’t have to pay for it if you don’t want it.

Rationing on the other hand (especially in any venue mandated by politics), happens after you’ve paid in to the system. It happens when quantity demanded exceeds quantity supplied and all of the demand is backed up by a positive legal privilege; really an entitlement/welfare.

Rationing is the inevitable result of policies which dictate: no matter how badly you want or need something, and no matter how much you’re willing to forsake in exchange, you are entitled only to a roll of the rationing-dice. Some people win, and some people lose, but they were all forced to pay.

Allocation by price, via the market is not perfect, and no honest defender of free markets would dare suggest that it is. But it preserves personal control, responsibility, and freedom; ideals to which no government rationing scheme could even hope to aspire.

no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics