Reply to a Salon Progressive

It's been a long time since I read something that demanded answering in detail. I just read, Piketty shrugged: How the French economist dashed libertarians’ Ayn Randian fantasies. The first thing that stood out was that despite referring frequently to Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, it's obvious he never read the book. It's also clear he doesn't understand libertarians.

Parramore wrote:

To understand the libertarian view of inequality, let’s turn to Milton Friedman, one of America’s most famous and influential makers of free market mythology. Friedman decreed that economic policy should focus on freedom, and not equality.

Right off I have to address the fact he called the free market a mythology. Friedman and libertarians believe the focus is on liberty as well as freedom. Also freedom doesn't mean you get to harm your neighbor. The progressive's focus on equality is a waste of time because it's unachievable. No matter how hard government tries it can never make us equal. The best government can do is give us equal opportunity to be the best we can and treat us equally under the law.

The Approaching Death of Free Speech

Bundy Ranch, Nevada

We have all been watching the battle between the IRS and Tea Party groups. There is growing, and maybe clear evidence that the IRS has been holding up certain groups for political reasons. There is also evidence that some staffers campaigned for candidate Obama while at work. But there is much more at stake with this – and that is the 1^st Amendment. By giving one political group more power than another they can effectively control speech – and possibly elections.

I have been watching the battle between LGTB and Conservative groups over gay marriage. For the most part the battle is only over marriage. So far the process is working, if not at a snails pace. But this piece isn't about gay marriage, but the right to voice your opinion is being placed in danger. A recent headline grabbed my attention, Hate group leader Peter LaBarbera detained at Canadian airport. Until that moment I have never heard of the anti-gay group, Americans for Truth about Homosexuality.

After looking over the website I agree with LGBT groups that this is in part a hate group – not so much because of their stand on marriage, but for a stand against homosexuality in general. With that said, I will defend their right to exist as long as they don't physically harm people. Simply because a group or person might spout hate, that doesn't mean people should listen and act on that speech. Those who act on that speech already had those beliefs.

It scares me that in Canada a person can be arrested for simply speaking out about their beliefs. If they wish to deny entry to people, that's up to the Canadian people. There are those in this country who would love for government to allow only their speech – those people come from both the left and right political spectrums.

Boy Scouts Admit Gays

The Boy Scouts of America has made the decision to allow openly gay scouts. Since the beginning scouts have had sexually active gay boys in the organization. Allowing the boys who are openly gay to join the scouts is the correct thing. I think It would be better to know which boys were gay so that on outings they aren't allowed to share tents and cabins. This would be essentially the same as separating sleeping arrangements by gender.

The people running the scouts still will not allow gay leaders. For some reason too many people believe gay adults are pedophiles, while statistics show otherwise. The anti-gay people point to a 1988 study (Erickson et al. (1988). Behavior patterns of child molesters. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 17, 77-86 ) that says 86% of the men found molesting boys were gay or bisexual. I dare to argue that a straight male won't molest young boys, but they will molest young girls. We can apply the same statistic that 86% of the molesters of young girls are male. All stats bare out the fact the majority of child molestation comes from males. If we apply the logic 86% of child molestation comes from men, then maybe the scouts should allow only female scoutmasters.

Equality For All (Revised)

This is a revised version of a piece I wrote in November of 2010.
Let’s begin with that the fact that no group is for equality for everyone. If we look deep within ourselves we will find prejudices, or just unknowingly create inequalities. Progressives are always talking about taxing the rich to help pay for those less fortunate. If everyone is truly equal, how can you make one person pay more in taxes than another? The answer is simple—you can’t.
The left will ask, “How do you help the poor if you don’t tax the rich?” You help them by getting out of their life. I was talking with a gentleman in South Africa and he mentioned Shanty Town. This is an area that is government owned land where the poor began to build small shanty homes in which to live.

This made me think about how in America the Federal government is making gigantic land grabs, while at the same time taxing the so-called rich, supposedly in an effort to help the poor. I watched as local governments began to ban or greatly restrict mobile homes because they provided fewer property taxes. These are homes that the less fortunate can easily afford.

Our government decided they didn’t want people living in shantytowns or mobile homes, so they came up with the Community Reinvestment Act and began to throw around terms such as affordable housing. The federal government used its might to force banks to give house mortgages to people who could barely afford them. When the economy declined and interest rates dropped these people began to refinance their homes with the lower variable rate. In time those rates began to rise, so much that these people lost, or will lose, their homes. In some cases monthly payments doubled.

If the same people had lived in a cheaper mobile home, or some cheaper home of their own design, then the collapse of the US economy might have never happened. If people were truly free to live their lives, economy down turns would be more local than national.